View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0004410Slicer4Core: Segmentationpublic2017-08-07 14:44
ReporterfedorovAssigned Topinter 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
Status assignedResolutionopen 
Product VersionSlicer 4.6.2 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0004410: Changing master volume in SegmentEditor does not update edit-able FOV
Description

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Load 2 volumes with non-overlapping or partially overlapping FOV
  2. Create a new segmentation in Segment Editor, set first volume as master, edit.
  3. Change master volume to the second volume, try to edit - nothing is drawn.
TagsNo tags attached.

Activities

fedorov

fedorov

2017-08-07 13:49

developer   ~0015029

Observed in 4.7.0-2017-08-01 r26187 on Mac.

pinter

pinter

2017-08-07 14:15

developer   ~0015030

I think it's a "feature", or a lack of a feature if you will that changing the master doesn't affect the geometry, and the first master is still used.

As Andras wrote in an email correspondence (including you Andrey) a few months ago:
"Also, geometry of the segmentation doesn't change when you switch master volume, so changing the master volume has very little effect on the segmentation (it's really just changing that referenceImageGeometry, which is just a hint about where the segmentation node's geometry originates from)."

This will be a part of a major overhaul.

fedorov

fedorov

2017-08-07 14:22

developer   ~0015031

The context was somewhat different in that discussion you mentioned, and in any case I think it is good to document this in the bug tracker.

It it's a "feature", then it's a counter-intuitive one! IMHO, this is not obvious to the user. It probably would be helpful to do a quick check whether master volume FOV overlaps with the segmentation geometry, and if it doesn't - warn the user. Otherwise all that the user can see is that there is no effect in trying to paint on the slice, and it is not obvious what is the reason to this. Anyway, this is my perspective as a user.

pinter

pinter

2017-08-07 14:33

developer   ~0015032

I completely agree. I didn't want to defend the implementation, I just stated that it's a shortcoming we're aware of and will need to be addressed for sure.

fedorov

fedorov

2017-08-07 14:44

developer   ~0015033

Makes sense, thank you!

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2017-08-07 13:49 fedorov New Issue
2017-08-07 13:49 fedorov Status new => assigned
2017-08-07 13:49 fedorov Assigned To => pinter
2017-08-07 13:49 fedorov Note Added: 0015029
2017-08-07 14:15 pinter Note Added: 0015030
2017-08-07 14:22 fedorov Note Added: 0015031
2017-08-07 14:33 pinter Note Added: 0015032
2017-08-07 14:44 fedorov Note Added: 0015033