From:
Bruce Fischl <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
To:
Antonin Skoch <ansk@ikem.cz>
Sent:
11/23/2016 2:26 AM
Subject:
Re: [Freesurfer] v6.0_beta - mris_make_surfaces -T2 refinement -issue with overlapping pial surfaces
no, they look fine in freeview because freeview is treating them as
sseparate surfaces. In mris_make_surfaces we are assuming it is the same
surface (same ras2vox, same number of vertices/faces, etc...)
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016, Antonin Skoch wrote:
> Dear Bruce,
>
> I am trying to understand. The vox2ras are indeed different:
>
> lh.white
>
> Volume Geometry vox2ras
> -0.70000 0.00000 0.00000 108.35732;
> 0.00000 0.00000 0.70000 -131.16824;
> 0.00000 -0.70000 0.00000 112.74670;
> 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 1.00000;
>
> lh.white.deformed
>
> Volume Geometry vox2ras
> -0.70000 0.00000 0.00000 108.33944;
> 0.00000 0.00000 0.70000 -127.46620;
> 0.00000 -0.70000 0.00000 109.73940;
> 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 1.00000;
>
> But when I load both surfaces in freeview, they perfectly fit, optically there is perfect
> vertex-by vertex match (by looking at the mesh rendering or 2D surface contour, even with
> extended zoom).
> However, vertices show different RAS coordinates in freeview cursor display, for example
> vertex 136135 in lh.white.deformed shows coords -1.36 -6.9 21.69, in lh.white shows
> coords -1.38 -3.2 18.68.
>
> It is some kind of issue of freeview?
>
> Antonin
>
>
> From: Bruce Fischl <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> To: Antonin Skoch <ansk@ikem.cz>
> Cc: <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> Sent: 11/23/2016 1:43 AM
> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] v6.0_beta - mris_make_surfaces -T2 refinement -issue with
> overlapping pial surfaces
>
> the vox2ras. Not sure about the HCP pipeline. They use a deprecated
> version of FS, but in any case what you had would not work as the ?h.pial
> surface didn't match the ?h.white.deformed one. If you also deformed
> the pial it would be ok
>
> On Wed, 23 Nov 2016, Antonin
> Skoch wrote:
>
> > Dear Bruce,
> >
> > thank you very much for your time.
> >
> > Concerning transformations, that is weird since I adopted my code from HCP
> pipelines
> >
> >https://github.com/Washington-University/Pipelines/blob/master/FreeSurfer/scripts/FreeSu
>
> > rferHiresPial.sh
> >
> > and there I think they use the surfaces precisely this way. They are using
> the surfaces
> > generated by 1mm3 volumes as input and refine them by using co-registered
> higher
> > resolution volumes. I use full-hires reconstruction, but for my safety and
> convenience I
> > left the code with transformations, which (I thought) should do not any
> harm (there is
> > not any resampling in my case).
> >
> > I also checked the white and white.deformed processed by default HCP
> pipeline and they do
> > NOT have the same ras2vox.
> >
> > BTW, which transformation in mris_info is relevant for this case? I found
> several of them
> > in mris_info:
> >
> > talairch.xfm
> >
> > surfaceRAS to talaraiched surfaceRAS
> >
> > talairached surfaceRAS to surfaceRAS
> >
> > Volume Geometry vox2ras
> >
> > Volume Geometry vox2ras-tkr
> >
> > Antonin
> >
> >
> > From: Bruce Fischl <fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> > To: Antonin Skoch <ansk@ikem.cz>
> > Sent: 11/23/2016 12:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] v6.0_beta - mris_make_surfaces -T2 refinement
> -issue with
> > overlapping pial surfaces
> >
> > yes, and I tracked it down and fixed it. BTW: don't use the
> > white.deformed surface - use the white one. You can't use one surface
> that
> > has been transformed (i.e. has a different ras2vox) and other
> surfaces that
> > have not (you can see this if you run mris_info on the surface files,
> the
> > ras2vox should match in all of them)
> >
> > cheers
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
> addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
> contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine
> at
> http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in
> error
> but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and
> properly
> dispose of the e-mail.
>
>
>