Literature DB >> 11604641

Standardizing digital photography: it's not all in the eye of the beholder.

G M Galdino1, J E Vogel, C A Vander Kolk.   

Abstract

Advances in digital photography have made it an efficient and economically appealing alternative to conventional photography. Nevertheless, as objective observers and clinical photographers, we must realize that all digital cameras are not created equal. Different digital cameras frequently used in plastic surgery practices (Olympus 600DL, Olympus 2500, Sony DSC-D700, Nikon Coolpix 950, and Nikon D1) were evaluated, using a subject photographed with each camera in the identical lighting conditions, to determine inherent differences in quality, color, and contrast of the resultant photographs. Three different lighting conditions were examined: single soft-box lighting, dual studio flash boxes, and operating room lighting with on-camera flash. The same digital settings (program mode, ISO camera default setting, high quality setting with JPEG compression) were used. Each camera was digitally color balanced using an 18 percent gray card. Raw and color-balanced images were viewed side-by-side. The macro-image capabilities of each camera were also examined. Conventional 35-mm photographs using a 105 macro-lens on Kodachrome and Ektachrome slide film were obtained for comparison. All of the digital cameras performed with noticeable differences, but they maintained consistency in the three different lighting conditions. Digital photographs differed most greatly with respect to quality and contrast, which was especially obvious once color balancing was performed. Marked differences in quality and ability were observed with respect to macro-image capabilities. Inherent differences in features among digital cameras produce dramatically different photographic results with regard to color, contrast, focus, and overall quality. With the increasing use of digital photography in plastic surgery journals and presentations, it must be recognized that digital cameras do not all display photographs of similar quality, especially when used to evaluate skin appearance. To standardize digital photography, the surgeon must realize that switching digital cameras is akin to switching film types. Standardization of digital photographs should include image resolution between 1.5 and 2.7 million pixels, ISO default setting, color balancing with an 18 percent gray card and software, consistency in focal distance, JPEG compression of medium-to-high quality, and backgrounds of medium blue or 18 percent gray.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11604641     DOI: 10.1097/00006534-200110000-00037

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  17 in total

1.  Measurement of knee joint motion using digital imaging.

Authors:  Damien Bennett; Brian Hanratty; Neville Thompson; David Beverland
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-11-27       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Development of digital shade guides for color assessment using a digital camera with ring flashes.

Authors:  Oi-Hong Tung; Yu-Lin Lai; Yi-Ching Ho; I-Chiang Chou; Shyh-Yuan Lee
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-01-05       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  A portable mirror stand for clinical facial photo documentation.

Authors:  Laureen Supit; Theddeus Oh Prasetyono
Journal:  Arch Plast Surg       Date:  2015-05-14

4.  Digital photographic measurement in hypospadias: validation and comparison to intraoperative measurement.

Authors:  Ardavan Akhavan; Paul A Merguerian; Richard W Grady; Michael DiSandro; Margarett Shnorhavorian
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 1.830

5.  Psychosocial acceptance of cleft patients: has something changed?

Authors:  Niels Christian Pausch; Karsten Winter; Dirk Halama; Christian Wirtz; Vedat Yildirim; Nattapong Sirintawat; Sirintawat Nattapong
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-07-28

Review 6.  The art and science of photography in hand surgery.

Authors:  Keming Wang; Evan J Kowalski; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 2.230

7.  Analysis of surgical outcome after upper eyelid surgery by computer vision algorithm using face and facial landmark detection.

Authors:  İlke Bahçeci Şimşek; Can Şirolu
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-05-08       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Principles and practice of external digital photography in ophthalmology.

Authors:  Bipasha Mukherjee; Akshay Gopinathan Nair
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.848

9.  eConsultation in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

Authors:  M J Trovato; A J Scholer; E Vallejo; G M Buncke; M S Granick
Journal:  Eplasty       Date:  2011-11-30

10.  Evolution of photography in maxillofacial surgery: from analog to 3D photography - an overview.

Authors:  Heidrun Schaaf; Christoph Yves Malik; Hans-Peter Howaldt; Philipp Streckbein
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2009-09-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.