<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Martin, <div><br></div><div> Thanks for your feedback.</div><div><br></div><div>I have fixed the "ALL Z PLANES" bug. Fixed script is attached, so you can replace the existing one. </div><div><br></div><div>I wasn't able to reproduce the "EXPORT INDIVIDUAL CHANNELS" bug. Could you try reproducing this and send me both the "Error" and "Info" logs from this?</div><div><br></div><div>Strange that Java update should fix a Python scripting problem - but maybe the bug was in Insight's display of results?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I originally was going to add a MAX PROJECTION option to this script, but was advised not to, because of the potential processing hit on the server of batch projecting a large number of images. </div><div><br></div><div>However, I'll discuss this a bit more and maybe experiment with that option.</div><div>If we decide to go ahead, it would be nice to hear your experiences with setting the rendering levels. I think our standard projection uses the existing rendering levels, leading to a lot of saturated pixels if you have the auto-set levels. </div><div><br></div><div>Options are </div><div> - Set levels to the min and max pixels for each image (each image different)</div><div> - For a batch of images, find the min and max pixel value for all the images (all the images would have to be 'compatible' - same number of channels, same pixel-type)</div><div> - Use the existing rendering settings, and rely on the user to set the levels they want in Insight before running the script. This is easiest from the script point of view, and actually gives the user most flexibility without complicating the script UI. However, you may not want to overwrite existing levels and it requires more instruction on running the script.</div><div><br></div><div> Cheers,</div><div><br></div><div> Will</div><div><br></div><div></div></body></html>