| Literature DB >> 22379119 |
Abstract
The digital age has brought both technical advances and ethical quandaries regarding data acquisition and image presentation in the field of cell biology. Image manipulation has drawn considerable attention in the past decade, leading to general guidelines for ethical data processing. However, effective methods of image presentation have been discussed only cursorily and have been largely overlooked. Under standard viewing conditions, the human visual system imposes limitations for readers analyzing fluorescence images. In this paper, I discuss the advantages and limitations of image-manipulation techniques with respect to the human visual system, including contrast stretching, nonlinear grayscale transformations, and pseudocoloring. While online data viewing presents innovative ways to access image information, most images continue to be viewed in static publications, in which image presentation is critical for effective information transmission.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22379119 PMCID: PMC3290635 DOI: 10.1091/mbc.E11-09-0824
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Biol Cell ISSN: 1059-1524 Impact factor: 4.138
FIGURE 1:Contrast stretch and nonlinear (power-law) transformations. Original (A) and scaled (B–F) images of GFP-v-SNARE in yeast cells responding to mating pheromone. Autoscale contrast stretch (B) redistributes pixel values across the whole display range, without losing spatial information. Contrast can be stretched further (C) by setting an intermediate gray value (B, arrowhead) as white, but gray values in the range above the upper limit are clipped (C, asterisks), losing spatial information in the brightest regions. The nonlinear power-law transformation (D and E) redistributes gray values according to a logarithmic formula with exponent γ, resulting in increased contrast for a subset of gray values. Inversion (F) of an autoscaled image (as in B) displays dark values as light and vice versa without altering the distribution of pixel intensities.
FIGURE 2:Color-coded contrast and pseudocoloring. Color-coded contrast (A) increases visual sensitivity to shallow contrast by representing gray values as varying color hues, according to an arbitrary color LUT (B). Pseudocoloring (D–F) applies a single-hue LUT to a grayscale image (C), resulting in gray levels represented by color brightness. The original image is identical to the power-law transformation (γ = 3.0) from Figure 1.
Summary of image-manipulation techniques, appropriate application contexts, and associated limitations.
| Manipulation | Use it when… | Cautions |
|---|---|---|
| Contrast stretch | The dynamic range of an image does not utilize the full available bit-depth. | Be careful of clipping, which eliminates spatial information in very bright or very dark regions. |
| Extraneous bright/dark signal is present. | Apply identically to all comparable images. | |
| Nonlinear transformation (e.g., power-law [γ]) | Both dim and bright features are relevant. | Depending on the value of γ, can have the same effect as clipping. |
| Changes intensity relationships within one image; therefore must be disclosed in text. | ||
| Inversion | Dim features are relevant. | Increases perceived contrast for dim features, but decreases contrast for bright features, without changing underlying information. |
| Color-coded contrast | Very small differences in intensities must be visualized. | Nonlinear color vision and RGB to CMYK conversion during printing decreases information fidelity. |
| Features in both the dim and bright regions are relevant. | If contrast is shallow but critical for a conclusion, quantitative data should accompany the image. | |
| Pseudocoloring | A multi-channel overlay is used to compare localization of multiple probes. | Contrast is best viewed in gray scale, thus avoid pseudocoloring for single-channel images. Nonlinear color vision and RGB-to-CMYK conversion during printing decreases information fidelity. Use magenta–green or cyan–yellow for the color blind. |