Mixing Explicit and Implicit transfer syntax - DICOM

This is a discussion on Mixing Explicit and Implicit transfer syntax - DICOM ; Hello, I was looking for information in the standard of a very bizarre case. Is it allowed to mixing Explicit and Implicit syntax in DICOM. I would tend to say no since there is only one Transfer Syntax defined in ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Mixing Explicit and Implicit transfer syntax

  1. Mixing Explicit and Implicit transfer syntax

    Hello,

    I was looking for information in the standard of a very bizarre case.
    Is it allowed to mixing Explicit and Implicit syntax in DICOM. I would
    tend to say no since there is only one Transfer Syntax defined in group
    0002. But I recently received the following image:

    http://cvs.creatis.insa-lyon.fr/view...owElements.dcm

    Looks like public elements are Explicit, whereas private are Implicit.

    Thanks for comments,
    Mathieu
    Ps: dcmdump is failing on this image.


  2. Re: Mixing Explicit and Implicit transfer syntax

    Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
    > I was looking for information in the standard of a very bizarre case.
    > Is it allowed to mixing Explicit and Implicit syntax in DICOM. I would
    > tend to say no since there is only one Transfer Syntax defined in group
    > 0002. But I recently received the following image: [...]


    Probably a conversion error at some point. I have seen similar images coming out of an old Elcint
    workstation. This is most certainly not legal DICOM.

    > Ps: dcmdump is failing on this image.


    Pre-1996 versions of DCMTK (then still called the European CTN software) had some
    code that would "guess" the transfer syntax for every sequence item and would even
    handle implicit VR big endian encoding. However, the heuristics created more problems
    then they solved.

    Regards,
    Marco Eichelberg

+ Reply to Thread