CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

August 2004

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
zoom and distortion
From:
Gary Laevsky <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 10 Aug 2004 15:23:30 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Reply-To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines) 
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Hello all,

This question has just been posed and I need a correct answer.

I know that zooming on our Radiance 2000 when using a 63x oil
objective anymore than 2 to 3 times is a "waste."  The precise
definition of "waste" is what I'm looking for.  I have been told that
this will yield a digital artifact, due to artificial "filling," as a
result of decreased resolution.

I realize my definition is nothing even resembling precise.  Can
someone please fill me in?

Thank you.

Best,

Gary

ATOM RSS1 RSS2