On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Jun Wang <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> this is really helpful, thanks a lot. when you mentioned writing out the
> results in Native space, is this for second-level analysis?
>
>
> Jun
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Vladimir Litvak <
[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Jun,
>>
>> For precision of source localisation it wouldn't make any difference.
>> The possible reasons to do it can be as follows:
>>
>> 1) Some structural scans are at much higher resolution than necessary
>> to make a head model. As a result head model generation runs slowly.
>> Reslicing to the template resolution takes care of that.
>> 2) Sometimes the code can fail if the individual image is grossly
>> misaligned with the template.Doing the coregistration first (and
>> sometimes you also need to do rough manual alignment as well before
>> that) guarantees that this will not happen.
>> 3) There is an option to write out the results in Native space (in the
>> batch version of source reconstruction). You might want this native
>> space to be aligned to the template space rather than shifted.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Vladimir
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Jun Wang <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > Thanks, Vladimir. Would you recommend doing Coregister
>> > (Est&Reslice) for getting better source modelling results? The
>> > "Multi-modal
>> > faces" sample didn't do that.
>> >
>> > best
>> > Jun
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 5:03 AM, Vladimir Litvak
>> > <
[log in to unmask]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dear Jun,
>> >>
>> >> No, this is not a problem. It looks like the meshes fit the structural
>> >> well (the direction of the slices doesn't matter). If you want a
>> >> better correspondence with the template image you can do Coregister
>> >> (Est&Reslice) in the fMRI part of SPM using your individual image as
>> >> input and the template as the target. You can then use the output of
>> >> that for you source modelling and it should correspond to the template
>> >> much better (although the head size will still differ).
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> Vladimir
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 1:41 AM, Jun Wang <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >> > Dear SPM experts,
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > As a SPM beginner, I am analyzing my subjects by following the
>> >> > "Multi-modal
>> >> > faces" sample dataset. I had some troubles with EEG co-registration.
>> >> > After
>> >> > loading individual subjct's T1 image, the EEG mesh(F1) I got looked
>> >> > weird
>> >> > and doesn't look like the one shown in manual. The sagittal slices
>> >> > not
>> >> > the
>> >> > transverse slices were presented with mesh. I am not sure why this
>> >> > happens,
>> >> > Maybe someone can help. Also, when I checked the registration by
>> >> > comparing
>> >> > my image with SPM template, the crosshair doesn't show in the same
>> >> > areas
>> >> > of
>> >> > two images(F2). Is that means my subject's MRI image needs to be
>> >> > modified?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Thank you in advance,
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Best wishes,
>> >> >
>> >> > Jun
>> >
>> >
>
>