Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare 2 methods of analog-to-digital video conversion in anticipation of improving, refining, and standardizing digital video production for medical education, diagnosis support, and telemedicine. A video workstation was devised containing 2 analog-to-digital video conversion systems: a digital video media converter with fire wire card and a video capture card. A procedure for final digital video production was created that used equivalent compression, pixel resolution, frame rate, and data rate for both systems. A subjective test was performed in which 12 archived analog videotapes, consisting of magnetic resonance angiograms, ultrasounds, neurosurgeries, and telemedicine applications, were converted digitally using the 2 methods. Randomized side by side video comparisons were analyzed and rated by subjective quality. An objective test was performed by videotaping a gray-scale test pattern off a computer monitor, digitally converting it by the 2 methods, and comparing the gray-scale values to the original pattern. There was no significant difference in overall video quality (P=.31) or grayscale reproduction using the 2 methods of analog-to-digital conversion. When performing simple analog-to-digital video conversion, a video capture card is equal in quality and costs less than a digital video (DV) media converter or fire wire card. If a digital video camera is available for use, then a DV media converter or fire wire card is more advantageous because it enables full operation of the digital video camera.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Suhocki PV: Say it with multimedia: New presentation tools for the radiologist AJR 171:313–319, 1998
Hennessey J, Fisherman E, Ney D: Digital video applications in radiologic education: Theory, technique, and application. J Digit Imaging 7:85–90, 1994
Stensaas S: Animating the curriculum: Integrating multimedia into teaching. Bull Med Libr Assoc 82:133–139, 1994
Santer D, Vera E, Erkonen W, et al: A comparison of educational interventions. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 149:297–302, 1995
Galvin JR, Alessandro MP, Kurihara Y, et al: A comparison of educational interventions. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 149:297–302, 1995
Macura KJ, Macura RT, Morstad BD: Digital case library: A resource for teaching, learning, and diagnosis support in radiology. Radiographics 15:155–164, 1995
Jaffe CC, Lynch PJ, Smeulders AW: Hypermedia techniques for diagnostic imaging instruction: Videodisk echocardiography encyclopedia. Radiology 171:475–480, 1989
D’Alessandro MP, Galvin JR, Erkonen WE, et al: The instructional effectiveness of a radiology multimedia textbook (Hyperlung) versus a standard lecture. Invest Radiol 28:643–648, 1993
Swett HA, Fisher PR, Cohn AI, et al: Expert system-controlled image display. Radiology 172:487–493, 1989
Swett HA, Mutalik PG: Multipurpose image and data management system for radiologists, in Brody WR, Johnston GS (eds): Computer Applications to Assist Radiology. Carlsbad, CA, Symposia Foundation 1992, pp 101–107
Taira RK, Cardenas AF, Chu WW, et al: A knowledgebased multi-media database system for skeletal radiology, in Lemke HU, Inamura K, Jaffe CC, et al (eds): Computer assisted radiology. Berlin, Germany, Springer-Verlag 1993, pp 649–654
DeAngelis GA, Dempsey B, Berr S, et al: Diagnostic efficacy of compressed digitized real-time sonography of uterine fibroids. Acad Radiol 4:83–89, 1997
Lippman A: Feature sets for interactive images. Commun Assoc Comput Machinery 34:92–101, 1991
Sistrom CL, Gay SB: Digital cameras for reproducing radiologic images: Evaluation of three cameras. AJR 170:279–284, 1998
Zar JH: Biostatistical Analysis (ed 2). Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1984, pp 150–156
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported in part by the Division of N.I.D.D.K from the National Institutes of Health (5 T35 HL07744-08), and by the Electronic Medical Education Resource Group (EMERG) at the University of Utah.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Berges, G., Davidson, H.C., Chapman, B. et al. A comparison of two methods of analog-to-digital medical video conversion. J Digit Imaging 13, 109–113 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168382
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168382