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

Remove manual masking features #49

Open
jcohenadad opened this issue May 27, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Remove manual masking features #49

jcohenadad opened this issue May 27, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@jcohenadad
Copy link
Member

To follow-up on #48 (comment), I would like us to re-think the relevance of the manual masking feature in ST.

FSLeyes being an MRI viewer, it offers extremely powerful capabilities for drawing manual masks. Here is an example of a 3D mask, created in only a few seconds:

fsleyes_mask.mov

I believe this approach should be preferred because:

  • It wouldn't be our responsibility to develop/maintain code related to manual masking;
  • FLSeyes already provide the feature and it works great;
  • It is more user-friendly to create the mask directly on the image, rather than having to find coordinates, enter them manually, check what would should be the appropriate size, etc.
  • The current ST-based manual masking does not easily allow for complex geometries.
@4rnaudB
Copy link
Member

4rnaudB commented May 27, 2022

Just discovered this feature and it feels like a second mask tab. You would want to replace the existing mask tab in shimming toolbox with this?

@jcohenadad
Copy link
Member Author

You would want to replace the existing mask tab in shimming toolbox with this?

not the tab (because SCT and BET masking are not offered by FSLeyes), but only the 'manual' mask from the combo box

@po09i
Copy link
Member

po09i commented May 27, 2022

I agree, I think adding a Shimming Toolbox masking feature in FSLeyes results in duplication of what is already a well designed feature. I think we should still keep the tab for both SCT and BET.

Note: I think the manual masking features are still relevant for the CLI version since we don't have access to the GUI.

@jcohenadad
Copy link
Member Author

Note: I think the manual masking features are still relevant for the CLI version since we don't have access to the GUI.

Agreed, we can leave it, but I would not spend too much time adding features to this CLI-based manual masking. I think that most users will use ST from the GUI

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants