Journal of Digital Imaging

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 152–165 | Cite as

Characterization of monochrome CRT display systems in the field

  • Hans Roehrig
  • Charles E. Willis
  • Michael A. Damento


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.

Key words

CRT image quality control CCD camera digital radiology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 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 1990Google Scholar
  2. 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 1991Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Capp MP, Roehrig H, Seeley GW: The Digital radiology department of the future. Radiol Clin North Am, 1985Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Seeley GW, Ovitt TW, Capp MP: The total digital radiology department: An alternative view. AJR 144:421, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huang HK (moderator): Advances in medical imaging. Ann Intern Med 112:203–220, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goodman LR, Wilson CR, Foley WD: Digital radiography of the chest: Promises and problems. AJR 150:1241–1252, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chang J, Channin S, Przybylowicz J, et al: The Lightbox Part 1. RSNA Special Course in Computers in Radiology 1997, pp 61–70Google Scholar
  8. 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, 1995PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scott W, Rosenbaum J, Ackerman S, et al: Subtle Orthopedic Fractures: Teleradiology Workstation versus film interpretation. Radiology 187: 811–815, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McLelland R, Hendrick RE, Zinninger MD, et al: The American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program. AJR 157:473–479, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 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, 1992Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hendrick RE: Standardization of image quality and radiation dose in mammograph. Radiology 174:648–654, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blume H: The ACR-NEMA Proposal for a Gray-Scale Display Function Standard. Proc SPIE 2707:344–360, 1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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 1998Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Symer O, Orwin Associates: Personal communication, May 1994Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gray JE, Stears J, Wondrow M: Quality Control of Video Components and Display Devices. Proc SPIE 486:64–71, 1984Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gray JE, Lisk KG, Haddick DH, et al: Test pattern for video displays and hard-copy cameras. Radiology 154:519–527, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lisk KG: SMPTE test pattern for certification of medical diagnostic display devices. Proc SPIE 486:79–82, 1984Google Scholar
  19. 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, 1994Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Samei E, Flynn MJ: Acceptance testing of image display monitors. Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI; Personal communication, October 1998Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hemminger BM, Johnston RE, Rolland JP, et al: Perceptual linearization of video display monitors for medical image presentation. Proc SPIE 2164:222–241, 1994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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 699–702Google Scholar
  23. 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 355–358Google Scholar
  24. 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, 1990CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roehrig H, Blume H, Ji T-L, et al: Noise of CRT display systems. Proc SPIE 1897:232–245, 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Roehrig H, Dallas WJ, Ji T-L, et al: Physical evaluation of CRTs for use in digital radiography. Proc SPIE 1091:262–278, 1989Google Scholar
  27. 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, 1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Przybylowicz J: Dome Imaging Systems; Personal communication, November 1997Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Matthijs P: BARCO Display Systems; Personal communication, June 1999Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Compton K: Clinton Electronics; Personal communication, May 1999Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Volbrecht M: Image Systems Inc; Personal communication, May 1999Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Eckhardt W, Siemens AG: Personal communication, May 1999Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    www.image-smiths.comGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Van Metter R, Zhao BS, Kohm K: The sensitivity of visual targets for display quality assessment. Proc SPIE 3658: 254–268, 1999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Briggs SJ: Digital display test target development. Boeing Aerospace Co, Report No.D190-15960-1, 1977Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Briggs SJ, Heagy D, Holmes R: Visual test target for display evaluation. SID 93 Digest 1993, pp 396–399Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Briggs SJ: Manual: Digital test target BTP #4. Boeing Aerospace Co, Report No. DI 80 25066-1, 1979Google Scholar
  38. 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, NJGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hangiandreou NJ, Fetterly KA, Bernatz SN, et al: Quantitative evaluation of overall electronic display quality. J Digit Imaging 11:180–186, 1998PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans Roehrig
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Charles E. Willis
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Michael A. Damento
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of Arizona, Radiology Research LabTucson
  2. 2.Diagnostic Imaging ServicesTexas Children's HospitalTucson
  3. 3.Roper Scientific CorpTucson

Personalised recommendations