Skip to main content
Log in

Characterization of monochrome CRT display systems in the field

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

Abstract

This article presents a review of image quality assessment methods for monochrome CRTs in the field as opposed to the laboratory. The review includes image quality programs at the University of Washington, the University of Texas at Houston, the University of Michigan, and the University of Arizona. CRT manufacturers and display-board suppliers also are concerned with image quality, particularly with respect to the life time of the CRT. The programs show that the need for image quality assessment for CRTs in the clinic is recognized. Although several experimental programs are in place, there is no universally accepted program. In fact, the clinical consequences of degraded monitor performance are not even well known and must be established. The existing programs mainly are based on the most comprehensive test pattern, the SMPTE pattern. The programs permit assessment of maximum luminance, display function, dynamic range, and contrast. They do not permit assessment of spatial resolution. There is no easy method to determine the spatial resolution in the field as precisely as desired simply because there are no visual aids (test patterns) to reliably determine loss of spatial resolution and signal-to-noise ratio using human observers. This report also presents initial and encouraging data obtained at the University of Arizona with a CCD camera. This CCD camera has the potential to be developed into an important tool for practical CRT evaluation for the clinic.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Honeyman JC, Forst MM, Staab EV, et al: Prototype picture archiving and communication system in clinical neuroradiology. Program of the Annual Meeting of the RSNA, Chicago, IL, November 1990

  2. Honeyman JC, Frost MM, Staab EV: Initial experiences with PACS in a clinical and research environment. SPE Medical Imaging V, San Jose, CA, February 1991

  3. Capp MP, Roehrig H, Seeley GW: The Digital radiology department of the future. Radiol Clin North Am, 1985

  4. Seeley GW, Ovitt TW, Capp MP: The total digital radiology department: An alternative view. AJR 144:421, 1985

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Huang HK (moderator): Advances in medical imaging. Ann Intern Med 112:203–220, 1990

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Goodman LR, Wilson CR, Foley WD: Digital radiography of the chest: Promises and problems. AJR 150:1241–1252, 1988

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chang J, Channin S, Przybylowicz J, et al: The Lightbox Part 1. RSNA Special Course in Computers in Radiology 1997, pp 61–70

  8. Scott W, Bluemke D, Mysko W, et al: Interpretation of emergency department radiographs by radiologists and emergency medicine physicians: Teleradiology workstation versus radiographs readings. Radiology 195:223–229, 1995

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Scott W, Rosenbaum J, Ackerman S, et al: Subtle Orthopedic Fractures: Teleradiology Workstation versus film interpretation. Radiology 187: 811–815, 1993

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. McLelland R, Hendrick RE, Zinninger MD, et al: The American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program. AJR 157:473–479, 1991

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. American College of Radiology-Committee on Quality Assurance in Mammography, Mammography Quality Control-Medical Physicist's Manual, Appendix 2 (Measurement of viewbox luminance, illuminance and colortemperature). American College of Radiology. Reston, VA, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hendrick RE: Standardization of image quality and radiation dose in mammograph. Radiology 174:648–654, 1990

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Blume H: The ACR-NEMA Proposal for a Gray-Scale Display Function Standard. Proc SPIE 2707:344–360, 1996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. AAPM Task Force 18: Acceptance Testing and Quality Control of Electronic Display Devices for Soft-Copy Display of Medical Images, University of South Carolina, November 1998

  15. Symer O, Orwin Associates: Personal communication, May 1994

  16. Gray JE, Stears J, Wondrow M: Quality Control of Video Components and Display Devices. Proc SPIE 486:64–71, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gray JE, Lisk KG, Haddick DH, et al: Test pattern for video displays and hard-copy cameras. Radiology 154:519–527, 1985

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lisk KG: SMPTE test pattern for certification of medical diagnostic display devices. Proc SPIE 486:79–82, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  19. Parsons DM, Kim Y: Quality control assessment for the medical diagnostic imaging support (MDIS) system's display monitors. SPIE Medical Imaging 2164:186–197, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  20. Samei E, Flynn MJ: Acceptance testing of image display monitors. Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI; Personal communication, October 1998

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hemminger BM, Johnston RE, Rolland JP, et al: Perceptual linearization of video display monitors for medical image presentation. Proc SPIE 2164:222–241, 1994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Blume H, Roehrig H, Ji T-L: Very high resolution CRT display systems: Update on the state of the art of very high resolution monochrome CRT displays. SID 92 Digest 1992, pp 699–702

  23. Blume H, Roehrig H, Ji T-L, et al: Very-high resolution monochrome CRT displays: How good are they really?. SID 91 Digest 1991, pp 355–358

    Google Scholar 

  24. Roehrig H, Blume H, Ji T-L, et al: Performance test and quality control of cathode ray tube displays. J Digit Imaging 3:134–145, 1990

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Roehrig H, Blume H, Ji T-L, et al: Noise of CRT display systems. Proc SPIE 1897:232–245, 1993

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Roehrig H, Dallas WJ, Ji T-L, et al: Physical evaluation of CRTs for use in digital radiography. Proc SPIE 1091:262–278, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  27. Roehrig H, Ji T-L, Browne M, et al: Signal-to-noise ratio and maximum information content of images displayed by a CRT. Proc SPIE. 1232:115–133, 1990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Przybylowicz J: Dome Imaging Systems; Personal communication, November 1997

  29. Matthijs P: BARCO Display Systems; Personal communication, June 1999

  30. Compton K: Clinton Electronics; Personal communication, May 1999

  31. Volbrecht M: Image Systems Inc; Personal communication, May 1999

  32. Eckhardt W, Siemens AG: Personal communication, May 1999

  33. www.image-smiths.com

  34. Van Metter R, Zhao BS, Kohm K: The sensitivity of visual targets for display quality assessment. Proc SPIE 3658: 254–268, 1999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Briggs SJ: Digital display test target development. Boeing Aerospace Co, Report No.D190-15960-1, 1977

  36. Briggs SJ, Heagy D, Holmes R: Visual test target for display evaluation. SID 93 Digest 1993, pp 396–399

  37. Briggs SJ: Manual: Digital test target BTP #4. Boeing Aerospace Co, Report No. DI 80 25066-1, 1979

  38. SofTrack Version 3.0: A Quality Control System for Display Performance; National Information Display Laboratory, a Division of David Sarnoff Research Center Inc, Princeton, NJ

  39. Hangiandreou NJ, Fetterly KA, Bernatz SN, et al: Quantitative evaluation of overall electronic display quality. J Digit Imaging 11:180–186, 1998

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported in part by a Grant from the Toshiba Corporation and NIH-SBIR Grant No. 1 R43 RR13524-01.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Roehrig, H., Willis, C.E. & Damento, M.A. Characterization of monochrome CRT display systems in the field. J Digit Imaging 12, 152–165 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168851

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168851

Key words

Navigation