Created on 2021-01-13 00:28 by claw, last changed 2021-04-12 16:48 by trrhodes.
| Pull Requests | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| URL | Status | Linked | Edit |
| PR 24227 | open | trrhodes, 2021-01-16 12:42 | |
| Messages (7) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg384989 - (view) | Author: Charles Law (claw) * | Date: 2021-01-13 00:28 | |
DICOM is a file format used frequently in medical imaging (it is also a communications protocol). It has been used since the 80's, and is still widely used by modern medical equipment. It has a well defined format: http://dicom.nema.org/dicom/2013/output/chtml/part10/chapter_7.html This proposal is for the addiction of a check to imghdr module to detect DICOM files, with imghdr.what() and return 'dicom' if a dicom file is found. |
|||
| msg385131 - (view) | Author: Terry J. Reedy (terry.reedy) *  |
Date: 2021-01-16 00:46 | |
Can you submit a patch, or post here an test_dicom function? |
|||
| msg385139 - (view) | Author: Ross Rhodes (trrhodes) * | Date: 2021-01-16 13:27 | |
Hello Charles, Following the format provided, I've opened a PR to implement your proposal. Feedback welcome. |
|||
| msg385594 - (view) | Author: Berker Peksag (berker.peksag) * |
Date: 2021-01-24 22:49 | |
Copying my comment from GitHub: > I think DICOM is too specific to be added to the stdlib. I'd prefer > improving documentation of imghdr.tests to make adding custom file > types clearer. |
|||
| msg386658 - (view) | Author: Ross Rhodes (trrhodes) * | Date: 2021-02-08 20:28 | |
Looking for input from other contributors here. Naturally with a PR already open I’m inclined to keep these changes, but if the majority agree that it is too specific a format then I’m happy to hear alternative suggestions? Ross |
|||
| msg390792 - (view) | Author: Pierre-Alain Moret (pam) | Date: 2021-04-11 19:23 | |
The DICOM format is indeed very widely used in the medical field and for me it deserves to be added in stdlib. I do not see why it is more specific than rast format which is included. Moreover it should be easy to add because even if the complete format is very complex with all the medical modalities, its enough to test the first 132 bytes of image that should be:
b'\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00DICM'
Of course, its not enough to test that we have a valid DICOM image, but it is also not the case with other formats.
For example, with this simple corrupted jpeg image :
imghdr.what('dummy', h= b'\xff\xd8\xff\xe0\x00\x10JFIF\x00\x01\x01\x00\x00\x01\xff\xd9')
'jpeg' is returned.
That is why I strongly advocate in favor of adding DICOM format in imghdr.
Pierre-Alain Moret
|
|||
| msg390866 - (view) | Author: Ross Rhodes (trrhodes) * | Date: 2021-04-12 16:48 | |
PR already open to support DICOM based on the first 132 characters. Marked “stale” since I haven’t had any feedback on GitHub, yet. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2021-04-12 16:48:53 | trrhodes | set | messages: + msg390866 |
| 2021-04-11 19:23:52 | pam | set | nosy:
+ pam messages: + msg390792 |
| 2021-02-08 20:28:53 | trrhodes | set | messages: + msg386658 |
| 2021-01-24 22:49:41 | berker.peksag | set | nosy:
+ berker.peksag messages: + msg385594 |
| 2021-01-16 13:27:33 | trrhodes | set | messages: + msg385139 |
| 2021-01-16 12:42:35 | trrhodes | set | keywords:
+ patch nosy: + trrhodes pull_requests: + pull_request23050 stage: needs patch -> patch review |
| 2021-01-16 00:46:51 | terry.reedy | set | nosy:
+ terry.reedy messages: + msg385131 stage: needs patch |
| 2021-01-13 00:28:46 | claw | create | |