Posted by
Gabriel Landini on
Mar 06, 2008; 12:41am
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/save-as-jpg-tp3696972p3696975.html
On Thursday 06 March 2008, Wayne Brown wrote:
> I am not sure if this might be deemed as not relevant to the group, so
> forgive me in advance if this is the case. We produce scientific
> imaging systems for a variety of applications, and we have customers who
> use ImageJ. We have had a debate going on for some time on the
> necessity of providing camera control and image acquisition from within
> the ImageJ environment. We have yet to do this for our systems,
> although we have had requests.
>
> Does it make any difference whether you bring files output from separate
> camera acquisition software into ImageJ, or use ImageJ itself for the
> acquisition of the image?
It is very refreshing to see the industry asking the user base for opinions.
Yes, it makes a huge difference.
If you can produce plugins that are callable from other plugins or from
macros, you open a large number of possibilities.
For instance, automatic uneven background corrections (I still have to see
that implemented in the software that is included with most cameras),
autofocus, autoexposure, mosaic capture, autosearch, averaging shots, time
lapsed analysis... there are many new possibilities.
So yes, please produce software that interfaces with IJ.
Rather than plugins that put up a dialog with buttons where one has to click
to capture, we need functions to control the camera which can be called from
IJ macros/plugins. If that is available, then one can create and modify the
capture software and capture images programmatically.
I hope it helps.
Gabriel