Discrete cosine transform JPEG compression vs. 2D JPEG2000 compression: JNDmetrix visual discrimination model image quality analysis

Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE

Volumn 5748, Issue , 2005, Pages 202-207

  Siddiqui, Khan M ^a   Johnson, Jeffrey P ^b   Reiner, Bruce I ^a,c   Siegel, Eliot L ^a,c  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b SIEMENS CORPORATE RESEARCH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Compression; Discrete cosine transform; Image storage and transmission; JPEG 2000; PACS; Radiography; Visual discrimination model

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; IMAGE COMPRESSION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MEDICAL IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; WAVELET TRANSFORMS;

COMPRESSION; DISCRETE COSINE TRANSFORM; IMAGE STORAGE AND TRANSMISSION; JPEG 2000; PACS; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION MODEL;

IMAGE QUALITY;

EID: 23844467547     PISSN: 16057422     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1117/12.596146     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (10)

1. th scientific assembly and annual meeting 2004, Chicago IL.
2. Clunie DA. Lossless compression of grayscale medical images: effectiveness of traditional and state-of-the-art approaches. In: Proc. SPIE Vol. 3980, p. 74-84, Medical Imaging 2000: PACS Design and Evaluation: Engineering and Clinical Issues; G. James Blaine, Eliot L. Siegel; Eds.
3. Good, W.F., et al., Subjective and objective assessment of image quality - a comparison. J Digit Imaging, 1994. 7(2): p. 77-8.
4. Good, W.F., et al., Comparing imaging systems by ROC studies. Detection versus interpretation. Invest Radiol, 1989. 24(11): p. 932-3.
5. Lubin J. A visual discrimination model for imaging system design and evaluation. In: Peli E, ed. Visual Models for Target Detection and Recognition. Singapore: World Scientific Publishers; 1995.
6. Jackson WB, Said MR, Jared DA, et al. Evaluation of human vision models for predicting human-observer performance. In: Kundel H, ed. Medical Imaging 1997: Image Perception. Bellingham, WA: SPIE; 1997:64-73.
7. Krupinski E, Johnson JP, Roehrig H, et al. Using a Human Visual System Model to Optimize Soft-Copy Mammography Display: Influence of Display Phosphor. Acad Radiol 2003; 10:161-166
8. Krupinski E, Johnson JP, Roehrig H, et al. Using a Human Visual System Model to Optimize Soft-Copy Mammography Display: Influence of MTF Compensation. Acad Radiol 2003; 10:1030-1035
9. Johnson JP, Lubin J, Nafziger JS, et al. Visual discrimination model for lesion detectability. In: Krupinski E, Chakraborty DP. Medical Imaging 2002: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment. Bellingham, WA: SPIE; 2003:248-255.
10. Krupinski E, Johnson JP, Roehrig H, et al. Human vision model to predict observer performance: detection of microcalcifications as a function of monitor phosphor. In: Krupinski E, Chakraborty DP. Medical Imaging 2002: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment. Bellingham, WA: SPIE; 2003:256-260.