acquisition parameters for all subjects in a
given study of course, but this was an unusual case...
Thanks,
Tricia
--- On Thu, 3/10/11, Bruce Fischl wrote:
From: Bruce Fischl
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Small voxel size
To: "Tricia Merkley"
Cc: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu"
Date
,
Tricia
--- On Thu, 3/10/11, Bruce Fischl wrote:
From: Bruce Fischl
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Small voxel size
To: "Tricia Merkley"
Cc: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu"
Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 6:37 AM
Hi Tricia,
I don't think you can use that subject. It will
,0.8) mm voxel size and
(288,288,165) voxels. Sorry that wasn't clear in my previous email. I'd
appreciate any insight that anyone might be able to share.
Thanks,
Tricia
--- On Wed, 3/9/11, Bruce Fischl wrote:
From: Bruce Fischl
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Small voxel size
To: &q
e.
Thanks,
Tricia
--- On Wed, 3/9/11, Bruce Fischl wrote:
From: Bruce Fischl
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Small voxel size
To: "Tricia Merkley"
Cc: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu"
Date: Wednesday, March 9, 2011, 5:01 PM
What is the resolution of your other subjects?
On M
What is the resolution of your other subjects?
On Mar 9, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Tricia Merkley wrote:
> Hello,
>
> One of our subjects was scanned with (0.7,0.7,0.8) mm voxel size, although
> all other acquisition parameters were the same as the other subjects. I'm
> wondering to what extent th
