[vtkusers] .vtk vs .vti

[Mathieu Malaterre]

[From the top of my head]
I would go for MHA/MHD file format, since you are ok with loosing all
the important information stored in the DICOM file.
When using .vtk file, by default this is ASCII, which means a real
mess when dealing with floating point type, and when writing as binary
it is written as Big Endian (last I checked).

2cts

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 5:34 PM, michiel mentink
<michael.mentink at st-hughs.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> I'd like to open a series of dicom images and save them as a volume image
> file for future opening.
>
> (my future plans: marching cubes: convert to surface mesh, register that
> with another surface mesh using ICP or the like)
> I noticed that ITKsnap doesn't open .vti files, however it does open .vtk
> files. ITK writes and opens .vtk files.
> Because I'm planning to use both ITK and VTK in the future, .vtk would seem
> to be a good option.
>
> However, in the VTK examples, a series of dicom images is saved as .vti
> Is .vtk obsolete, or is it absolutely fine to keep using that format?
>
> What is the advantage of .vti?
>
> greets, Michael
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the VTK FAQ at:
> http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/VTK_FAQ
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtkusers
>
>



-- 
Mathieu