Posted by
Gabriel Landini on
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/Improving-Particle-Analyzer-accuracy-tp4999626p4999627.html
On Wednesday 01 Aug 2012 10:35:03 Matthew Moore wrote:
> On low DPI images, saved straight to jpg, imagej consistently comes well
> under manual counts. On high DPI images, saved to tiff and then
> converted (on max settings) to jpgs (so imagej can load them), imagej
> consistently counts higher than the manual counts.
Shouldn't the amount of ram to hold the loaded image be the same regardless of
the format that is stored in?
But you can improve accuracy in the representation of your image data by not
using lossy formats (like lossy jpeg).
Do you see where the the differences are? for example do you detect too many 1
pixel regions? Is that noise or data? Have you tried different segmentation
methods? Do they converge?
> Does anyone have any ideas as to how I can improve accuracy? I've spent
> a while trying different pixel^2 and circularity settings. I'm using
> the version of imagej from the ubuntu repositories (1.44i).
Without more details it is difficult to know what is going on, but I would be
willing to bet it is not the particle analyzer accuracy, but the segmentation
approach used.
You would benefit from the constant bug fixing. Latest ij.jar is 1.47b6 (the
daily build).
Cheers
Gabriel
--
ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html