Slashdot Mirror


Reading FilmX Picture Files?

bzlman asks: "I just broke my finger and instead of conventional x-rays, the ER gave me a CD with huge picture files on it from the company called FilmX from sorna.com. Unfortunately, the software to read the pics is for Windows, and the file type for the images (each about 10 MB) is 'command line' (the files are of no conventional type). I've tried opening the files with every image program for Mac OS X and Classic, to no avail. These are high quality images I want to see, and I hope someone can help me find a Mac OS X way to view them. Thanks."

71 comments

  1. The wonders of searching VT by RalphBNumbers · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hmm... their homepage says they are "a dicom solution".

    A versiontracker search for "dicom" under MacOSX returns these programs.

    Or you could just use the ubiquitous GraphicConverter which handles just about everything, including dicom images iirc.

    --
    "The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
  2. Is this a joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    It says on the freakin' link you supplied what the format is: DICOM

    Use Google and find plenty of viewers (ImageMagick works, for instance).

    It would've taken you less typing then your slashdot story.

    1. Re:Is this a joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The story is a red herring. The real aim of the story was to hopefully fire up a flamewar against the DICOM makers screaming for them to make their stuff open source. Thanks to the astute slashdot readers it looks like that's been quashed.

    2. Re:Is this a joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DICOM is an open format, anyway. It's just a 3-d bitmap; that is, a list of 2-d bitmap "slices" along a z-axis, along with some header data to specify physical dimensions and slice order. That's all - usually, you apply some after-the-fact compression like gzip (lossy compression is right out, since they're medical images).

    3. Re:Is this a joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is /. in 2004. Hacker nature, figuring out stuff on your own is so 19xx.

  3. Whoa! That's an interesting google... by morgewan · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would warn against a google for 'filmx mac' if you are in a sensitive environment. Are you sure that was a finger they x-rayed???

    Honey, I was just trying to help some guy out on slashdot REALLY!

    1. Re:Whoa! That's an interesting google... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy crap! I just ran this same google, and a link to this slashdot story is at the top of the search results already! Why isn't Google Images this fast to update?

  4. Virtual PC by macrealist · · Score: 1, Informative

    The viewer is on the CD. Not the best solution, but Virtual PC should allow you to view it.

    --
    I am living proof of the Peter Principle
    1. Re:virtual pc by Pope · · Score: 1

      OK, so instead of buying DVD2OneX you have to buy Virtual PC. Not much of a solution unless you need VPC for other software.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    2. Re:virtual pc by i621148 · · Score: 1

      well, virtual pc is a little less hard to "buy" ;)

    3. Re:virtual pc by Pope · · Score: 1

      So's DVD2OneX ;)

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    4. Re:virtual pc by i621148 · · Score: 1

      really? i have had a hard time with: DVD2oneX V1.4.1 (Mac OS-X) which has changed the registration scheme. it is not as publicized like V1.4 is yet on the boards and i cannot find anywhere to download the old legacy V1.4 package... i think i am just going to !gasp! buy it instead of transferring 8G of files back and forth through samba.

  5. Try raw image loader by Rikus · · Score: 3, Informative

    I know nothing about the specific file format being used here, but the fact that the images are quite large might suggest that they contain an uncompressed representation of the image data, possibly viewable with a raw image data loader (such as the GIMP plugin called raw.c).
    Of course, even if that is the case, it might not be possible to get a decent picture from it, but it's worth a shot.

    1. Re:Try raw image loader by MyDixieWrecked · · Score: 1

      if they were raw image files, you could import them with photoshop, so long as you know the bpp and dimensions... photoshop is pretty good at guessing most of the time.

      I'd be interested in a copy of said images for both viewing and experimentation purposes. Perhaps I could write a gimp plugin for it?

      And for the poster who suggested virtual PC, what the hell? that's overkill, why not just suggest a cheap 200$ PC? heh.

      --



      ...spike
      Ewwwwww, coconut...
    2. Re:Try raw image loader by harrkev · · Score: 1, Troll

      As a rule, *NO* medical images are ever stored using lossy compression. Lossy compression can create artifacts, and medical images are used to make life-or-death decisions. "Sorry Mrs. Smith. That brain tumor was actually a JPEG artifact."

      So, medical images will either use lossless or no compression. There are some lossless compression schemes that can gain about a 50% reduction in picture size. Nothing compared to 90% or so using JPEG, but not too bad either.

      --
      "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
    3. Re:Try raw image loader by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 1
      Sorry, this is a reply about your sig:
      Conservatives: Kill murderers, save children.
      Liberals: Kill children, save murderers.


      So, I say kill everyone (pro-death penalty, pro-abortion, pro-assisted suicide,) where do I fall in that spectrum? :-p
      --
      Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
      The purpose of that site was not known.
  6. use iRad or Osirix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    the pictures may be in DICOM format, which is the standard for radiographic images. Either of these programs will read that format and allow you to manipulate the image series.

    1. Re:use iRad or Osirix by eyv · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'll be a karma whore. Here is a page of information and links to some free viewers.

    2. Re:use iRad or Osirix by Smurf · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, judging from the web page, the pictures appear to be in DICOM format. If so, I highly recommend OsiriX, an extremely cool, free, open source (GPL), DICOM viewer and PACS workstation/server that happens to be Mac only.

      There are other programs that will open DICOM files, like the NIH's ImageJ. There are other cool, free medical image viewers for Mac and other systems (MRIcro comes to mind). And there are professional tools that spank OsiriX's ass, but cost over $70,000. But I have seen nothing for a reasonable price that is as good and as easy to use as OsiriX. Make sure you give it a look!

    3. Re:use iRad or Osirix by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 3, Informative

      There are a few more for OS X:

      Escape Medical Viewer
      DreamFird aka jBoxView
      iRad

      More search results here and here . So in this regards you have your choice of solutions. I think even GraphicsConverter might be able to view the images, but not the associated data.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  7. Here we go again by ravenspear · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I really don't care if I burn Karma here.

    Why is Cliff intent on turning apple.slashdot.org into a tech support forum? I mean I could probably point to at least 10 stories he has posted in the last month or two which are basically some random person who needs help with an OS X issue that a two second search on Google or VT or the Macworld of Macfixit forums or any other number of places would have yielded the answer to.

    1. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sad that criticism of the editors results in such stupid karmic punishment. If I had mod points, I'd mod this post up. Cliff is the worst editor on Slashdot. Period.

    2. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Cliff is the worst editor on Slashdot. Period.

      What about michael?

    3. Re:Here we go again by zo219 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not Cliff. (Okay, maybe it is Cliff, but that's another story.) Fact is, every damn OS X forum has been clogged - clogged, people! - with questions that a pulldown of the ol' Help Menu would answer. If Google is too much to ask. I don't get it. Why OS X? It is Switchers? Some kind of Learned Helpless that eventually besets all who use Windows?
      In which case one must be patient and charitable. But forget completely about Apple "My screen is all funny writing and grey" Discussions. The dumb-down is everywhere. I have even seen (gasp, I know) semi-boneheaded idling on macosxhints.com. Now, that's serious. Though by this time, Panther hints must be running pretty sparse on the ground. . .

    4. Re:Here we go again by DavidLeblond · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Its partly because when we switched we were told by our friends that we would not be able to find any software on the Mac, so we assume its not there (I'm a recent switcher.) Hell I even have heard people argue that "Apple doesn't have many applications because there aren't any development tools yet for the Mac."

    5. Re:Here we go again by LikelyStory · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure, it would be a two second search - but only if one knows that DICOM was the name of an image format. Nor does the company's statement "We are a DICOM alternative to film" help unless you already know what DICOM means. Kind of a catch-22, no?

    6. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its partly because when we switched we were told by our friends that we would not be able to find any software on the Mac, so we assume its not there.

      So you assume it's not there, don't even bother searching for potential solutions -- not even on Google -- and post to AskSlashdot instead? Brilliant.

    7. Re:Here we go again by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

      I never said thats what I did. I googled for all of my software. Only said I understood where they were coming from.

      Google's quickly becoming worthless anyway, so your smartass comment means nada.

    8. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Google's quickly becoming worthless anyway, so your smartass comment means nada.

      I guess you never even bothered to look at the Google link that I provided then. Searching for the terms ' "Mac OSX" DICOM viewer ' returns a number of relevant results. #1 points to no less than six Mac programs. #2 lists four. #3 and #4 refer to the excellent OsiriX application for -- you guessed it -- Mac. #5 lists...

      But hey, you can complain all you like about Google being worthless. As my simple search points out, the real problem lies with your inability to use Google effectively. Hell, I even misspelled "OS X" as "OSX" and still got those results!

      You might want to brush up on your search techniques.

    9. Re:Here we go again by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

      I really don't care about Dicom viewers. I really don't care about your search results. And I know how to use a search engine, I've been using them since Webcrawler. But the amount of bunk results I get doing searches is increasing every day and I've been having to dig through more and more crap in order to get to the relevant results. Just search for a generic drug name and see how many "online pharmacies" come up, and how many of the pages have acutal drug information on it and you'll know what I'm talking about.

    10. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This article reeks of a setup to publicize something. Apparently its become a fashionable way to attract internet traffic (specifically from OS X users). Personally, I'm not going to follow the freakin' link, and I'm not going to search Google for file formats or apps that read them. Now can I have some real news please

    11. Re:Here we go again by AusG4 · · Score: 1

      Webcrawler? Bah. N00b. :P

      If you didn't cut your teeth on Gopher, you're still an NFG.

      --
      bash-3.00$ uname -a
      SunOS panda 5.10 Generic sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-2
    12. Re:Here we go again by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

      If you didn't cut your teeth on Gopher, you're still an NFG.

      Well I did, so I'm not. IMHO if you cut your teeth on Gopher, you're still an NFG, NFG.

  8. Dear slashdot.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    My friend gave me a shiny flat object. He said it's a "Seedy" and I should put it in my Mac. But my Mac only has a small 3.5-inch slot on the lower right.

    What do I do? Should I cut the seedy in half or what?

    Thanks!

    1. Re:Dear slashdot.... by beelsebob · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, that slots only for small wholemeal rolls, I would suggest getting an external bread oven for your seedy. Bob

    2. Re:Dear slashdot.... by BMonger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you Mac only has a 3.5 inch floppy slot and no CD-Rom drive you probably need a new Mac... ;)

    3. Re:Dear slashdot.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But my Mac only has a small 3.5-inch slot...

      I'm amazed that you were still able to measure its size. Maybe that was just a good guess.

  9. 'Command line' huh. by cbiffle · · Score: 3, Informative

    I have to assume you checked the type of the file by pointing at it in the Finder.

    Pull up a Terminal and enter 'file name-of-one-of-the-files' without the quotes. It will tell you.

    It's likely to say DICOM Medical Imaging Data, but we'll see.

    Search for a reader for the format it suggests.

    1. Re:'Command line' huh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a Mac user, what is this Terminal you speak of, it sounds deadly.

  10. If no one mods you up by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

    then you're a slut, not a whore. =)

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    1. Re:If no one mods you up by Siniset · · Score: 1

      and apparently it's not working...nothings worse than being a slut who can't get any.

  11. Thoughts by JavaRob · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A few other commenters seem to have found the answer for you already... but if this were a totally non-standard, proprietary format that was impossible to view on anything but Windows, I can still think of possible solutions. E.g., from what I understand Windows is becoming a fairly widespread operating system nowadays; perhaps you have a neighbor, or a friend, or a relative, or a coworker, who has one of these unusual machines? :)

    Seriously, though, you should complain. All they have to do is include a readme file that says "Users of other operating systems can open these images using any image viewer with DICOMM support" or something along those lines. It's not hard -- but they may not have bothered yet simply because they aren't getting any real complaints. It's like all of the websites out there that are only tested on IE. No complaints, so why change?

    Fortunately, as more people use Firefox, and (possibly?) more people use Macs, the common understanding that you're "safe" to only include support for Windows and IE will start to disappear.

    1. Re:Thoughts by mbaudis · · Score: 1

      Here is your cake.

      Can you send something back tomorrow? My birthday; but I prefer some champagne...

      And to stay on topic: I second your comment ;-)

      happy birthday!

    2. Re:Thoughts by Lovejoy · · Score: 1

      I have no cake to mail you. And I don't know you. But Hapy Birthday anyway!

      You are right on target. He should complain to the medical office, then to the company that produced the CD.

      No one will do anything about it until they get a sufficient number of complaints.

    3. Re:Thoughts by JavaRob · · Score: 1

      Ok, I had to change my sig (since my birthday is now over). Now people reading your comment will be *so* confused.... Oh, well.

      Anyway, happy birthday to you, today. And voila: /pops champagne cork, hands over bottle

  12. openrad.com to the rescue! by whiteSanjuro · · Score: 5, Informative

    what you are looking for is an open-source DICOM Viewer. OpenRad is a great source for open source radiology projects and information.

    1. Re:openrad.com to the rescue! by Jane_the_Great · · Score: 1

      Well, he's looking for a DICOM viewer but there's no reason it has to be open-source.

      --
      THIS ACCOUNT IS OFFICIALLY RETIRED/RETARDED.
  13. Osirix: open/free cocoa DICOM viewer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Many programs will view DICOM files these days, even the most excellent and venerable ImageMagik. Osirix is an excellent tool for visualising and analysing medical images, volumetric data, and will let you manipulate the data, view in 3D and all sorts of funky things.

  14. virtual pc by i621148 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    just use virtual pc to install a crap version of windows on your mac. i have been using dvdbackup for mac and could not find a comparable version of dvdshrink (except for dvd2one which is expensive). even through emulation on a g4, the new virtual pc is pretty fast. encoding an entire dvd in 18 minutes... so if you can get past the "puke" factor of allocating some hard disk space for windows, i think it is a fantastic product. also you can use it to try out "test" operating systems like windows media center from winbeta.org or even the new fedora 3 before putting it on your main server. now i just wonder if i can run some old legacy solaris apps? :)

  15. iRad will do the Trick!!! by tommyleebyron · · Score: 1, Informative

    http://irad.sourceforge.net/

  16. Off topic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use Easy DVD Copy on OS X.

  17. ImageJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a Java app that will handle about any image file format including DICOM images. Consult the plugins for DICOM support.

    http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/

  18. virtual pc pirate! Eye, matey, I caught ya! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you casually suggest "using" (as opposed to buying) a microsoft product: VPC. You use dvdshrink, because the alternative is "too expensive!" You might as well fly the jolly roger and wear an eyepatch. You're probably one of those mp3 ipod pirates, too! Ya might wanna think of posting this kind of information as AC. Although its reasonable to not expect to hear from them...after all, nobody expects the DMCA Inquisition!

  19. Its a public relations gimmick Nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know if its an attempt to publicize the format, the imaging company, or application that reads this format. The conventional press has become a dumping ground for public relations blather, and now Slashdot suffers from this covert advertising, too. Even if its advertising for "free software," unless its an objective review, I don't want to hear about it, and I'm not going to take the time to search google. I might as well just browse Google sci/tech news

  20. Re: Do you work for ImageMagick? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the app is free, maybe its open source, I don't care. I don't know if you're just another sucker, but this whole article reeks of a setup to publicize something. I'm not going to look for ImageMagick, I'm not going to follow the freakin' link, and I'm not going to search Google. Now can I have some real news please?

  21. Wow- how much is google paying you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've hear of wasting time on /., but you've taken time-wasting to a new level. My hats off to you, a true slacker!

  22. Not nearly enough, care to chip in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My hats off to you, a true slacker!

    Yep, we've all got goals.

    I imagine that the 8-10 minutes it took to look up those results is pretty insignificant compared to the amount of time you must have already spent looking for similar information.

  23. Just relax by nycroft · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Dude, seriously, all these guys that are giving you crap are just a bunch of Mac snobs. They've been working with their computers so long that they don't remember what it was like to feel helpless when encountered by a strange file. Sure you could've done a little research, but that's not your fault.

    What is the Apple section for anyway? Is it just for a bunch of flamers to sit around bitching? Or are we here to actually help the Mac user community grow a little?

    Try Graphic Converter, it should be in your Applications Folder or Utilities folder. If that fails, OsiriX has an open source, OSX compatible viewer.

    Sorry about my compatriots here, we'll try and be more tolerant next time.

    --
    Mr. Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time is enemy action.
    1. Re:Just relax by ravenspear · · Score: 0, Troll

      What is the Apple section for anyway? Is it just for a bunch of flamers to sit around bitching? Or are we here to actually help the Mac user community grow a little?

      My understanding of /. was that it was "news for nerds" not "a community help forum for the technically illiterate."

    2. Re:Just relax by nycroft · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Well if you don't have anything good to say to the original poster, don't say it at all is what I'm getting at. You just proved my point, you snob.

      --
      Mr. Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time is enemy action.
    3. Re:Just relax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who agrees that there's nothing wrong with helping the original poster, let me just say that by your language and word choice you've just proved (for the second time in two posts) that you're an asshole. Lighten up, asshole.

    4. Re:Just relax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry about my compatriots here, we'll try and be more tolerant next time.

      Eh, speak for yourself.

    5. Re:Just relax by Absentminded-Artist · · Score: 1
      LOL Nicely put, nycroft. Nothing is more intimidating for somebody new to something than dealing with techno-elitist snobs who make their day by tearing somebody else down. Time was you would only bump into that in PC IRC forums (ever try being a n00b in IRC? It's ugly, man!) But I'm disappointed to see this attitude come over to the Mac.

      I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. We are on slashdot, after all. ;) And the Mac has won over many new users from the geekier side because of its sweet GUI built over a Unix system, many of them tweenagers with lots of brains but little manners. Still, it would be nice if the punks on the forum would button it and stop busting people's chops for not being born with obscure file and system knowledge.

      --
      The Splintered Mind - Overcoming
  24. DICOM Files by Macgoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Graphic Converter opens this kind of file with no problem. Photoshop CS does not. Go figure.

  25. Re:Sue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. That's HIPAA - Not HIPPA; and

    2. They are HIS medical files. No privacy violation for a medical provider to give you your OWN information.

    No wonder you posted AC. Idiot.

  26. Yet another Goggle find of Mac DICOM viewers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/cr1/d icom.html

  27. OsiriX - the best DICOM solution for the Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use OsiriX http://homepage.mac.com/rossetantoine/osirix/Index 2.html on my Mac daily at the Hospital. It's the best Mac OS X DICOM solution available. What's more, it's free and GPL! Spock

  28. Look at idoimaging.com by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 1

    The best place to look for programs that read the many different medical imaging file formats is idoimaging.com.

    You'll find a ton of programs and libraries for reading DICOM files there on any major platform.