Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
We have a NORAN "OZ" system running with the Silicon Graphics station using
the software Intervision.
I agree with the comments from Tony Collins about the reason for the market
failure of the system. The software running a SGI station was our main
problem. The software is very unfriendly, full of bugs and unreliable. We
still have the system in working condition, but with no much use.
Last week I spoke with someone from Prairie Technologies, the company that
bought the rights over the NORAN video rate technology, I understand that
one of their projects is to redesign the electronic control box, replace the
software for one running on a PC and offer a retrofit. Depending on the
cost, this would be a good chance for our OZ system to come back to life!
I have no experience with spinning disk confocals, but for what I have seen,
heard and read, I also agree with the comments about their disadvantages. It
would be great to have a system with all the potentialities of the NORAN
working properly.
Leoncio Vergara
Director
Optical Imaging Lab. (OIL)
UTMB, Galveston, TX.
-----Original Message-----
From: tony collins (BI) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 8:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: video rate confocals
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
Hi Simon
We have two Noran Oz, a PE Ultraview and a Visitech QLC100.
I agree, the Noran was way ahead of it's time. Great hardware, clunky
software - not just because of the "unfriendly" Silicon Graphics platform.
Trying to get the software to do dual channel imaging is quite something,
not at all intuitive. It will however, do high speed *simultaneous* dual
channel imaging, something the camera based confocals have yet to sort out.
And of course, as you say, FRAP (and therefore FRET that uses
photobleaching) cannot be done with a camera based system.
Getting the Noran software to grab a hi-res image is also difficult, but it
will do it - I can email you a hi-res image if you'd like.
I think one of the flaws was in the marketing rather than the hardware. It
was sold pretty much exclusivley based on its speed, but slowed down (albeit
still pretty quick) it generates pretty good hi-res images (I'll get around
to putting numbers on this one day...). So, the short answer is the hardware
seems great but the software is appawling, especially compared to modern
software. A friendly PC version of the software would have benefited the
hardware as its capabilities would have been easier to exploit. I'm sure
there are existing users that would be interested in a PC version of the
software too.
I hope this helps,
Tony
> Folks; this is really aimed at those of you who owned a Noran
> system, and
> then have acquired a Yokagawa head (Perkin Elmer/Solamere
> etc). Which system
> worked(s) better?(with respect to
> sensitivity/bleaching/flexibility) I have
> always thought that the Noran was an instrument before its
> time and while
> being a point scan/slit scan system had enormous flexibility
> (bleaching, ROI
> scanning etc) that the Nipgow disk system simply doesnt
> have. What if it
> had been designed in a pc platform, would it have continued
> to be used, or
> did it fail for some inherent design flaw that I am unaware of?
> Looking for input.
> Thanks
> Simon
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Simon C Watkins Ph.D.
> Professor, Cell Biology and Physiology
> Director, Center for Biologic Imaging
> BSTS 225
> University of Pittsburgh
> Pittsburgh PA 15261
> tel: 412-648-3051
> fax: 412-648-2797
> URL: http://www.cbi.pitt.edu
> -------------------------------
>
Senior Research Associate
Laboratory of Molecular Signalling
Babraham Institute
Babraham
Cambridge, UK
CB2 4AT
Tel: +44 (0)1223 496499
Fax: +44 (0)1223 496043
The contents of this e-mail are the views of the sender and do not
necessarily represent the views of The Babraham Institute or of BBSRC. This
e-mail is confidential. It should not be read, copied, disclosed or used by
any person other than the intended recipient. Unauthorised use, disclosure
or copying by whatever medium is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If
you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender immediately
and delete the e-mail from your system.
Although we have taken steps to check that this e-mail and attachments are
free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice
the recipient should also ensure they are actually virus free.
|
