Effect of room illuminance on monitor black level luminance and monitor calibration

Journal of Digital Imaging

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 350-355

  Chakrabarti, K ^a   Kaczmarek, R V ^a   Thomas, J A ^b   Romanyukha, A ^b  

^a CENTER FOR DEVICES AND RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH   (United States)

^b UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

Author keywords

Black level; Diffuse reflection; Illuminance; Image contrast; Image surround; Luminance

Indexed keywords

BLACK LEVEL; DIFFUSE REFLECTION; IMAGE CONTRAST; IMAGE SURROUND;

CALIBRATION; DIAGNOSIS; HEALTH; IMAGE QUALITY; LIGHTING; MAMMOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGY;

IMAGE PROCESSING;

ARTICLE; AUTOMATED PATTERN RECOGNITION; CALIBRATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; EVALUATION; HOSPITAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; HUMAN; ILLUMINATION; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MONITORING; PHOTOSTIMULATION; VISION;

CALIBRATION; DATA DISPLAY; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LIGHTING; MONITORING, PHYSIOLOGIC; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEMS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 2942702158     PISSN: 08971889     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10278-003-1720-5     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Chakrabarti, K, Thomas, JA, Kaczmarek, RV, et al: Optimization of viewing conditions and phantom image quality evaluations on GE DMR and full-field digital mammography system. J Digit Imaging 13(suppl):226-227, 2000
2. Waynant, RW, Chakrabarti, K, Kaczmarek, RV: Testing optimum of viewing conditions for mammographic displays. J Digit Imaging 12(suppl):209-210, 1999
3. Waynant, RW, Chakrabarti, K, Kaczmarek, RV: Improved sensitivity and specificity of mammograms by producing uniform luminance from viewboxes. J Digit Imaging 11(suppl): 189-191, 1998
4. Task Group 18, American Association of Physicists in Medicine: Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems.
5. National Electrical Manufacturers Association: Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM), Part 14: Grayscale Standard Display Function, 2000
6. Flynn, MJ, Badano, A: Image quality degradation by light scattering in display devices. J Digit Imaging 12:50-59, 1999
7. Roehrig, H, Krupinski, EA, Furukawa, T: Evaluation of a flat CRT monitor for use in radiology. J Digit Imaging 14:142-148, 2001
8. Haak, R, Wicht, MJ, Hellmich, M, et al: Influence of room lighting on grey-scale perception with a CRT- and a TFT monitor display. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 31:193-197, 2002
9. Hemminger, BM, Dillon, AW, Johnston, RE, et al: Effect of display luminance on the feature detection rates of masses in mammograms. Med Phys 26:2266-2272, 1999
10. Wang, J, Anderson, J, Lane, T, et al: Contrast-detail characteristic evaluations of several display devices. J Digit Imaging 13:162-167, 2000
11. Mertelmeier, T: Why and how is soft copy reading possible in clinical practice? J Digit Imaging 12:3-11, 1999
12. Cederberg, RA, Frederiksen, NL, Benson, BW, et al: Effect of different background lighting conditions on diagnostic performance of digital and film images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 27:293-297, 1998
13. DIN 6868-57-2001: Image quality assurance in x-ray diagnostics: acceptance testing for image display devices. The German Standards Institution. Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V., February 2001
14. Bijkerk, KP, Lindeijer, JM, Thijssen, MA: The CDMAM-Phantom: a contrast-detail phantom specifically for mammography. Radiology 185:395, 1992
15. Suryanarayanan, S, Karellas, A, Vedantham, S, et al: Flat-panel digital mammography system: contrast-detail comparison between screen-film radiographs and hard-copy images. Radiology 225:801-807, 2002