|









| |
2D or 3D Imaging?
AlterImage makes the finest 2D
aesthetic simulation available. But if you are confused in deciding between
AlterImage’s 2D imaging or the 3D imaging offered by other vendors, here are
some things to consider:
 |
Advantages of 3D
imaging may include:
 |
The ability to
visualize the effect of specific implant sizes. |
 |
The ability to
calculate an implant size to match a simulation. |
 |
The ability to
obtain measurements in 3 dimensions. |
|
 |
Advantages of 2D
imaging:
 |
2D imaging is
much simpler, faster, and easier than 3D imaging. |
 |
2D simulation
is far easier and much more flexible than 3D imaging. With 2D simulation,
you can make any kind of simulation you want. With 3D simulation, you
are limited to the domain-specific tools that come with the 3D software. |
 |
2D imaging
requires no dedicated space. Many AlterImage users take a digital image of
the patient right in the consultation room. |
 |
2D imaging is
much less expensive, anywhere from about 1/10th the price to
1/100th the price of 3D imaging. |
|
 |
2D medical
imaging can be done with any kind of digital camera. But 3D medical imaging
requires the use of a sophisticated dual-camera setup or a separate pattern
projection system. Inexpensive single-camera 3D is too inaccurate for medical
use. |
In summary, for most aesthetic
physicians, 2D imaging will meet your needs in the most cost-effective way. We
expect that in the future, aesthetic physicians will continue to use 2D imaging
for the majority of their patients but some aesthetic physicians may also use 3D
imaging for special cases.
(2D means “2 dimensional” and 3D means “3
dimensional”. A conventional digital camera produces 2D images.)
|