<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Thanks for the quick reply, David. You’re right: I’m in need of inclusivity on both ends. I’m voxelizing contours using vtkPolyDataToImageStencil and I want to ensure that the resulting stencil fully encapsulates the contours. Are there any tricks to compensate that wouldn’t require me to modify my points directly? I guess I could just dilate my result, but it would be nice to have it as tight around the contours as possible.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Bryan<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> David Gobbi [mailto:david.gobbi@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 2, 2014 2:50 PM<br><b>To:</b> Bryan Cool<br><b>Cc:</b> VTK Users<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [vtkusers] Inclusiveness of Rasterization<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Bryan,<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Do you mean inclusive on both ends? Exclusive on both ends would<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>just make it worse...<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The behavior of the rasterization is 100% intentional. In order for<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>rasterization to work when there are adjacent areas that are being<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>rasterized, it must be exclusive on one end and inclusive on the<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>other end. Otherwise, adjacent areas could end up with either a<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>gap between them or with an overlap.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The exclusitivity can be compensated for by subtracting a small<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>tolerance at the lower end or by using other tricks.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>What is your use case?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> - David<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Bryan Cool <<a href="mailto:bryan@radialogica.com" target="_blank">bryan@radialogica.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><p class=MsoNormal>Hi everyone,<br><br>I noticed that vtkImageStencilRaster has code like the following in<br>InsertLine and FillStencilData, for both the x and y directions:<br><br>if (x1 >= xmin)<br> {<br> r1 = vtkMath::Floor(x1) + 1;<br> }<br>if (x2 < xmax)<br> {<br> r2 = vtkMath::Floor(x2);<br> }<br><br>Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like the lower side is exclusive,<br>while the upper end is inclusive. The upshot of this is that the only way<br>to stencil the first pixel is to have a line intersect the row on the<br>negative side of the first pixel (in the extents). On the other hand, to<br>stencil the last pixel a line only need intersect anywhere past the<br>second-to-last pixel (in the extents).<br><br>Assuming that's true, it seems a bit asymmetric. Is there any way to have<br>exclusive behavior on both ends?<br><br>Thanks,<br>Bryan<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div></div></div></div></body></html>