Literature DB >> 15965160

The effect of digital image resolution and compression on anterior eye imaging.

R C Peterson1, J S Wolffsohn.   

Abstract

AIM: To determine the theoretical and clinical minimum image pixel resolution and maximum compression appropriate for anterior eye image storage.
METHODS: Clinical images of the bulbar conjunctiva, palpebral conjunctiva, and corneal staining were taken at the maximum resolution of Nikon:CoolPix990 (2048x1360 pixels), DVC:1312C (1280x811), and JAI:CV-S3200 (767x569) single chip cameras and the JVC:KYF58 (767x569) three chip camera. The images were stored in TIFF format and further copies created with reduced resolution or compressed. The images were then ranked for clarity on a 15 inch monitor (resolution 1280 x 1024) by 20 optometrists and analysed by objective image analysis grading. Theoretical calculation of the resolution necessary to detect the smallest objects of clinical interest was also conducted.
RESULTS: Theoretical calculation suggested that the minimum resolution should be > or = 579 horizontal pixels at 25x magnification. Image quality was perceived subjectively as being reduced when the pixel resolution was lower than 767 x 569 (p<0.005) or the image was compressed as a BMP or <50% quality JPEG (p<0.005). Objective image analysis techniques were less susceptible to changes in image quality, particularly when using colour extraction techniques.
CONCLUSION: It is appropriate to store anterior eye images at between 1280 x 811 and 767 x 569 pixel resolution and at up to 1:70 JPEG compression.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15965160      PMCID: PMC1772706          DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2004.062240

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0007-1161            Impact factor:   4.638


  14 in total

1.  Digital fundus imaging: a quality and cost comparison with 35-mm film.

Authors:  S Prasad; P Bannon; L G Clearkin; R P Phillips
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand       Date:  1999-02

2.  Effect of digital image compression on screening for diabetic retinopathy.

Authors:  R S Newsom; A Clover; M T Costen; J Sadler; J Newton; A J Luff; C R Canning
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 3.  Microcysts: clinical significance and differential diagnosis.

Authors:  L Keay; I Jalbert; D F Sweeney; B A Holden
Journal:  Optometry       Date:  2001-07

4.  Resolution of retinal digital colour images.

Authors:  P K Jensen; E Scherfig
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand       Date:  1999-10

5.  Compression assessment based on medical image quality concepts using computer-generated test images.

Authors:  O Kocsis; L Costaridou; G Mandellos; D Lymberopoulos; G Panayiotakis
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 5.428

6.  Clinical monitoring of ocular physiology using digital image analysis.

Authors:  James S Wolffsohn; Christine Purslow
Journal:  Cont Lens Anterior Eye       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.077

Review 7.  Imaging in the 21st century.

Authors:  W N Charman
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Can digitised colour 35 mm transparencies be used to diagnose diabetic retinopathy?

Authors:  L D George; C Leverton; S Young; J Lusty; F D Dunstan; D R Owens
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.359

9.  Incremental nature of anterior eye grading scales determined by objective image analysis.

Authors:  J S Wolffsohn
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 4.638

10.  A comparative evaluation of digital imaging, retinal photography and optometrist examination in screening for diabetic retinopathy.

Authors:  J A Olson; F M Strachan; J H Hipwell; K A Goatman; K C McHardy; J V Forrester; P F Sharp
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 4.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.