Hello. I have macaque data that is 0.25mm. I like that. I can do things with it that are more than cosmetic.
The data was taken with a fancy brukker, and the contrast is very good from the sequence used. so good I wonder if it's a problem (it's a FLASH_MTR - it does correlate to T1 really closely, but contrast GM-WM is clearer. and there may be differences.) Thus far, I've been downsampling to 0.5 to make CARET surfaces. I'm beginning to suspect that, for my project, there is profit in a surface made at 0.25, with many nodes. what I am interested in is the really quite small region (in absolute terms) that was the subject of the paper by lewis and van essen in 2000. even though the F99 atlas does not have 300,000 nodes the paint, border and metric data are scalable and my own data would indeed support a hi-res surface, and benefit from it. I've got RAM. but I never managed to get far with 0.25. segmentation fails with hindbrain at any resolution below 0.5. I didn't mind. But now I think (I really do) I have a good reason to seek surface construction directly from my structural data at 0.25mm. So: is it possible? caret_command ... -res=X ? my data is ex-vivo. And probably no more than 1% of nonGM or nonWM voxels are nonzero. no ventricles. nothing. I did that. A mistake maybe. If I segment at 0.5, upsample to 0.25 and generate a surface with my data it works. CARET can make the surface. but segmentation does not work. appreciate help. Colin
_______________________________________________ caret-users mailing list [email protected] http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
