ImageJ vs. Pixcavator, a follow-up
In the last post I provided a list that compared the capabilities of ImageJ (without plug-ins) and Pixcavator 2.4 in analysis of gray scale images. Then I submitted the link to the ImageJ’s forum.
The premise was very simple. The list contained enough features of ImageJ’s to show that they are comparable (in a certain narrow sense). It also contained some Pixcavator’s features that ImageJ doesn’t have to make the comparison interesting. I expected people to try it and give me some feedback. This is done every day because it’s a fair trade: people get to try something new and I get to learn something new. That didn’t happen.
My post was taken as an attack on ImageJ. The responses were along these lines:
- ImageJ is free (as in “free speech” as I was explained).
- ImageJ works on all platforms not just Windows.
- ImageJ’s plug-ins include “particle tracking, deconvolution, fourier transform, FRET analysis, 3D reconstruction, neuron tracing…”
Clearly, this wasn’t the kind of feedback I expected. I thought they were simply off topic.
To resolve the issue somewhat I added the first two items to the table and also promised to have a post to compare ImageJ with plug-ins to Pixcavator SDK (it’s free but unlike free speech it will only stay free for some time…).
Even though this was very unsatisfying, it wasn’t all bad – there were a few positive/neutral responses (thanks!) and there were spikes in the number of visits and downloads.
In retrospect, I should have made it clear that the comparison was from the point of view of a user not a developer. In this light, the main advantage of Pixcavator becomes evident – its simplicity!
So I didn’t learn anything new and didn’t get to improve my software, so what? I can turn this around and say that the end result is in fact a good news:
None of the statements in the post has been refuted.
The only statement that has been refuted – multiple times – is: “Pixcavator is better than ImageJ”, the statement I never made or implied.
One interesting reaction came from Mark Burge: “I would hazard to say that everything in Pixcavator is surely available through a plugin”. I wagered $100 that he was wrong. No response so far. How about we make this a bit more interesting? Here’s is a challenge:
$300 for the first person who shows that all of these features of Pixcavator’s are reproducible by the existing ImageJ’s plug-ins!
Meanwhile life goes on. We had a couple of milestones recently. First, we reached 30,000 downloads of Pixcavator since January 2007 (versions 2.2 – 2.4). Second, the wiki – the main page – has been visited 10,000 times since August 2007. Recently we are getting over 80 daily visitors.


I’ve looked at both sites Imagej and Pixcavator, there is no compparison.
Doesn’t matter that imagj is free, I ran some analysis on both systems, Pixacator produced what I needed in seconds, still trying to get to grips with Imagej and no results.
Keep up the good work.
Kevin Mc Carthy
MD Technelogix Ltd