Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!boingo.med.jhu.edu!haven!adm!lhc!nih-csl!NIHDCRT!Vivino
From: Vivino@NIHDCRT (Mark Vivino)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: x-ray scanners -- a followup
Message-ID: <839@nih-csl.nih.gov>
Date: 16 Jan 91 21:35:07 GMT
References: <91014.100116CRANER@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu>
Sender: news@nih-csl.nih.gov
Organization: Nat'l Inst's of Health
Lines: 22

>We use an Eikonix scanner, which functionally is the same as a video
>camera, just higher resolution (4096x4096 12-bit pixels). I haven't 
noticed
>the loss of quality you mention, although I haven't done any real careful
>studies.
>The Eikonix is not very convenient to use, being hard to focus and adjust
>for correct illumination, but seems to give good images once this is
>done.
>We are image processing mammograms, and require the high resolution to
>image microcalcifications properly. Richard S. Crane
 
   I wouldn't count on the Eikonix single line CCD array (made by NEC) to 
give you 12 bits. I'd say you might have 9 significant, and 10 if you are 
lucky. Also the Nikon lens that comes with this system can't give you high 
positional accuracy, even if the stepper motor does. Nikon does not give 
out info on the Contrast Transfer Function of their lenses.

Opinions are my own, I don't own an Eikonix but I am interested in their 
product.

Mark Vivino
mvivino@helix.nih.gov