Literature DB >> 7734526

Introduction to perceptual linearization of video display systems for medical image presentation.

B M Hemminger1, R E Johnston, J P Rolland, K E Muller.   

Abstract

The perceptual linearization of video display systems should play a significant role in medical image presentation. It maximizes the faithfulness of information transfer to the human observer; it provides a method for standardizing the appearance of images across different display devices; and it allows for calculation of the inherent contrast resolution of different display devices. This paper provides insight into the process of perceptual linearization by decomposing it into the digital driving level-to-monitor luminance relationship, the monitor luminance-to-human brightness perception relationship, and the construction of a linearization function derived from these two relationships. A discussion of previous work in these areas is given. We then compare and contrast the results of previous work with recent experiments in our laboratory and related work in vision and computer science. We conclude that (1) sufficiently good visual models exist for agreeing on a standard method of calculating the perceptual linearization function; (2) improvements in the resolution and luminance distribution of the digital-to-analog circuitry in display systems are required for medical imaging; and (3), methods for calculating a linearization remapping from a perceptual linearization function currently have significant error and should be replaced with methods that minimize perceptual error.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7734526     DOI: 10.1007/bf03168052

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  8 in total

Review 1.  Visual cues in the interpretation of medical images.

Authors:  H L Kundel
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 2.177

2.  Contrast thresholds of the human eye.

Authors:  H R BLACKWELL
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am       Date:  1946-11

3.  Pupil size as determined by adapting luminance.

Authors:  S G DE GROOT; J W GEBHARD
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am       Date:  1952-07

4.  Objective assessment of image quality: effects of quantum noise and object variability.

Authors:  H H Barrett
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 2.129

5.  Visibility of blobs with a Gaussian luminance profile.

Authors:  P Bijl; J J Koenderink; A Toet
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Visibility of elliptical Gaussian blobs.

Authors:  P Bijl; J J Koenderink
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Visual detection and resolution as a function of adaptation and glare.

Authors:  I Lie
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Effect of ambient light on electronically displayed medical images as measured by luminance-discrimination thresholds.

Authors:  D C Rogers; R E Johnston; S M Pizer
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 2.129

  8 in total
  12 in total

1.  Roughness feature of metaphase chromosome spreads and nuclei for automated cell proliferation analysis.

Authors:  G Corkidi; L Vega; J Márquez; E Rojas; P Ostrosky-Wegman
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Characterization of monochrome CRT display systems in the field.

Authors:  H Roehrig; C E Willis; M A Damento
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Calibration of medium-resolution monochrome cathode ray tube displays for the purpose of board examinations.

Authors:  M G Evanoff; H Roehrig; R S Giffords; M P Capp; R J Rovinelli; W H Hartmann; C Merritt
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Proposal of a quality-index or metric for soft copy display systems: contrast sensitivity study.

Authors:  Jihong Wang; Ken Compton; Qi Peng
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2003-09-11       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Pulmonary nodule detection with digital projection radiography: an ex-vivo study on increased latitude post-processing.

Authors:  Juergen Biederer; Tobias Gottwald; Hendrik Bolte; Christian Riedel; Sandra Freitag; Richard Van Metter; Martin Heller
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-09-09       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Measurement accuracy and perceived quality of imaging systems for the evaluation of periodontal structures.

Authors:  B Güniz Baksi
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2008-07-27       Impact factor: 2.634

7.  Contrast sensitivity of digital imaging display systems: contrast threshold dependency on object type and implications for monitor quality assurance and quality control in PACS.

Authors:  Jihong Wang; Jun Xu; Veera Baladandayuthapani
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  Modular extension of the ACR-NEMA DICOM standard to support new diagnostic imaging modalities and services.

Authors:  W D Bidgood; S C Horii
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  The effect of intensity windowing on the detection of simulated masses embedded in dense portions of digitized mammograms in a laboratory setting.

Authors:  E D Pisano; J Chandramouli; B M Hemminger; D Glueck; R E Johnston; K Muller; M P Braeuning; D Puff; W Garrett; S Pizer
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.056

10.  Trend of contrast detection threshold with and without localization.

Authors:  David L Leong; Louise Rainford; Tamara Miner Haygood; Gary J Whitman; William R Geiser; Beatriz E Adrada; Lumarie Santiago; Patrick C Brennan
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.056

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.