Difference between revisions of "CCPiSurvey"
m |
m |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Respondence came from a range of users through the 300+ names on hte list but only 9 responded completely. The second question asked “What aspects of imaging are you involved with?” and gave a fixed set of responses. | Respondence came from a range of users through the 300+ names on hte list but only 9 responded completely. The second question asked “What aspects of imaging are you involved with?” and gave a fixed set of responses. | ||
| − | [[File:CCPiSlide2.JPG| | + | [[File:CCPiSlide2.JPG|500px]] |
This showed a predominance for user based needs rather than development needs; and also national facilities rather than lab based (often university type facilities) users. | This showed a predominance for user based needs rather than development needs; and also national facilities rather than lab based (often university type facilities) users. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Q3 "What software do you use for tomgraphic analysis and visualization?" With fixed list of tools. | Q3 "What software do you use for tomgraphic analysis and visualization?" With fixed list of tools. | ||
| − | [[File:CCPiSlide3.JPG]] | + | [[File:CCPiSlide3.JPG|500px]] |
This showed that there were a few key favoured packages that would be candidates for API links for fuure development. | This showed that there were a few key favoured packages that would be candidates for API links for fuure development. | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
Q4 "What image processing techniques do you use?" Choice of commercial/open source/own software. | Q4 "What image processing techniques do you use?" Choice of commercial/open source/own software. | ||
| − | [[File:CCPiSlide4.JPG]] | + | [[File:CCPiSlide4.JPG|500px]] |
This was interesting and significant, as it showed that users were developing their own software for reconstruction and some filtering techniques but mainly using commercial software for segmentation and quantification. | This was interesting and significant, as it showed that users were developing their own software for reconstruction and some filtering techniques but mainly using commercial software for segmentation and quantification. | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
Q5: "What are your current and future computational requirements? Please detail your current needs in terms e.g. of image size and number of images. What computer hardware is typically required to process your data and is fast turn around important to your experiments?" Comments given were: | Q5: "What are your current and future computational requirements? Please detail your current needs in terms e.g. of image size and number of images. What computer hardware is typically required to process your data and is fast turn around important to your experiments?" Comments given were: | ||
| − | [[File:CCPiSlide5.JPG]] | + | [[File:CCPiSlide5.JPG|500px]] |
As expected scale and size of object was important although these values can be represented within large (1/2 TB RAM) fat nodes so extreme cluster implementations were not necessarily there to be developed. | As expected scale and size of object was important although these values can be represented within large (1/2 TB RAM) fat nodes so extreme cluster implementations were not necessarily there to be developed. | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
Q6 "Are there any algorithms in tomographic image reconstruction, analysis or quantification that you believe CCPi should consider providing an efficient open source implementation of?" Comments given were: | Q6 "Are there any algorithms in tomographic image reconstruction, analysis or quantification that you believe CCPi should consider providing an efficient open source implementation of?" Comments given were: | ||
| − | [[File:CCPiSlide6.JPG]] | + | [[File:CCPiSlide6.JPG|500px]] |
This gave a starting point for a list of potential new objectives for the SLA team to address. | This gave a starting point for a list of potential new objectives for the SLA team to address. | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
Q7 "CCPi is involved in a range of activities to support the research community (see http://www.cpi.ac.uk). Of the current CCPi activities which do you believe to be the most benifical to the research community? Please rate each area on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being most important." | Q7 "CCPi is involved in a range of activities to support the research community (see http://www.cpi.ac.uk). Of the current CCPi activities which do you believe to be the most benifical to the research community? Please rate each area on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being most important." | ||
| − | [[File:CCPiSlide7.JPG]] | + | [[File:CCPiSlide7.JPG|500px]] |
The obvious priority was training requirements - and discussion in the WG involved ways to set up cross training facilities and access to data. | The obvious priority was training requirements - and discussion in the WG involved ways to set up cross training facilities and access to data. | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
Q8 "Do you have any other comments on the CCPi project?" Comments given were: | Q8 "Do you have any other comments on the CCPi project?" Comments given were: | ||
| − | [[File:CCPiSlide8.JPG]] | + | [[File:CCPiSlide8.JPG|500px]] |
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
== Results from Survey: July-December 2014 == | == Results from Survey: July-December 2014 == | ||
| − | + | Over the folowing six months changes have happended that have resulted in the following actions: | |
| + | |||
| + | .* Quantification visualisation tools are now being developed for ImajeJ, Avizo and ParaView | ||
| + | |||
| + | *. Outreacch events are cotinuing but at a much lower effort level | ||
| + | |||
| + | *. Software show-and-tell events along with related seminars focus on guidance and use of the products as well as the research solution. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *. | ||
Revision as of 14:09, 28 January 2015
CCPi Survey results.
This survey was carried out in March-June 2014 to influence the panel during the Summer Working Group meeting. The key aim was to discuss how limited CCP core SLA effort could be better utilised by focussing on API development for specific platforms. Secondary aim was to consider which tools would be implementable within a new framework for the CCP, and another secondary aim was to ask for feedback on not programming development work for example training, advice etc.
On 17 June 2014 the CCPi Working Group Meeting was held at the Atlas Visualisation Facility in RAL.
Executive Summary
From this survey the focus on choice of tools was changes so that ImageJ, Avizo and ParaView products were favoured. A previous popular tool for development VolView proved to be unpopular for users and therefore was dropped.
Presentation
Respondence came from a range of users through the 300+ names on hte list but only 9 responded completely. The second question asked “What aspects of imaging are you involved with?” and gave a fixed set of responses.
This showed a predominance for user based needs rather than development needs; and also national facilities rather than lab based (often university type facilities) users.
Q3 "What software do you use for tomgraphic analysis and visualization?" With fixed list of tools.
This showed that there were a few key favoured packages that would be candidates for API links for fuure development.
Q4 "What image processing techniques do you use?" Choice of commercial/open source/own software.
This was interesting and significant, as it showed that users were developing their own software for reconstruction and some filtering techniques but mainly using commercial software for segmentation and quantification.
Q5: "What are your current and future computational requirements? Please detail your current needs in terms e.g. of image size and number of images. What computer hardware is typically required to process your data and is fast turn around important to your experiments?" Comments given were:
As expected scale and size of object was important although these values can be represented within large (1/2 TB RAM) fat nodes so extreme cluster implementations were not necessarily there to be developed.
Q6 "Are there any algorithms in tomographic image reconstruction, analysis or quantification that you believe CCPi should consider providing an efficient open source implementation of?" Comments given were:
This gave a starting point for a list of potential new objectives for the SLA team to address.
Q7 "CCPi is involved in a range of activities to support the research community (see http://www.cpi.ac.uk). Of the current CCPi activities which do you believe to be the most benifical to the research community? Please rate each area on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being most important."
The obvious priority was training requirements - and discussion in the WG involved ways to set up cross training facilities and access to data.
Q8 "Do you have any other comments on the CCPi project?" Comments given were:
Results from Survey: July-December 2014
Over the folowing six months changes have happended that have resulted in the following actions:
.* Quantification visualisation tools are now being developed for ImajeJ, Avizo and ParaView
- . Outreacch events are cotinuing but at a much lower effort level
- . Software show-and-tell events along with related seminars focus on guidance and use of the products as well as the research solution.
- .
