 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Dentistry / October 20043D Rendered Dental X-Ray Video Clip I made?
www.keyneimage.co.uk\DemoVideo4.wmv Only 9.7mb - runs about 90 seconds Needs Windoze Media Player 9 or 10 Its been reduced in size by 2/3 but its still well worth a look. You can play 'Spot The Amalgam' (its the Big Mountains Jan) and the broken Crown Post, like you never saw before. Lots of fun for all the family. John Chewter Its actually a serious video of a software diagnostic tool in action > www.keyneimage.co.uk\DemoVideo4.wmv > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > John Chewter >Its actually a serious video of a software diagnostic tool in action I was going to dl and watch this as soon as I wasn't at work... Adenosine Some people emailed me that their firewalls blocked the wmv So I zipped it: www.keyneimage.co.uk\DemoVideo4.zip Cool animation, but the sound track is hard to dance to. Seriously, It is interesting, but I am not certain of its usefulness. Maybe playing with such a tool for a while would change my mind. (Not trying to hint that I want a copy, but honestly not being certain how I would utilize it). What resolution does the digital radiograph need to be saved at to do this?  Signature~+--~+--~+--~+--~+-- Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA .................................................... This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only. Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect your health. ...................... > www.keyneimage.co.uk\DemoVideo4.wmv > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > John Chewter Steve: >What resolution does the digital radiograph need to be saved at to do this? This X-Ray is a 512x768 pixel digital radiograph from a Trophy RVG3 sensor. It can render at various precisions - depending on what you want to see and the size of the radiograph image This is sample clip was not renderered at it's most sensitive level (which can look very 'busy'. >Seriously, It is interesting, but I am not certain of its usefulness. This is just one tool in the softwares toolbox and is not magic, but it is an intreractive, interesting and very dramatic way to display an X-Ray. Cavities look like bomb craters, calicfied periodental ligaments show up as sharp mountain ridges etc. In another mode, generalized bone loss is easly seen. It seems to be a good patient education tool, as patients readily identify with the 'landscape alegory' and easily missed subtle features in X-Rays stick out like a sore thumb. Requests for printouts to take home are common! In our testing phase (2 years ago) dentists were still finding new ways to use it, several weeks into the trial. Give it a try and let us know what you think? The X-Ray I used is in the sample patient of the software. Note. A 3D accelleration really helps for fast/large rendering. On my $50 game card it renders full screen at 100 frames/sec.and higher On a non accellerated card 2 frames/sec and a small render window may be all that is acheivable >Maybe playing with such a tool for a while would change my mind. Grab a download: :) www.keyneimage.co.uk/KICam2D3D311.zip > Cool animation, but the sound track is hard to dance to. > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> >> John Chewter So that is a roughly 600 dpi image? How does the image compare with an average 300 dpi image? Signature~+--~+--~+--~+--~+-- Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA .................................................... This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only. Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect your health. ...................... > Steve: > [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] >>> >>> John Chewter That sample is set to 'Normal' precision If you set it to 'High' Precision it will look the same as the sample clip. (It has an Ultra setting also) Assuming similar image quality blah blah ........... Send me one and I will send you a screen shot > So that is a roughly 600 dpi image? > [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] >>>> >>>> John Chewter Once the image is captured, you cannot change the resolution. If all images were captured at 600 dpi, your database would get huge twice as fast. Signature~+--~+--~+--~+--~+-- Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA .................................................... This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only. Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect your health. ...................... > That sample is set to 'Normal' precision > If you set it to 'High' Precision it will look the same as the sample [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] >>>>> >>>>> John Chewter 600dpi is 4x bigger (in file size) than 300 dpi. Twice as wide and twice as high. European Rules. The app. may not loose original captured data content without clearly branding the image as such and it would loose any legal weight (Certain caveats apply like certified near-lossless). There are very similar regulations in USA & Canada. We can get about 250 Million images of that size on a $100 drive. Cheap enough! The trend is 1200-2400 dpi and going up. The downside is that what Dentists need to see gets obscured, in the micro-detail that is exposed. We have ways to handle that. I personally can see no clinical advantage above 1200 dpi in dental work but I am not a dentist. > Once the image is captured, you cannot change the resolution. > [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] >>>>>> >>>>>> John Chewter Of course if you want to scan @ 300 DPI - that's up to you The software does not mind but you cannot change after it is in the database. This is by design John > 600dpi is 4x bigger (in file size) than 300 dpi. Twice as wide and twice > as high. [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> John Chewter For a PAx , 300 dpi is very good. Panoramic and Cephs need 600 dpi More than that is not useful. >600dpi is 4x bigger (in file size) than 300 dpi. Twice as wide and twice as >high. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >>>> >>>> How does the image compare with an average 300 dpi image? .. Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA Writing on a tablet PC,so forgive me if the PC misreads my poor handwriting. As a developer, I mostly have to use what hardware is provided. If the dentist is using a 1200 dpi schick then that is what I have to provide support for.. > For a PAx , 300 dpi is very good. Panoramic and Cephs need 600 dpi > More than that is not useful. [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > Writing on a tablet PC,so forgive me if the PC misreads my poor > handwriting. >So that is a roughly 600 dpi image? > >How does the image compare with an average 300 dpi image? Twice as good. -- W_B wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com Take out the G'RBAGE Four times the area. Four times the detail. On scanned film, to me, it just looks like four times the noise (film grain) On digital sensors you do see more useful detail >>So that is a roughly 600 dpi image? >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com > Take out the G'RBAGE >Four times the area. Four times the detail. > >On scanned film, to me, it just looks like four times the noise (film grain) > >On digital sensors you do see more useful detail Good to know. Any chance of price reduction of digital sensors on the horizon ? -- W_B wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com Take out the G'RBAGE That's an interesting question. 3 years ago we had 12 or so 'Main Players' world wide Now its been boiled down to (arguably) 3 majors as dog ate dog. So silicon is getting cheaper but competition is reducing. I guess no immediate drops. The good news is the Far East could produce a new strong viable incomer very soon. That might raise a few eyebrows. ^-o >>Four times the area. Four times the detail. >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com > Take out the G'RBAGE >Good to know. > >Any chance of price reduction of digital sensors on the horizon ? > >-- Why not? See the price on digital cameras? I mean good ones 8 Megapixels? CHEAP. Oh wait, the sensors are for dentists ... NEVER MIND Joel >www.keyneimage.co.uk\DemoVideo4.wmv > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >John Chewter So, it looks like this was created by using the xray as a bump map over a flat surface? Adenosine Kind of. It uses the X-ray as a heightmap for an array meshes. I then generate a (my own enhanced) bumpmap and apply it as a texture to the meshes. Then I light the whole thing and render with a vertex shader (plus some other tricks). Stay tuned for the forthcoming major 3D update in January! >>www.keyneimage.co.uk\DemoVideo4.wmv >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Adenosine |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.