3D semi-landmark analysis

2010-01-21 Thread morphmet


-- Forwarded message --
From: *Erik Otarola-Castillo* eotar...@iastate.edu
mailto:eotar...@iastate.edu
Date: Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: 3D semi-landmark analysis
To: morphmet@morphometrics.org mailto:morphmet@morphometrics.org


Francois,

Yes, if you are interested in quantifying and comparing
three-dimensional semi-landmarks, you would need to let the 3D
semilandmarks slide along their tangent directions (either along curves
or surfaces) during the GPA procedure to obtain correct estimates of
shape. The procedure is outlined in Gunz et al. 2005 (Semilandmarks in
three dimensions).

I believe Green and Bookstein’s Edgewarp software allows one to do this,
and it is freely available.

Dean Adams and I have recently developed an R routine for a general GPA
that allows superimposition of 2D or 3D landmark data. The landmarks can
represent locations of anatomical points, semilandmarks on curves, and
semilandmarks on surfaces. We are currently testing and packaging our
routine, and should have it available by February 1^st 2010.


Cheers,

Erik


On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:51 PM, morphmet
morphmet_modera...@morphometrics.org
mailto:morphmet_modera...@morphometrics.org wrote:



 Original Message 
Subject: 3D semi-landmark analysis
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:16:02 GMT
From: Francois Gould fgou...@jhmi.edu mailto:fgou...@jhmi.edu
To: morphmet morphmet@morphometrics.org
mailto:morphmet@morphometrics.org

Dear list,
I'm trying to figure out how to analyze 3D semilandmarks on a surface
(specifically, a semi-landmark digitization of articular surfaces). 
If I

understand things correctly, it is best to include a sliding algorithm
in the Procrustes fitting stage (when all the semilandmark
configurations are being translated, rotated and scaled). Am I correct
in thinking this? And does anyone know of any software that 
incorporates

sliding in a plane for 3D semilandmarks?
Thank you.
Yours,

Francois Gould MSc
Graduate Student
Center for Functional anatomy and Evolution,
Johns Hopkins, Baltimore




--
Replies will be sent to the list.
For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org




--

_

Erik Otárola-Castillo
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Graduate Program
253 Bessey Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-1050
Phone 631-796-7331
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~eotarola/homepage.html
__




--

_

Erik Otárola-Castillo
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Graduate Program
253 Bessey Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-1050
Phone 631-796-7331
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~eotarola/homepage.html
__


--
Replies will be sent to the list.
For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org



Next Engine 3D scanner hardware requirements

2010-01-21 Thread morphmet


 Original Message 
Subject: Next Engine 3D scanner hardware requirements
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:24:58 -0600
From: Andy Grass adgr...@gmail.com
To: morphmet_modera...@morphometrics.org

Hi everyone, we just got a new Next Engine 3D scanner here at the
University of Iowa morphometrics lab and I was wondering if anyone had
any experience using it on computers with different hardware.  The
minimum requirements are 2GB or RAM  and a 256MB video card, and the
recommended requirements are 4GB of RAM and a 512MB video card.  Does
anyone have experience using it with both the minimum and recommended
requirements? None of the computers we have currently are powerful
enough to run it, so we'll have to get a new one.  Getting more RAM
isn't an issue but most of the default computers that can be ordered
from the university come with just a 256MB video card.  So if the
lower power video card works just fine then that's great, but if the
difference in performance with a 512MB card is significant then I'll
push for that.

Thanks!

--
Andy Grass
andy-gr...@uiowa.edu
Grad Student
Department of Geoscience
University of Iowa



--
Replies will be sent to the list.
For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org



Re: Next Engine 3D scanner hardware requirements

2010-01-21 Thread Thomas O'Mahoney
Dear Andy,
Having used the NextEngine with both the minimum and recommended
specs (for scanning humeri)I would advise to go for the recommended
specs as a baseline. As you said RAM isn't a problem,I'd put as much
as you can in (although to go above 4gb you'll obviously need a 64bit
OS) -the scanning program sucks up memory,especially when aligning
scans and fusing them.
Hope that's of help.
Tom O'Mahoney

On 21/01/2010, morphmet morphmet_modera...@morphometrics.org wrote:

  Original Message 
 Subject: Next Engine 3D scanner hardware requirements
 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:24:58 -0600
 From: Andy Grass adgr...@gmail.com
 To: morphmet_modera...@morphometrics.org

 Hi everyone, we just got a new Next Engine 3D scanner here at the
 University of Iowa morphometrics lab and I was wondering if anyone had
 any experience using it on computers with different hardware.  The
 minimum requirements are 2GB or RAM  and a 256MB video card, and the
 recommended requirements are 4GB of RAM and a 512MB video card.  Does
 anyone have experience using it with both the minimum and recommended
 requirements? None of the computers we have currently are powerful
 enough to run it, so we'll have to get a new one.  Getting more RAM
 isn't an issue but most of the default computers that can be ordered
 from the university come with just a 256MB video card.  So if the
 lower power video card works just fine then that's great, but if the
 difference in performance with a 512MB card is significant then I'll
 push for that.

 Thanks!

 --
 Andy Grass
 andy-gr...@uiowa.edu
 Grad Student
 Department of Geoscience
 University of Iowa



 --
 Replies will be sent to the list.
 For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org





Re: Next Engine 3D scanner hardware requirements

2010-01-21 Thread heamarie

 I'm having the same issue right now. One thing you need to be careful about is 
you could have a high enough graphics card (mine is 256), but if it is 
integrated and not dedicated it may still not work.

--Heather

 


 

 

-Original Message-
From: Thomas O'Mahoney tomomaho...@googlemail.com
To: morphmet@morphometrics.org
Sent: Thu, Jan 21, 2010 2:59 pm
Subject: Re: Next Engine 3D scanner hardware requirements


Dear Andy,
Having used the NextEngine with both the minimum and recommended
specs (for scanning humeri)I would advise to go for the recommended
specs as a baseline. As you said RAM isn't a problem,I'd put as much
as you can in (although to go above 4gb you'll obviously need a 64bit
OS) -the scanning program sucks up memory,especially when aligning
scans and fusing them.
Hope that's of help.
Tom O'Mahoney

On 21/01/2010, morphmet morphmet_modera...@morphometrics.org wrote:

  Original Message 
 Subject: Next Engine 3D scanner hardware requirements
 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:24:58 -0600
 From: Andy Grass adgr...@gmail.com
 To: morphmet_modera...@morphometrics.org

 Hi everyone, we just got a new Next Engine 3D scanner here at the
 University of Iowa morphometrics lab and I was wondering if anyone had
 any experience using it on computers with different hardware.  The
 minimum requirements are 2GB or RAM  and a 256MB video card, and the
 recommended requirements are 4GB of RAM and a 512MB video card.  Does
 anyone have experience using it with both the minimum and recommended
 requirements? None of the computers we have currently are powerful
 enough to run it, so we'll have to get a new one.  Getting more RAM
 isn't an issue but most of the default computers that can be ordered
 from the university come with just a 256MB video card.  So if the
 lower power video card works just fine then that's great, but if the
 difference in performance with a 512MB card is significant then I'll
 push for that.

 Thanks!

 --
 Andy Grass
 andy-gr...@uiowa.edu
 Grad Student
 Department of Geoscience
 University of Iowa



 --
 Replies will be sent to the list.
 For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org