Hi,
I guess even in that case the fieldmaps may be fair enough.
One more question: If you have the choice between a 60 dir acquisition with a fieldmap and a 40 dir blip-up/blip-down acquisition, what would you choose?
Thanks,
Andreas
________________________________________
Von: FSL - FMRIB's Software Library [[log in to unmask]] im Auftrag von Matt Glasser [[log in to unmask]]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2011 16:26
An: [log in to unmask]
Betreff: Re: [FSL] AW: [FSL] AW: [FSL] DWI scanning
I thought they were taking the patient out, but if they aren't doing
anything that changes the shim/then I agree no additional field maps are
needed.
Peace,
Matt.
-----Original Message-----
From: FSL - FMRIB's Software Library [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Andreas Bartsch
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 5:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [FSL] AW: [FSL] AW: [FSL] DWI scanning
Yep, you are right: we would just cocentenate, eddy correct and register to
the field map...
I guess I was not fully alert.
Cheers-
Andreas
________________________________________
Von: FSL - FMRIB's Software Library [[log in to unmask]] im Auftrag von
Derek Jones [[log in to unmask]]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2011 11:31
An: [log in to unmask]
Betreff: Re: [FSL] AW: [FSL] DWI scanning
Hi Guys
I'm probably being a bit slow - but why do you think you need a new field
map each time?
For clarification...is the participant lying in the scanner in one session -
and the only thing that is changing is the directions of the encoding
vectors, between sessions (bandwidth etc. all remain the same)?
Thanks in advance
Derek
|