Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Proposal of a Quality-Index or Metric for Soft Copy Display Systems: Contrast Sensitivity Study

  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In addition to the inherent qualities of a digital image, the qualities of the monitor and graphics control card as well as the viewing conditions will affect the perceived quality of an image that is displayed on a soft copy display (SD) system. With the implementation of picture archiving and communication systems (PACS), many diagnoses are being made based on images displayed on SD devices, and consequently SD quality may affect the accuracy of diagnosis. Unlike the traditional film-on-lightbox display, optimal SD system parameters are not well defined, and many issues remain unsettled. In this article, the human observer performance, as measured by contrast sensitivity, for several SD devices including an active matrix liquid crystal flat panel monitor is reported. Contrast sensitivities were measured with various display system configurations. Experimental results showed that contrast sensitivity depends on many factors such as the type of monitor, the monitor brightness, and the gamma settings of the graphics card in a complex manner. However, there is a clear correlation between the measured contrast thresholds and the gradient of the display device’s luminance response curve. Based on this correlation, it is proposed to use the gradient of luminance response curve as a quality-index or metric for SD devices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J Wang S Langer (1997) ArticleTitleA brief review of human perception factors in Digital Display for PACS. J Digit Imaging 10 158–168 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1c%2FmtFGgtQ%3D%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. EA Krupinski H Roehrig (1999) ArticleTitleInfluence of monitor luminance and tone scale on observers’ search and dwell patterns. Proc SPIE 3663 151–156 Occurrence Handle10.1117/12.349636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Carrino JA. “Image Quality: a clinical perspective” In: Siegel E, Reiner BI, and Carrino J, editors. SCAR University Primer 3: Quality Assurance in the Digital Medical Enterprise. Society for Computer Applications in Radiology; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Carrino JA. “Image Quality: a clinical perspective” In: Siegel E, Reiner BI, and Carrino J, editors. SCAR University Primer 3: Quality Assurance in the Digital Medical Enterprise. Society for Computer Applications in Radiology; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  5. H Roehrig H Blume TL Ji et al. (1990) ArticleTitlePerformance tests and quality control of cathode ray tube displays. J Digit Imaging 3 134–45

    Google Scholar 

  6. H Blume H Roehrig M Brown et al. (1990) ArticleTitleComparison of the physical performance of high resolution CRT displays and films recorded by laser image printers and displayed on light-boxes and the need for a display standard. Proc SPIE 1232 97–114

    Google Scholar 

  7. SC Horii (1995) ArticleTitleQuality assurance for picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) and PACS technology applications in radiology. J Digit Imaging 8 1–2 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqB2M3jtVU%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. H Roehrig E Krupinski (1998) ArticleTitleImage quality of CRT displays and the effect of brightness on diagnosis of mammograms. J Digit Imaging 11 IssueIDSuppl 1 187–188 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1cvgs1ChtA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9735465

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. RL Arenson D Chakraborty SB Seshadri et al. (1990) ArticleTitleThe digital imaging workstation. Radiology 176 303–315 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By%2BA3M7mtlA%3D Occurrence Handle2367643

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. SJ Dwyer BK Stewart JW Sayre et al. (1992) ArticleTitlePerformance characteristics and image fidelity of gray-scale monitors. Radiographics 12 765–772 Occurrence Handle1636038

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. H Roehrig CE Willis MA Damento (1999) ArticleTitleCharacterization of monochrome CRT display systems in the field. J Digit Imaging 12 152–165 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c%2FlsFahsA%3D%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. H Blume BM Hemminger (1997) ArticleTitleImage presentation in digital radiology: perspectives on the emerging DICOM display function standard and its application. Radiographics 17 769–777 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiB1Mfis1c%3D Occurrence Handle9153711

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. E Muka T Mertelmeier R Slone et al. (1997) ArticleTitleImpact of phosphor luminance noise on the specification of high-resolution CRT displays for medical imaging. Proc SPIE 3031 210–221

    Google Scholar 

  14. TK Pilgram RM Slone E Muka et al. (1998) ArticleTitlePerceived fidelity of compressed and reconstructed radiological images: a preliminary exploration of compression, luminance, and viewing distance. J Digit Imaging 11 168–175 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M%2FmsVGitw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9848049

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. S Langer J Wang (1996) ArticleTitleUser and system interface issues in the purchase of imaging and information systems. J Digit Imaging 9 113 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiD3cnpvVE%3D Occurrence Handle8854260

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dwyer S: Soft copy displays and digitizers. In Frey G Sprawls P (eds) Proceedings of 1997 AAPM Summer School on Expanding Role of Medical Physics in Diagnostic Imaging AAPM 1997, Medical Physics Publishing, Madison, WI, 381

  17. LT Cook GG Cox MF Insana et al. (1998) ArticleTitleComparison of a cathode-ray-tube and film for display of computed radiographic images. Med Phys 25 IssueID7 Pt1 1132–1138 Occurrence Handle10.1118/1.598304 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1czkslWhsg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9682198

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang J, Stetson C: Characteristic evaluations of medical image displays using contrast-detail curve measurements. Society for Information Display International Symposium, SID Digest 172-175, 2000

  19. J Wang J Anderson L Lane et al. (2000) ArticleTitleContrast-detail characteristic evaluations of several displays devices. J Digit Imaging 13 IssueIDSuppl l Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3cvotVOkug%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10847373

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. S Langer J Wang (1997) ArticleTitleAn evaluation of ten digital image review workstations. J Digit Imaging 10 65 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiA3cfhvFE%3D Occurrence Handle9165421

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. J Wang Q Peng (2002) ArticleTitleAn interactive method of assessing the characteristics of softcopy display using observer performance tests. Proc SPIE 4686 189–197 Occurrence Handle10.1117/12.462677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. E Muka BR Whiting (2002) ArticleTitleOn the human visual system intrascene luminance dynamic range. Proc SPIE 4686 169 Occurrence Handle10.1117/12.462676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. E Muka G Reiker (2002) ArticleTitleReconsidering bit depth for radiological images—is eight enough? Proc SPIE 4686 177 Occurrence Handle10.1117/12.462675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. BM Hemminger RE Johnston JP Rolland et al. (1995) ArticleTitleIntroduction to perceptual linearization of video display systems for medical image presentation. J Digit Imaging 8 21–34 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqB2M3jtVc%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. MJ Flynn A Badano (1999) ArticleTitleImage quality degradation by light scattering in display devices. J Digit Imaging 12 50–59 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M3ntlOqsQ%3D%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. A Badano MJ Flynn (1997) ArticleTitleImage degradation by glare in radiologic display devices. Proc SPIE: Int Soc Optical Eng 3031 222–231

    Google Scholar 

  27. Samei E, Badano A, Chakraborty D, et al: Assessment of Display Performance for Medical Imaging Systems. Draft Report of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 18, Version 9.0, October 2002

  28. Wang J: Computer monitor QC issues. Categorical Course at SCAR annual conference, 2001

  29. M Weibrecht G Spekowius P Quadflieg et al. (1997) ArticleTitleImage quality assessment of monochrome monitors for medical soft copy display. Proc SPIE 3031 232–244

    Google Scholar 

  30. H Roehrig (1999) ArticleTitleImage quality assurance for CRT display systems. J Digit Imaging 12 1–2 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M7lsFKrtA%3D%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. H Roehrig (1999) ArticleTitleImage quality assurance for CRT display systems—Part II. J Digit Imaging 12 49 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M3ntlOqsA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10342246

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. NJ Hangiandreou KA Fetterly SN Bernatz et al. (1998) ArticleTitleQuantitative evaluation of overall electronic display quality. J Digit Imaging 11 IssueIDSuppl 1 180–186 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1cvgs1Chtw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9735464

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. JC Weiser KT Drummond BD Evans et al. (1997) ArticleTitleQuality assurance for digital imaging. J Digit Imaging 10 7–8 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiH3MzpsVQ%3D Occurrence Handle9268821

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. NJ Hangiandreou KA Fetterly JP Felmlee (1999) ArticleTitleOptimization of a contrast-detail-based method for electronic image display quality evaluation. J Digit Imaging 12 60–67 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M3ntlOqtg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10342248

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. GG Reiker N Gohel E Muka et al. (1992) ArticleTitleQuality monitoring of soft-copy displays for medical radiography. J Digit Imaging 5 161–167 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By2A1M3pt1M%3D Occurrence Handle1520742

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. J Wang (2002) ArticleTitleA Quality Index for the quality of softcopy display in PACS. Med Phys 29 1219

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Drs. Jon Anderson, Tim Blackburn, and Gary Arbique for their insightful comments and suggestions in preparing this manuscript, and Ms. J Xu for her help in part of the experiment.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75390-9071, USA

    Jihong Wang Ph.D. & Qi Peng

  2. Clinton Electronics Inc., Loves Park, Illinois 61111, USA

    Ken Compton

Authors
  1. Jihong Wang Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ken Compton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Qi Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jihong Wang Ph.D..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, J., Compton, K. & Peng, Q. Proposal of a Quality-Index or Metric for Soft Copy Display Systems: Contrast Sensitivity Study . J Digit Imaging 16, 185–202 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-003-1657-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-003-1657-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation