-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Store original image downsample in LabeledImageServer #27
Conversation
3de3f1c
to
8fd3068
Compare
Worth checking the tests I changed/added :) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it would be great if you could add a comment regarding how the new downsample behaviour works (in the docstring of the LabeledImageServer
class or in its constructor). Just something to say the LabeledImageServer
has the same size as the original server and level 0 can have a downsample > 1
Great point, thanks! I will also make this clear in the notebooks before merging |
Can you have a quick look over the comment/s and see if it's clear? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's clear, thanks
Continuation of changes discussed in #25
Previously all labeledservers had downsample of 1, meaning they effectively lost any concept of the original image's resolution. This lead to an inconvenient API for the most common use cases (matched use of similar labelled and original images).
This means that running
will now return an image of the size of
original_server
, rather than downsampled by 2.It also seems to mean that region requests are resized to the labeledserver's downsampled coordinate space, without needing to run
region.downsample_region()
on every request.