<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/9/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Julien Michel</b> <<a href="mailto:julien.michel@c-s.cnes.fr">julien.michel@c-s.cnes.fr</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Karthik Krishnan a écrit :<br>> Julien:<br>><br>> I can understand your issue with being bogged down by memory. However, I
<br>> don't completely agree with your proposed solution. Here are my<br>> disagreements.<br><br>Well in our toolkit we recommend the use of VectorImage, from which we<br>can retrieve the pixel number of components afther an
<br>UpdateOutputInformation(), at run time (but before the<br>UpdateOutputData()). This is not a problem for us because we always have<br>the same number of components for all pixels (our images beeing acquired<br>by remote sensors).
</blockquote><br>
<div>I did not know that itk::VectorImage was being used very much outside of a "little community" here. I could see that its found its way into remote sensing with variable number of spectral bands. Unless its confidential info, may we please know of the toolkit in question ? We'd be interested in some feedback to know if its working well with the imaging pipeline.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks</div>
<div>-- <br>Karthik Krishnan<br>R&D Engineer,<br>Kitware Inc.</div></div>