Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Exposing "geometry mask" #183

Open
IngmarVoigt2 opened this issue Nov 30, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

Exposing "geometry mask" #183

IngmarVoigt2 opened this issue Nov 30, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@IngmarVoigt2
Copy link

For certain processing tasks it would be useful to expose a mask of the geometry (i.e. a Cartesian volume of the same size as the actual image data, but only consisting of e.g. 1 or 255 inside the actual Ultrasound scan geometry and 0 outside - illustration below).

For the sake of computational efficiency it would ideally be sampled together with the actual Cartesian volume (containing the anatomy), e.g. via an overload of IImage3dSource::GetFrame( ..., Image3d *geomMask)

Clearly this would involve an interface change, that impacts all plugins, so prb the default implementation could just fall back onto the original IImage3dSource::GetFrame - what do you think @forderud ?

image

@forderud
Copy link
Member

I think it would be even simpler to do the following:

  • Update the doc to state Zero-valued tissue samples are special in the sense that they indicate areas outside of the imaging sector.
  • Ask all vendors to update their loaders to guarantee that within-image-sector samples are guaranteed to have non-zero sample values.

Still, this proposal will need to be discussed between all vendors first.

@IngmarVoigt2
Copy link
Author

That might be one way, but may potentially mess up some of the processing that is in place nowadays - not sure ..

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants