This Article Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hood, J. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hood, J. H.

A 35 mm camera for cineradiology

Department of Surgery, Sub-department of Radiology, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Herston, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

This excerpt was created in the absence of an abstract.

Film image quality in cineradiology is influenced by many factors (Campbell, Klatte and Shalkovski, 1960). Severe limitations are imposed by the image intensifier which has limited capacity to resolve fine detail. Definition is dose-dependent. As dosage is increased, resolving power of the tube improves and scintillation is minimised. A liberal attitude to radiation levels received by the patient will result in better motion pictures though dose-rates may approach those used in radiotherapy.

While the image produced on the output phosphor of the amplifier tube is a poor one by optical standards, it can be de-graded further in transference through the optical systems and camera onto film. Film, film size and processing are important and have been considered elsewhere (Klatte, Campbell and Lurie, 1959).

Camera design has not received the same consideration although, together with the projector, it has a profound effect on the depiction of motion (Hood, 1966).

With a view to improving existing apparatus, both in regard to facility of operation and quality of end product, (i.e., the cinefilm) a camera, editor and step printer have been built which are especially suited to cineradiology.

This consists of a body with light-tight magazines (Fig. 1). The latter hold 400 ft. of film and each may be removed from the body, independently of the other, facilitating loading and unloading operations. The take-up spool is belt driven through a friction clutch.