We've been doing some calibrations on OMX platforms, and I'm curious if anybody else has methods for generating high-quality OTFs for various optical conditions (depth in the sample, refractive index of the oil, various channels, etc).
Justin,
I believe that all the time scattering is superior then microscopy including so for as resolution is concern including electron microscopy.May it be OTFs or anything else how it matters?
I guess you probably know about it, but this could be a question for the OMX mailing list too - I've had some good practical answers from the user community on there about specific OMX-related questions:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=omx
Graham,
The statistical averaging is always superior then microscopy as it is because the scanning are is relatively very small in comparison to the scattering experiments, where the whole system is contributing the intensity.There are many references to explain. the real fact.
Thanks, Graham. We've found that it's an issue for a lot of users, and I thought I would just put it out here to see if anybody else had ideas.
Dillip, I don't think I understand your point. Are you saying that EM is superior to light microscopy? Or that localisation-based techniques are superior to structured illumination? The main point isn't about whether one technique is superior to another, but developing methods to achieve the highest-quality reconstructions.
No No Scattering techniques are always superior then any microscopic techniques.
Justin,I understand your objective and that is why I told on scattering is superior then microscopic techniques.
I feel like I'm being trolled, but in case I'm not - I appreciate the concern, but for experiments looking a labelled biological structures in intact or living cells, scattering techniques are not applicable. We are attempting to improve the performance of our current structured illumination microscopes, not switch to another technique.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction