Free webp to jpg
Image MIME Reference
DICOM-RLE

DICOM Run-Length Encoding

image/dicom-rle
VS

North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax

image/naplps
NAPLPS

A complete technical comparison of DICOM Run-Length Encoding and North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature DICOM-RLE NAPLPS
Transparency (Alpha) ✕ No ✕ No
Animation Support Yes Yes
Progressive Loading ✕ No Yes
HDR Support Yes ✕ No
EXIF Metadata ✕ No ✕ No
ICC Color Profile Yes ✕ No
DICOM Run-Length Encoding
image/dicom-rle
Extension
.dcm.dicom
Container DICOM (PS3.10)
Compression Lossless (RLE)
Algorithm
Run-Length Encoding (RLE)
Color Depth 8-bit, 16-bit, 24-bit
Developed by National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) / ACR
Released 1993
Magic Bytes
44 49 43 4D (at byte offset 128)
Full DICOM-RLE reference →
North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax
image/naplps
Extension
.nap.naplps
Container NAPLPS Byte Stream
Compression Uncompressed (Tokenized ASCII Commands)
Algorithm
None (Coordinate encoding)
Color Depth 16-color palette (Indexed from larger color spaces)
Developed by ANSI / CSA (Based on Canadian CRC's Telidon)
Released 1983
Magic Bytes
1B (Variable / ESC sequences)
Full NAPLPS reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser DICOM-RLE NAPLPS
Chrome Chrome
Firefox Firefox
Safari Safari
Edge Edge
IE IE (Legacy)
DICOM-RLE

DICOM-RLE Strengths

  • Guarantees lossless preservation of critical medical data necessary for diagnostics
  • Extremely robust metadata structure containing patient information, modality, and spatial geometry
  • Faster to encode and decode than complex compression schemes like JPEG 2000
Limitations
  • RLE compression offers very low compression ratios compared to modern codecs like JPEG-LS or JPEG 2000
  • Zero support in web browsers or standard consumer image viewers
  • Strict data privacy regulations (HIPAA/GDPR) make handling DICOM files complex due to embedded PHI
NAPLPS

NAPLPS Strengths

  • Extremely bandwidth-efficient, enabling colorful graphical interfaces over early 300 baud dial-up connections
  • Resolution-independent vector scaling allowed the exact same file to be displayed accurately on varied early PC monitors and television sets
Limitations
  • Completely obsolete and unsupported by modern web technologies
  • Relies heavily on stateful parsing and terminal emulators rather than straightforward file decoding
  • Easily misidentified by MIME sniffers as plain text or generic binary streams due to the lack of a standardized file header

When to choose which format

DICOM-RLE
Use DICOM-RLE when…
  • Medical Imaging
  • Ultrasound
  • X-Rays / CT / MRI
  • PACS Archives
NAPLPS
Use NAPLPS when…
  • 1980s Videotex Services
  • Prodigy Online Service Graphics
  • Historical BBS Terminal Graphics
  • Legacy Teletext Broadcasts
Share this comparison