IT-LIST Digest 50Topics covered in this issue include:  1) Re: Installing additional components.	by "Don Wilcox"   2) Re: Outline image in new window?	by "Don Wilcox"   3) Re: v1.25 does nothing :(	by "Don Wilcox"   4) Re: SAVING STACKS IN VER 1.25	by "Don Wilcox"   5) Re: Fourier transforms and IT	by "Don Wilcox"   6) Re: binary file question	by "Don Wilcox"   7) Re: Maximum image size capibility	by "Don Wilcox"   8) Re: SAVING STACKS IN VER 1.25	by "Dr. Bin Yu"   9) Re: Fourier transforms and IT	by Christian Broesamle  10) Re: LEAVE	by Don Matthys  11) Re: LEAVE	by Tom Mote  12) Re: LEAVE	by Robert Smith ----------------------------------------------------------------------Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:02:48 -0700From: "Don Wilcox" To: Subject: Re: Installing additional components.Message-ID: <199610011822.LAA29518@dogbert.xroads.com>----------> From: Tom Mote > To: wilcox@xroads.com> Subject: Re: LEAVE> Date: Monday, September 30, 1996 10:44 PM> > I have [in the past three or four days] gotten ITool 1.25> installed and running on my computer but don't know how to install the> other components that I have downloaded.  I assume that I just copy the> various files into appropriate sub-folders.  Is that correct?> That is correct.Don------------------------------Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:05:11 -0700From: "Don Wilcox" To: Subject: Re: Outline image in new window?Message-ID: <199610011822.LAA29521@dogbert.xroads.com>----------> From: Alan Hale > To: wilcox@xroads.com> Subject: Outline image in new window?> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 1996 10:21 PM> > I am using IT 1.23. According to the Help files, in > Settings|Preferences|Find Objects there ought to be an option:> > "Show outline image in new window"> > However, this does not appear in the dialog box itself. Am I missing > something?The option existed in version 1.2, and only confused people, so I removedit in version 1.23, but forgot to change the manual.  The option remainsgone in version 1.25, but the manual is now correct.Don------------------------------Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:06:57 -0700From: "Don Wilcox" To: Subject: Re: v1.25 does nothing :(Message-ID: <199610011823.LAA29524@dogbert.xroads.com>----------> From: Peter Stalmans > To: wilcox@xroads.com> Subject: Re: v1.25 does nothing :(> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 1996 8:38 PM> > At 07:28 AM 9/26/96 +0600, you wrote:> >I have installed IT125 on two separate machine, one running NT4.0b2 andone> >with NT4.0 Final (build 1381)...> >> >However, on both systems, IT appears to load, but nothing is ever> >displayed.  The task manager shows that the process is running, butthere> >are no visible windows.  If I run DEBUG on the process, the IT "appears"> >and I am able to use the program.  Any clues?> > I installed IT 1.25 in Win NT4.0 beta 2 and now in the final version(both> Server and Workstation). It was obvious from the beginning that it takesa> lot of time to boot IT in NT 4.0: actually 55 seconds on a Pentium 100with> 24 Mb RAM. After booting, the program works fine. I do not know why ittakes> so much time.> Try waiting a bit longer.I just installed NT 4.0 on my development machine, and I too have noticed asignificant delay in loading the program.  As of this moment, I haven't gota clue as to why it takes so long.  Hopefully, I will be able to do someprofiling of the load process and figure out what is going on.Don ------------------------------Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:08:01 -0700From: "Don Wilcox" To: Subject: Re: SAVING STACKS IN VER 1.25Message-ID: <199610011823.LAA29531@dogbert.xroads.com>----------> From: Brian O'Rourke > To: wilcox@xroads.com> Subject: SAVING STACKS IN VER 1.25> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 1996 9:37 PM> > Does any body know why I can't save stacks in Version 1.25, but I can in=> Version 1.23?  In 1.25 I reopen a saved stack and there's only one => image, regardless of the number in the original stack.Could be that I screwed something up with saving stacks in version 1.25.  Iwill look into this problem.  IF it is a bug, I will fix it for the nextinterim release, scheduled for whenever we get to it :-).Don------------------------------Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:10:19 -0700From: "Don Wilcox" To: Subject: Re: Fourier transforms and ITMessage-ID: <199610011823.LAA29552@dogbert.xroads.com>----------> From: Christian Broesamle > To: wilcox@xroads.com> Subject: Fourier transforms and IT> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 1996 11:30 PM> > Hello Toolers,> > Are there plans to add Fourier transforms to IT? If so, when? Does > anybody know of a PC based free- or shareware program that can do > Fouriers?This is scheduled, and may make it into the next release.  I need to spendsome time deciding exactly how I want it to work -- I already have thecode.Don------------------------------Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:12:28 -0700From: "Don Wilcox" To: Subject: Re: binary file questionMessage-ID: <199610011824.LAA29556@dogbert.xroads.com>----------> From: Laura Louise Cowen > To: wilcox@xroads.com> Subject: Re: binary file question> Date: Thursday, September 26, 1996 12:17 PM> > Thanks for the help so far.  Everything seems to work (most of the time)> when I have tried your seggestion on using the threshold.  I know an> trying to automate it by creating a macro.  I was wondering if in the> macro I could set my range (for the threshold scale) rather than> continually doing manually.  So far I have gotten it to write a macro for> every step except the selection of the range.  Any ideas?  Laura. -- > There is no mechanism for this in the current macro language.  The languagecurrently under development will provide this capability, you can assume a3-4 month wait time on the release of this version; however, we will makeavailable very (and I mean VERY) early interim releases in an effort toexpand our testing base.  Keep an eye on this list for furtherannouncements.Don------------------------------Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:13:44 -0700From: "Don Wilcox" To: Subject: Re: Maximum image size capibilityMessage-ID: <199610011824.LAA29559@dogbert.xroads.com>----------> From: Paul A. Roales > To: wilcox@xroads.com> Subject: Maximum image size capibility> Date: Friday, September 27, 1996 4:54 AM> > Hi,> > I am looking into using IT for Landsat satellite photo analysis and oneof> the concerns I have is the maximum size of the image IT can handle. Iknow> that the NIH image processing software can only handle an image with a> maximum width of 4096 pixels but can handle an infinate length image.Since> the Landsat images are approximately 23056 pixels wide and 21585 pixelslong> I need to know if they are too large for IT to handle. Anyone have any> experience with large images?The only limitation in ImageTool will be those of Windows itself, so youare limited to 32Kx32K pixels in each dimension.  NT can handle biggerimages, but 95 cannot, and IT is written to the lowest common denominator.Don------------------------------Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 14:56:46 -0400From: "Dr. Bin Yu" To: it-list@sparky.uthscsa.eduSubject: Re: SAVING STACKS IN VER 1.25Message-ID: <3251696E.2C02@cps.msu.edu>Don Wilcox wrote:>  next> interim release, scheduled for whenever we get to it :-).> > DonCould you please pay attantion on the problem I mentioned several timesin my previous mails on morphological operations in the new release?Thanks,Bin------------------------------Date: Tue, 1 Oct 96 21:26:10 +0200From: Christian Broesamle To: it-list@sparky.uthscsa.eduSubject: Re: Fourier transforms and ITMessage-ID: <9610011926.AA06863@rzusuntk.unizh.ch>>> Hello Toolers,>>=20>> Are there plans to add Fourier transforms to IT? If so, when? Does=20>> anybody know of a PC based free- or shareware program that can do=20>> Fouriers?>This is scheduled, and may make it into the next release.  I need to spend>some time deciding exactly how I want it to work -- I already have the>code.>>Don>>I=B4ve seen Fourier Transform tools in TimWin and NIH Image. The latter one= Iliked better. Maybe someone else has another suggestion?Christian*******************************************Christian BroesamleBrain Research InstituteUniversity of ZurichAugust Forel Strasse 18029 Zurich, Switzerlandphone: +41 1 385 6334fax: +41 1 422 2262privat:Konradstrasse 72CH 8005 ZuerichSchweizvoice: +41 1 272 6855e-mail: broesam@hifo.unizh.ch*******************************************------------------------------Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 16:29:40 -0500From: Don Matthys To: it-list@sparky.uthscsa.eduSubject: Re: LEAVEMessage-ID: <32518D43.C50@vms.csd.mu.edu>John Irving wrote:> > At 02:17 AM 10/1/96 +0600, you wrote:> >LEAVE> >   SO, WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH YOU, EH, MISTER?>   YOU DON'T LIKE US OR SOMETHING, IS THAT IT?I know neither the source nor the meaning of the offending message.Don Matthys------------------------------Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 15:58:49 -0700From: Tom Mote To: it-list@sparky.uthscsa.eduSubject: Re: LEAVEMessage-ID: <3251A229.E16@ix.netcom.com>Don Matthys wrote:> > John Irving wrote:> >> > At 02:17 AM 10/1/96 +0600, you wrote:> > >LEAVE> >> >   SO, WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH YOU, EH, MISTER?> >   YOU DON'T LIKE US OR SOMETHING, IS THAT IT?> > I know neither the source nor the meaning of the offending message.> > Don MatthysI'm a "newby" on this list.  Is the "LEAVE" message one which was supposed to have been originated by me, sent to me, originated bysomeone else, sent to everyone on the list or what.  I am completelyconfused at this juncture.  I don't think that I originated it nutI have gotten three messages about it today from three differentpeople.Tom------------------------------Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 17:14:59 -0400From: Robert Smith To: it-list@sparky.uthscsa.eduSubject: Re: LEAVEMessage-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961001211459.00691088@curtech.com>At 03:55 PM 10/1/96 +0600, you wrote:>Don Matthys wrote:>> >> John Irving wrote:>> >>> > At 02:17 AM 10/1/96 +0600, you wrote:>> > >LEAVE>> >>> >   SO, WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH YOU, EH, MISTER?>> >   YOU DON'T LIKE US OR SOMETHING, IS THAT IT?>> >> I know neither the source nor the meaning of the offending message.>> >> Don Matthys>>>I'm a "newby" on this list.  Is the "LEAVE" message one which was >supposed to have been originated by me, sent to me, originated by>someone else, sent to everyone on the list or what.  I am completely>confused at this juncture.  I don't think that I originated it nut>I have gotten three messages about it today from three different>people.>>Tom>Tom (and various others):   A message to a BBS-type group, consisting of the one word LEAVE,typically is an automatic way of causing the hardware to drop the sender'sname from the "mailing list".  Usually they don't get distributed to groupmembers; I suspect there was some subtle error which caused this particularone not to be properly recognised (an extra  or something).   Bear in mind that messages on a group like this one are NEVER intendedfor a single individual unless so addressed in the BODY of the message (likethis one is); they go to everyone, relevant or not.  I suggest we devote as much attention to this apparent glitch as itdeserves (i.e. no more), and go back to image processing.Bob>>             .  Robert A. Smith, Ph.D.  _____    .    Vision Systems' Analyst |     |<.      Current Technology, Inc. |_____|   .    (603) 868-2270     ^       .  ras@curtech.com    / \   /   \------------------------------End of IT-LIST Digest 50