it should keep all control points and manual edits
Bruce
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Ilana
Hairston wrote:
> sorry for being dense - but what then would be the best way to acheive
> better wm intensity?
> We get much better contrasts and better segmentation in fronto-temporal
> regions when we run mri_n
sorry for being dense - but what then would be the best way to acheive
better wm intensity?
We get much better contrasts and better segmentation in fronto-temporal
regions when we run mri_nu_correct.mni. But then we still need to fix
topological errors. My understanding is that '-make all' fixes
Hi Ilana
that won't work. I guess you could try copying nu2.mgz to nu.mgz and
trying -make all (assuming you have a new enough version of recon-all)
cheers
Bruce
On
Tue, 4 May 2010, Ilana Hairston wrote:
> Also re-sending my query - perhaps someone has experience with contrast
> adjustments
>
Also re-sending my query - perhaps someone has experience with contrast
adjustments
We have been doing contrast correction using mri_nu_correct.mni after
> autorecon-all
>
(e.g.,
>
mri_nu_correct.mni --i FS090620ll/mri/orig/001.mgz --o
> FS090620ll/mri/orig/nu2.mgz --n 2).
>
> My question is w
Hi there,
We have been doing contrast correction using mri_nu_correct.mni
(e.g., mri_nu_correct.mni --i FS090620ll/mri/orig/001.mgz --o
FS090620ll/mri/orig/nu2.mgz --n 2).
My question is, after subsequent corrections (control points, white
matter) do we need to specify nu2.mgz as the target file fo
