Hi, Thank you so much for your support. It really helped. There was a problem with my code creating Ankle.mha. I corrected it and got a decent result.
Cheers, Sreejith On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 6:09 PM Simon Rit <simon....@creatis.insa-lyon.fr> wrote: > Hi, > Please, as I said before "To start with, I would make sure that everything > outside the leg is at about 0 in your original Ankle CT data." I don't know > the reason but your Ankle.mha file contains crazy values (Min: 9.43646e+07 > Max: 9.44526e+07). If I run > rtkforwardprojections -g geoemtry.xml -i AnkleDICOM.mha -o test.mha --like > Ankle.mha -f CudaRayCast > rtkfdk -g geometry.xml -o Output.mha -p . -r ^test.mha$ --dimension > 512,512,245 --hardware cuda --hann 0.4 --hannY 0.4 > I have a more decent result. Remove or increase hann values to have a > better spatial resolution. > Cheers, > Simon > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 9:36 AM Sreejith P P <sreejithputhe...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Simon, >> >> Thank you very much for your quick response. >> As suggested, I have refined the Ankle Dicom data so that everything >> outside the leg part is at 0. I got a fine projection 'Ankle.mha' after >> doing that. >> However, I didn't get much effect when I reconstructed it using rtkfdk. I >> understand that projecting and reconstructing a CT image will necessarily >> result in a loss of quality due to the multiple interpolations. But I >> doubt, maybe something I am missing here can make it better. Could you have >> a look at it, please? >> >> I used the following command for reconstruction. >> *rtkfdk -g geometry.xml -o Output.mha -p . -r Ankle.mha --dimension >> 512,512,245 --hardware cuda --hann 0.4 --hannY 0.4* >> >> Ankle.mha >> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1M5hey85gQhh_gCC1dEvvr_EsXkRAOWm3/view?usp=drive_web> >> AnkleDICOM.mha >> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/14qcXeN3IL_qHT3IbiJfMaQrTIPIPu81v/view?usp=drive_web> >> geoemtry.xml >> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/105dwnd8dqgeE2d0qz9I9FPzH1t5b2gcc/view?usp=drive_web> >> output.mha >> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/11COT9G6jzrHALPvUs8N4jnnZt9kuIMd3/view?usp=drive_web> >> >> Regards, >> Sreejith >> >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 12:44 PM Simon Rit < >> simon....@creatis.insa-lyon.fr> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> Your projections in Ankle.mha display a very large value in air. To >>> start with, I would make sure that everything outside the leg is at about 0 >>> in your original Ankle CT data. >>> Note that projecting and reconstructing a CT image will necessarily >>> result in a loss of quality due to the multiple interpolations (during >>> projection and backprojection). I would suggest to use fine pixels in the >>> projections (e.g. --spacing .25) which you can bin during reconstruction >>> (--binning 4,4). >>> Simon >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 6:06 PM Sreejith P P <sreejithputhe...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I have created projections from 'Ankle' CT data using RTK (cuda >>>> projection filter). It looks good to me. >>>> After that, I tried rtkfdk application to reconstruct it. >>>> I used the following command and got the attached output. >>>> >>>> *rtkfdk -g geometry.xml -o Output.mha -p . -r Ankle.mha --dimension >>>> 512,512,245 --hardware cuda --pad 1.0 --hann 0.4 --hannY 0.4* >>>> >>>> Am I doing it correctly? If yes, I would like to know what I can do to >>>> improve the result. >>>> >>>> Ankle.mha >>>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/10ybESn9HoU9_LYDgaLUNYIf2BzTarQij/view?usp=drive_web> >>>> geometry.xml >>>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cTlvPld3iRNiRUW8HmnF29i_j6AmzaPW/view?usp=drive_web> >>>> Output.mha >>>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iI9V9TUIAKUMyfe-w6TTzFzS0DzvaGyn/view?usp=drive_web> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rtk-users mailing list >>>> Rtk-users@public.kitware.com >>>> https://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rtk-users >>>> >>>
_______________________________________________ Rtk-users mailing list Rtk-users@public.kitware.com https://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rtk-users
