Posted by
Krs5 on
Jul 01, 2011; 1:23pm
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/Opening-of-RoiSet-files-tp3684044p3684046.html
Sorry Wayne, maybe I was not clear, but the user opens some of the RoiSet files manually for quality control. If I write it into a macro it works fine because of 'roiManager("reset");'.
The answer from Peter makes it clear. I did not realize that successive opened RoiSet files are loaded all together in the RoiManager (we have large number of ROI, so did not see it). So they have to delete all ROI before opening the next.
Thanks for the quick response.
Kees
-----Original Message-----
From: ImageJ Interest Group [mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Peter Haub
Sent: 01 July 2011 06:50
To:
[hidden email]
Subject: Re: Opening of RoiSet files
Hi Kees,
if you are opening several roi.zip archives at the same time (e.g. by
d&d) all roi's will be loaded into the RoiManager ..
and all roi's will be displayed together.
Indeed you have to close the RoiManager or you have to delete all roi's
before opening a new roi.zip archive.
There is only one RoiManager instance per running IJ application.
If you would like to compare different images with their roi's
simultaneously you can start multiple IJ application to open the data
(image + roi's) separately.
Peter
On 01.07.2011 00:57, Straatman, Kees R. (Dr.) wrote:
> Dear list remembers
>
> I seem to have some problems with opening saved RoiSet files. I wrote a macro for somebody to analyse a set of images and save for each images the ROI settings. If they try to open them in the ROI manager to check the results it shows for all the RoiSet files the same data. I noticed that if I close the ROI manager or I select Delete within the ROI manager before opening (via Open or drag and drop) the next RoiSet file it opens the right data. I know, when I run a macro to do this I "reset" the roiManager, but I would expect if I open a new file into the ROI manager to see its data. I have the feeling I have seen a post about this before but could not find it in the mailing list.
>
> Is this intended behaviour or a bug?
> Thanks
>
> Kees