The fade button: turns fading on and off.
The fade slider: determines the fraction of the intensity in
the slice
windows due to the foreground and due to the background.
Thus, suppose you set the fade at 50% with the fade button
on: you
should see a blend of the two images. If you click the fade
button and turn off fading, you should see only the
foreground image.
Thus, the fade button is really useful for switching back
and forth between views in the slider window.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
As near as I can tell, this does actually work as designed
(i.e. the program behaves the way the code leads me to
believe it should behave). I think it often doesn't seem to
be working because it only applies when the overlay value is
exactly zero.
Try doing these steps:
- load some images
- create a new working volume
- threshold the volume to create a segmentation mask
- put a transform around the working volume
- double click the matrix and move it over so it partially
overlaps the original image
- now play with the slider with the Fade button in or out...
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
since you have looked over the code, you can probably fix
the fade button to do what it used to do and what the people
I work with want it to do. Here was its former function:
1) When the fade button is not depressed, only the
foreground object is displayed.
2) When the fade button is depressed, the slider fades from
100% foreground to 100% background.
I am positive the fade button does not do these things.
It used to.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Well, I don't know about earlier versions, but I have
version 1.0.3 for windows here (from 1999) and it behaves
the same as the current one.
First, to clarify - this feature really only applies to
segmentation masks.
The behavior as I see it is:
Case 1: button is out (Fade off)
- background is shown full opacity
- slider causes overlay to go from full opacity to fully
transparent
Result - if there is no segmentation a pixel, the original
image always shows up. Where there is segmentation, you
control whether you see original, only color, or a blend.
Case 2: button is in (Fade on)
- background opacity slides with slider
- overlay opacity is (1 - slider)
Result - every pixel is blended between the two volumes and
non-segmented regions of the background fade to black (where
they wouldn't have if Fade were off).
Isn't the functionality you mentioned available using the
existing controls? If the problem is the number of mouse
clicks required, I think a shortcut key be a better solution
(e.g. in the past I've used the space bar to toggle the
overlay image on and off).
I have to admit - I have always found that control
confusing, and only now feel I understand it after reading
the code. Probably the best bet is to redesign that little
corner of the UI to conveniently handle all the useful
behavior (maybe a few more buttons).
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
It wasn't always confusing.
It used to be the way I described it -- which was very
simple. The 1999 windows version of the slicer goes back too
far.
Your want the version of the slicer now usually referred to
as the "oldslicer".
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The windows versions are all post "slicer2k" so not the
original slicer.
(This goofy name was created in 1999 by Dave) So these
versions are actually not going back far enough.
The original code from before this reworking is seen by
typing oldslicer at the SPL, as Samson said.
I think the desired slider behavior is to fade from one
grayscale to another also in order to do image overlays -- I
think this works to some extent but not "as desired" for
all.
The image overlay is for registration, etc.
Lauren
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I'll take a look at "oldslicer" tomorrow when I'm in the spl
and can try it on solaris.
So far, I actually like the current behavior it has now
better than what Samson describes. The only real difference
I see is that you are requesting it so that "1) When the
fade button is not depressed, only the
foreground object is displayed." -- but why wouldn't you
just drag the slider all the way so that only the foreground
object is displayed? Is it just because it's harder to drag
the slider than push the button? Is there more to it than that?
Your case 2) descibes the current default behavior as far as
I can tell.
Just because I've found the current UI confusing at first,
doesn't mean I don't think the functionality is useful -- in
fact if I were doing a lot of manual segmentation day after
day I think I'd find the current functionality pretty handy.
I think what you are describing would remove useful
functionality.
Perhaps we can find a way to handle all the cases gracefully.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Steve,
you might well be right that for segmentations a different
fade button is preferred. As Lauren points out, we used to
it for overlaying grayscales. For Grayscale images, it is
really helpful to be able to put the slider all the way to
one end and then use the fade button to flip back and forth
between images. It is also very helpful to be able to go
from slightly overlaid to no overlay to get an idea of how
much a region may have brightened or moved.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Logged In: YES
user_id=240253
What was the button supposed to do? I don't remember.
Logged In: YES
user_id=243838
The fade button: turns fading on and off.
The fade slider: determines the fraction of the intensity in
the slice
windows due to the foreground and due to the background.
Thus, suppose you set the fade at 50% with the fade button
on: you
should see a blend of the two images. If you click the fade
button and turn off fading, you should see only the
foreground image.
Thus, the fade button is really useful for switching back
and forth between views in the slider window.
Logged In: YES
user_id=368428
As near as I can tell, this does actually work as designed
(i.e. the program behaves the way the code leads me to
believe it should behave). I think it often doesn't seem to
be working because it only applies when the overlay value is
exactly zero.
Try doing these steps:
- load some images
- create a new working volume
- threshold the volume to create a segmentation mask
- put a transform around the working volume
- double click the matrix and move it over so it partially
overlaps the original image
- now play with the slider with the Fade button in or out...
Logged In: YES
user_id=243838
Well Steve,
since you have looked over the code, you can probably fix
the fade button to do what it used to do and what the people
I work with want it to do. Here was its former function:
1) When the fade button is not depressed, only the
foreground object is displayed.
2) When the fade button is depressed, the slider fades from
100% foreground to 100% background.
I am positive the fade button does not do these things.
It used to.
Logged In: YES
user_id=368428
Hi Samson -
Well, I don't know about earlier versions, but I have
version 1.0.3 for windows here (from 1999) and it behaves
the same as the current one.
First, to clarify - this feature really only applies to
segmentation masks.
The behavior as I see it is:
Case 1: button is out (Fade off)
- background is shown full opacity
- slider causes overlay to go from full opacity to fully
transparent
Result - if there is no segmentation a pixel, the original
image always shows up. Where there is segmentation, you
control whether you see original, only color, or a blend.
Case 2: button is in (Fade on)
- background opacity slides with slider
- overlay opacity is (1 - slider)
Result - every pixel is blended between the two volumes and
non-segmented regions of the background fade to black (where
they wouldn't have if Fade were off).
Isn't the functionality you mentioned available using the
existing controls? If the problem is the number of mouse
clicks required, I think a shortcut key be a better solution
(e.g. in the past I've used the space bar to toggle the
overlay image on and off).
I have to admit - I have always found that control
confusing, and only now feel I understand it after reading
the code. Probably the best bet is to redesign that little
corner of the UI to conveniently handle all the useful
behavior (maybe a few more buttons).
Logged In: YES
user_id=243838
It wasn't always confusing.
It used to be the way I described it -- which was very
simple. The 1999 windows version of the slicer goes back too
far.
Your want the version of the slicer now usually referred to
as the "oldslicer".
Logged In: YES
user_id=240253
The windows versions are all post "slicer2k" so not the
original slicer.
(This goofy name was created in 1999 by Dave) So these
versions are actually not going back far enough.
The original code from before this reworking is seen by
typing oldslicer at the SPL, as Samson said.
I think the desired slider behavior is to fade from one
grayscale to another also in order to do image overlays -- I
think this works to some extent but not "as desired" for
all.
The image overlay is for registration, etc.
Lauren
Logged In: YES
user_id=368428
I'll take a look at "oldslicer" tomorrow when I'm in the spl
and can try it on solaris.
So far, I actually like the current behavior it has now
better than what Samson describes. The only real difference
I see is that you are requesting it so that "1) When the
fade button is not depressed, only the
foreground object is displayed." -- but why wouldn't you
just drag the slider all the way so that only the foreground
object is displayed? Is it just because it's harder to drag
the slider than push the button? Is there more to it than that?
Your case 2) descibes the current default behavior as far as
I can tell.
Just because I've found the current UI confusing at first,
doesn't mean I don't think the functionality is useful -- in
fact if I were doing a lot of manual segmentation day after
day I think I'd find the current functionality pretty handy.
I think what you are describing would remove useful
functionality.
Perhaps we can find a way to handle all the cases gracefully.
Logged In: YES
user_id=243838
Steve,
you might well be right that for segmentations a different
fade button is preferred. As Lauren points out, we used to
it for overlaying grayscales. For Grayscale images, it is
really helpful to be able to put the slider all the way to
one end and then use the fade button to flip back and forth
between images. It is also very helpful to be able to go
from slightly overlaid to no overlay to get an idea of how
much a region may have brightened or moved.