External Email - Use Caution
Hello,
Thank you for your reply. I went back and checked the brain.finalsurfs.mgz and
it is changing the values to 110 and looks much better. The aseg.mgz is also
looking better after the edits as well.
When we typically do successive passes through the brain, we usually compare
the wm.mgz and the brainmask.mgz to determine where controls points need to be
added. Since the wm.mgz mask is not being changed from the control points,
which volumes do you suggest we use to see white matter changes after multiple
edits?
Thanks
________________________________
From: freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
<freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> on behalf of Douglas N. Greve
<dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 9:43 AM
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Problem with intensity normalization control points
The wm.mgz is expected since we added denoising to it; but it does not matter
because wm.mgz is essentially a binary mask of WM. The brainmask.mgz is created
from T1.mgz. The T1.mgz will be affected by control points, but only if you run
it from the beginning. The surfaces are placed on brain.finalsurfs.mgz, so
check to make sure that that volume is being correctly influenced by the
control points.
On 9/30/2021 6:51 PM, Staci A Board wrote:
External Email - Use Caution
External Email - Use Caution
Hello, our lab has been using freesurfer for years, dating back to version 4.3
and recently ran into a problem with a new installation of 7.2. After adding
control points in the typical fashion and saving them into the subject’s tmp
folder as “control.dat” and running -autorecon2-cp, mri_normalize seems to
correctly identify the control points, the correct number, the mean value and
the scaling. The subsequent steps complete without failure and brain.mgz is
generated with 110 values in the cp spots. However, the subsequent wm.mgz and
brainmask.mgz images do not seem to have been affected by the control points
(e.g. the control point locations aren’t at a 110 value and the white matter is
almost identical). Curious if anyone else has run into the issue? Is there a
new workflow in this version of Freesurfer that I’m neglecting?
So far I have tried to create a new control.dat using freeview and copied the
old points into that file, and run twice with the same results.
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
https://secure-web.cisco.com/10xnRvuQTV0EWuWjyrXtpZCIWe7cC35QTQd-jDSLx1tOzAesLT-W8b3bD6lLEvYV9qvO37ZNL94Gle3558_cHqcj2Txs21fJI1QWZ51KN8eiMFUuOH91-IAJ_EP4meOOf8Bke8luB6Bs_1bE4VV0BmUA1omNB5gzDGxMf-sTcNlTHNzq298A6lFe7oeS3dFs5ZUXjEv3lFgk47P7P8dZfFZwI8yDp56G1RQYsRb1qJCB-8h1ouclonuiJniMPZ6Q-dWJCc0UiA9pJBnhsxwK_iw/https%3A%2F%2Fmail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffreesurfer
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
