search

slarson / wholebrain

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/wholebrain
0 stars 0 forks source link

incorporate client / server volume rendering into main WBC #370

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
We'd like to natively support rendering very large volumes in the WBC.  We'd 
like these volumes to be served up to the client in small chunks to minimize 
bandwidth and local client memory overhead constraints.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by stephen....@gmail.com on 28 Oct 2009 at 1:07

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
We can get an initial version into WBC based on what we've implemented in the 
Volume 
Rendering example.

Original comment by stephen....@gmail.com on 4 Jan 2010 at 8:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by stephen....@gmail.com on 25 Jan 2010 at 11:16

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
We're getting very close on this.  Let's be sure to accomplish issue 233 so 
that we can 
easily configure multiple volumes on the server side without having to 
recompile the 
client.  I also understand that we need to fix some bugs with the Windows 
binaries.

Original comment by stephen....@gmail.com on 1 Mar 2010 at 9:13

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
We should make sure that the final result of this are volumes that are placed 
and sized 
appropriately in the context of the rest of the mouse brain, and working via 
web start 
on all 3 platforms.

Original comment by stephen....@gmail.com on 1 Mar 2010 at 9:20

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by stephen....@gmail.com on 10 Mar 2010 at 10:32

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Will look to complete in April.

Original comment by stephen....@gmail.com on 18 Mar 2010 at 12:47

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Volume rendering 'works' but the data looks funky

Mac OSX 10.5.8 (running java 1.5 32bit but is a 64 bit machine)

Original comment by davlit0...@gmail.com on 22 Mar 2010 at 11:09

Attachments:

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
thank you for checking this. Sorry about the bug. That's totally wrong..
That must be from either from pre-processing step or rendering step.

Original comment by hanseok....@gmail.com on 22 Mar 2010 at 11:19

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Good news!  It's probably not an architecture problem. It's something else, 
(maybe with the server or simply 
which volume I've selected) The good thing is that it's reproducable and 
consistent with my machine. So fixing it 
on one machine is likely to fix all machines.

I ran WBC on my 10.4 Mac, the one which the volume rendering worked previously 
and got the same results. See 
attached screen.

Original comment by caprea on 24 Mar 2010 at 1:11

Attachments:

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Thank you for checking Chris. Can't wait to work on this problems! please be 
ready to throw as much work as 
you want to me next week. :)

Original comment by hanseok....@gmail.com on 24 Mar 2010 at 1:47

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I don't think there is anything wrong with the render code, it looks like the 
data
on the volumes server has been changed and is now serving up this bunk 
white-block
data instead of the purkinje cell that was expected to see. (The white block is
index 2)

It is still possible to use index 0 to get a good looking data, but the 
Purkinje is
missing

Original comment by caprea on 31 Mar 2010 at 11:39

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Chris, I added another volume today
and I think that corrupted or shuffled the id. I'll revert them.
I and Dave should work on this to ensure adding new volume does not corrupt 
previous ids.
Sorry for not letting you know in advance.

Original comment by hanseok....@gmail.com on 31 Mar 2010 at 11:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Or you can use id 5 to get the purkinje cell.
I need to ask Dave for the ordering or to read the source code.

Original comment by hanseok....@gmail.com on 31 Mar 2010 at 11:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
First cut of this is working for major platforms.  Next we need to make it 
efficient 
enough to load the volumes up efficiently.

Original comment by stephen....@gmail.com on 10 May 2010 at 11:51

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by stephen....@gmail.com on 11 May 2010 at 12:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by caprea on 10 Jun 2010 at 8:28