Journal of Digital Imaging

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 1–12 | Cite as

Displaying radiologic images on personal computers: Image storage and compression—Part 2

  • Thurman Gillespy
  • Alan H. Rowberg
Images on Personal Computers

Abstract

This is part 2 of our article on image storage and compression, the third article of our series for radiologists and imaging scientists on displaying, manipulating, and analyzing radiologic images on personal computers. Image compression is classified as lossless (nondestructive) or lossy (destructive). Common lossless compression algorithms include variable-length bit codes (Huffman codes and variants), dictionary-based compression (Lempel-Ziv variants), and arithmetic coding. Huffman codes and the Lempel-Ziv-Welch (LZW) algorithm are commonly used for image compression. All of these compression methods are enhanced if the image has been transformed into a differential image based on a differential pulse-code modulation (DPCM) algorithm. The LZW compression after the DPCM image transformation performed the best on our example images, and performed almost as well as the best of the three commercial compression programs tested. Lossy compression techniques are capable of much higher data compression, but reduced image quality and compression artifacts may be noticeable. Lossy compression is comprised of three steps: transformation, quantization, and coding. Two commonly used transformation methods are the discrete cosine transformation and discrete wavelet transformation. In both methods, most of the image information is contained in a relatively few of the transformation coefficients. The quantization step reduces many of the lower order coefficients to 0, which greatly improves the efficiency of the coding (compression) step. In fractal-based image compression, image patterns are stored as equations that can be reconstructed at different levels of resolution.

Key Words

personal computer image compression differential pulse code modulation Huffman codes Lempel-Ziv-Welch compression discrete cosine transformation discrete wavelet transformation fractal compression tagged interchange file format 

References

  1. 1.
    Lynch TJ: Data Compression: Techniques and Applications. Belmont, CA, Lifetime Learning Publications, 1985, pp 55–56Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Held G, Marshall TR: Data Compression: Techniques and Applications, Hardware and Software Consideration (ed 2). New York, NY, Wiley, 1987, pp 96–107Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huffman DA: A method for construction of minimum-redundancy codes. Proc Institute for Radio Engineers 40:1098–1101, 1952Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rabbani M, Jones PW: Image compression techniques for medical diagnostic imaging systems. J Digit Imaging 4:65–78, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilson DL: Compressed radiologic images and workstation viewing. J Digit Imaging 5:168–175, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Witten IH, Neal RM, Cleary JG: Arithmetic coding for data compression. Communications Association for Computing Machinery 30:520–540, 1987Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nelson M: The Data Compression Book. San Mateo, CA, M&T Books, 1992Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ziv J, Lempel A: A universal algorithm for sequential data compression, IEEE Trans Info Theory 23:337–343, 1977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ziv J, Lempel A: Compression of individual seuqences via variable-rate coding. IEEE Trans Info Theory 24:530–536, 1978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fiala ER, Greene DH: Data compression with finite windows. Communications ACM 32:490–505, 1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Storer JA: Data Compression: Methods and Theory. Rockville, MD, Computer Science, 1988Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Welch T: A technique for high-performance data compression. IEEE Computer 17:8–19, 1984Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nelson MR: LZW data compression. Dr Dobb's J 14:29–87, 1989Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    TIFF, revision 6.0. Aldus Developers Desk, Aldus Corporation, Seattle, WAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Embree PM, Kimble B: C Language Algorithms for Digital Signal Processing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1991Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wallace GK: The JPEG still picture compression standard. Communications Association for Computing Machinery 34:30–44, 1991Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Siegel EL, Templeton AW, Hensley KL, et al: Image data compression using a new floating-point digital signal processor. J Digit Imaging 4:188–195, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Manduca A: Interactive wavelet-based 2-D and 3-D image compression. SPIE Med Imaging 1897:307–318, 1993Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mandelbrot BB: The Fractal Geometry of Nature. New York, NY, WH Freeman and Co, 1982Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barnsley MF: Fractals Everywhere. Boston, MA, Academic, 1988Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Barnsley M: Image Compression Using the Fractal Transform. Image Processing 90—the Key Issues. Conference Proc. London, UK, Blenheim Online, 1990Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Banet B: Is fractal worth holding out for? The cold fusion of image compression begins to get some respect, in: Digital Media: A Seybold Report. Media, PA, Seybold, 1992, p 9Google Scholar

Copyright information

© W.B. Saunders Company 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thurman Gillespy
    • 1
  • Alan H. Rowberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology, SB-05University of WashingtonSeattle

Personalised recommendations