Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Photography in dermatology: comparison between slides and digital imaging.
J Cosmet Dermatol. 2003 Jul; 2(3-4):131-4.JC

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Clinical photography is an essential tool for any medical speciality, such as dermatology, wherein accurate records are required of pre, intra and postoperative findings, plus quick access to these records for comparison and evaluation purposes. Clinical photography is important not only to the surgeon, but also to the patient, so that a realistic objective assessment of improvement may be made. Conventional emulsion film-based prints from negatives and positive colour transparencies revolutionised clinical records when they first appeared. Now the appearance and rapid development of digital photography is bringing about yet another revolution.

AIM

To compare conventional with digital photography from the standpoints of cost-effectiveness, ease of archiving and ease of retrieval. The quality of the imaging was not dealt with.

METHODS

A professional clinical photographer took images using: Nikon F3 (conventional emulsion based photography); FotoFinder Derma (digital photography).

RESULTS

Although traditional emulsion-based photographs are quicker to take, digital imaging provides an almost immediately available image and is much swifter to use for classification, later retrieval and comparison between serial images.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the initial expense of acquiring digital equipment compared with traditional photographic apparatus, when examined over a five-year period, both formats cost approximately the same. Digital photography offers advantages in ease of archiving and storage, savings in time and space, extremely quick retrieval and very easy comparison of images. Digital photography is very much the way of the future in dermatological clinical imaging.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Laser Dermatology Centre, Marseilles, France. laserder@jeanluclevy.comNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

17163918

Citation

Levy, J L., et al. "Photography in Dermatology: Comparison Between Slides and Digital Imaging." Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, vol. 2, no. 3-4, 2003, pp. 131-4.
Levy JL, Trelles MA, Levy A, et al. Photography in dermatology: comparison between slides and digital imaging. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2003;2(3-4):131-4.
Levy, J. L., Trelles, M. A., Levy, A., & Besson, R. (2003). Photography in dermatology: comparison between slides and digital imaging. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2(3-4), 131-4.
Levy JL, et al. Photography in Dermatology: Comparison Between Slides and Digital Imaging. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2003;2(3-4):131-4. PubMed PMID: 17163918.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Photography in dermatology: comparison between slides and digital imaging. AU - Levy,J L, AU - Trelles,M A, AU - Levy,A, AU - Besson,R, PY - 2006/12/14/pubmed PY - 2006/12/14/medline PY - 2006/12/14/entrez SP - 131 EP - 4 JF - Journal of cosmetic dermatology JO - J Cosmet Dermatol VL - 2 IS - 3-4 N2 - BACKGROUND: Clinical photography is an essential tool for any medical speciality, such as dermatology, wherein accurate records are required of pre, intra and postoperative findings, plus quick access to these records for comparison and evaluation purposes. Clinical photography is important not only to the surgeon, but also to the patient, so that a realistic objective assessment of improvement may be made. Conventional emulsion film-based prints from negatives and positive colour transparencies revolutionised clinical records when they first appeared. Now the appearance and rapid development of digital photography is bringing about yet another revolution. AIM: To compare conventional with digital photography from the standpoints of cost-effectiveness, ease of archiving and ease of retrieval. The quality of the imaging was not dealt with. METHODS: A professional clinical photographer took images using: Nikon F3 (conventional emulsion based photography); FotoFinder Derma (digital photography). RESULTS: Although traditional emulsion-based photographs are quicker to take, digital imaging provides an almost immediately available image and is much swifter to use for classification, later retrieval and comparison between serial images. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the initial expense of acquiring digital equipment compared with traditional photographic apparatus, when examined over a five-year period, both formats cost approximately the same. Digital photography offers advantages in ease of archiving and storage, savings in time and space, extremely quick retrieval and very easy comparison of images. Digital photography is very much the way of the future in dermatological clinical imaging. SN - 1473-2165 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/17163918/Photography_in_dermatology:_comparison_between_slides_and_digital_imaging_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-2130.2004.00081.x DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -
Try the Free App:
Prime PubMed app for iOS iPhone iPad
Prime PubMed app for Android
Prime PubMed is provided
free to individuals by:
Unbound Medicine.