The effect of image content on detail preservation and file size reduction in lossy compression

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 36, Issue 7, 2007, Pages 387-392

  Fidler, Aleš ^a,b   Skaleric U ^a   Likar, B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

^b Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics ^*  (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Data compression, radiology information systems; Radiography, dental, digital

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPRESSION; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; GEOMETRY; IMAGING SYSTEM; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY;

ALVEOLAR BONE LOSS; ALVEOLAR PROCESS; DATA COMPRESSION; HUMANS; MANDIBLE; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHY, BITEWING; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEMS; TIME FACTORS; TOOTH; TOOTH LOSS;

EID: 35649009032     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/66171128     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Erickson BJ. Irreversible compression of medical images. J Digit Imaging 2002; 15: 5-14.
2. Watson AB. DCTune: a technique for visual optimization of DCT quantization matrices for individual images. Society for Information Display Digest of Technical Papers 1993; XXIV: 946-949. Available from: http://vision.arc.nasa.gov/publications/sid93/sid93.pdf.
3. Fidler A, Skaleric U, Likar B. The impact of image information on compressibility and degradation in medical image compression. Med Phys 2006; 33: 2832-2838.
4. Fidler A, Likar B, Skaleric U. Lossy JPEG compression: easy to compress, hard to compare. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006; 35: 67-73.
5. FDA, Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for the submission of premarket notifications for medical image management devices, 2000. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ode/guidance/416.pdf, p. 16.
6. Shannon CE. A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 1948; 27: 379-424. Available from: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf.
7. Janhom A, van der Stelt PF, van Ginkel FC, Geraets WG. Effect of noise on the compressibility and diagnostic accuracy for caries detection of digital bitewing radiographs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28: 6-12.
8. Janhom A, van der Stelt PF, van Ginkel FC. Interaction between noise and file compression and its effect on the recognition of caries in digital imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2000; 29: 20-27.
9. Girod B. What's wrong with mean-squared error? In: Watson A (ed). Digital images and human vision. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993, pp 207-220.
10. Brettle DS, Ellwood R, Davies R. Determination of the optimal conditions for dental subtraction radiography using a storage phosphor system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28: 1-5.
11. Kocsis O, Costaridou L, Mandellos G, Lymberopoulos D, Panayiotakis G. Compression assessment based on medical image quality concepts using computer-generated test images. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2003; 71: 105-115.
12. Chen TJ, Chuang KS, Wu J, Chen SC, Hwang IM, Jan ML. Quality degradation in lossy wavelet image compression. J Digit Imaging 2003; 16: 210-215.