| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Computer Applications |
1 From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Box 8131, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110. From the 1998 RSNA scientific assembly. Received December 30, 1998; revision requested February 23, 1999; revision received July 16; accepted August 18. Address correspondence to R.M.S. (e-mail: sloner@mir.wustl.edu).
PURPOSE: To determine the degree of irreversible image compression detectable in conservative viewing conditions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An image-comparison workstation, which alternately displayed two registered and magnified versions of an image, was used to study observer detection of image degradation introduced by irreversible compression. Five observers evaluated 20 16-bit posteroanterior digital chest radiographs compressed with Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) or wavelet-based trellis-coded quantization (WTCQ) algorithms at compression ratios of 8:1–128:1 and x2 magnification by using (a) traditional two-alternative forced choice; (b) original-revealed two-alternative forced choice, in which the noncompressed image is identified to the observer; and (c) a resolution-metric method of matching test images to degraded reference images.
RESULTS: The visually lossless threshold was between 8:1 and 16:1 for four observers. JPEG compression resulted in performance as good as that with WTCQ compression at these ratios. The original-revealed forced-choice method was faster and as sensitive as the two-alternative forced-choice method. The resolution-metric results were robust and provided information on performance above visually lossless levels.
CONCLUSION: The image-comparison workstation is a versatile tool for comparative assessment of image quality. At x2 magnification, images compressed with either JPEG or WTCQ algorithms were indistinguishable from unaltered original images for most observers at compression ratios between 8:1 and 16:1, indicating that 10:1 compression is acceptable for primary image interpretation.
Index terms: Computers, diagnostic aid • Data compression • Images, artifact, **.93, **.992 • Images, display, **.1215, **.992 • Images, processing, **.992 • Picture archiving and communication system (PACS)
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  K. J. Kim, B. Kim, K. H. Lee, T. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, H.-S. Kang, and Y. H. Kim Regional Difference in Compression Artifacts in Low-Dose Chest CT Images: Effects of Mathematical and Perceptual Factors Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): W30 - W37. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Bajpai, K. H. Lee, B. Kim, K. J. Kim, T. J. Kim, Y. H. Kim, and H. S. Kang Differences in Compression Artifacts on Thin- and Thick-Section Lung CT Images Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): W38 - W43. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Kim, K. H. Lee, K. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, H.-r. Kim, and Y. H. Kim Artifacts in Slab Average-Intensity-Projection Images Reformatted from JPEG 2000 Compressed Thin-Section Abdominal CT Data Sets Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2008; 190(6): W342 - W350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Kim, K. H. Lee, K. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, S. Hahn, T. J. Kim, and Y. H. Kim Prediction of Perceptible Artifacts in JPEG 2000 Compressed Chest CT Images Using Mathematical and Perceptual Quality Metrics Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2008; 190(2): 328 - 334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Ringl, R. E. Schernthaner, C. Kulinna-Cosentini, M. Weber, C. Schaefer-Prokop, C. J. Herold, and W. Schima Lossy Three-dimensional JPEG2000 Compression of Abdominal CT Images: Assessment of the Visually Lossless Threshold and Effect of Compression Ratio on Image Quality Radiology, November 1, 2007; 245(2): 467 - 474. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Fidler, B. Likar, and H. Rupert Ringl What Is Wrong with Compression Ratio in Lossy Image Compression? Radiology, October 1, 2007; 245(1): 299 - 300. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. S. Woo, K. J. Kim, T. J. Kim, S. Hahn, B. Kim, Y. H. Kim, and K. H. Lee JPEG 2000 Compression of Abdominal CT: Difference in Tolerance Between Thin- and Thick-Section Images Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2007; 189(3): 535 - 541. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Ringl, R. E. Schernthaner, A. A. Bankier, M. Weber, M. Prokop, C. J. Herold, and C. Schaefer-Prokop JPEG2000 Compression of Thin-Section CT Images of the Lung: Effect of Compression Ratio on Image Quality Radiology, September 1, 2006; 240(3): 869 - 877. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A Gegler, C. Mahl, and V Fontanella Reproducibility of and file format effect on digital subtraction radiography of simulated external root resorptions Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., January 1, 2006; 35(1): 10 - 13. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. P. Ko, J. Chang, E. Bomsztyk, J. S. Babb, D. P. Naidich, and H. Rusinek Effect of CT Image Compression on Computer-assisted Lung Nodule Volume Measurement Radiology, October 1, 2005; 237(1): 83 - 88. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. P. Ko, H. Rusinek, D. P. Naidich, G. McGuinness, A. N. Rubinowitz, B. S. Leitman, and J. M. Martino Wavelet Compression of Low-Dose Chest CT Data: Effect on Lung Nodule Detection Radiology, July 1, 2003; 228(1): 70 - 75. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. E. Zalis, P. F. Hahn, R. S. Arellano, G. S. Gazelle, and P. R. Mueller CT Colonography with Teleradiology: Effect of Lossy Wavelet Compression on Polyp Detection—Initial Observations Radiology, August 1, 2001; 220(2): 387 - 392. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. H. Wiggins III, H. C. Davidson, H. R. Harnsberger, J. R. Lauman, and P. A. Goede Image File Formats: Past, Present, and Future RadioGraphics, May 1, 2001; 21(3): 789 - 798. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |
