Hi, for in-place filters there is no problem. However, if you are creating a more complicated pipeline, with no in-place intermediate filters, it gets more complicated.
Currently, if you access MITK images via an AccessByITK macro call, you usually call a function/method which locally instantiates the ITK filter pipeline (as Matt figured out correctly). Therefore, the output images are repeatedly newly allocated and putting the output ITK image in a MITK image will not reuse the memory from the "old" MITK image which might have been put in a MITK data node already. Sascha On 08/01/2011 11:16 AM, Daniel Maleike wrote: > On 08/01/2011 11:00 AM, Peter Neher wrote: >> Hi Matt, >> >> I think you could work directly on the input segmentation image without >> creating any output. This way you avoid the allocation of an unnecessary >> second image. > Some ITK filters have an in-place options, which would do exactly what > you are looking for, i.e. modifying their input instead of allocating a > new output. > > Daniel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey _______________________________________________ mitk-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mitk-users
