*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****

Precisely? What do you mean? Lets say you have a nine pixel camera. How would you recommend displaying the raw data reported by the camera in terms of x-y position and intensity?

Cheers Mark


On 15/04/2012, at 1:26 PM, Guy Cox wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
> 
> Precisely.
> 
>                            Guy
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Cannell
> Sent: Sunday, 15 April 2012 9:17 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Nyquist and Image size
> 
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
> 
> Hi Guy
> 
> Thanks a lot! You have got the wrong end of the stick. I am not talking about image reconstruction but displaying raw pixel data...
> 
> Cheers
> 
> 
> On 15/04/2012, at 11:33 AM, Guy Cox wrote:
> 
>> *****
>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>> *****
>> 
>> OK, I think I know Mark well enough that I can just say bollocks.
>> 
>> Representing a sample as a square (ie presenting a sine wave as a square wave) is introducing a whole series of (every alternate) higher harmonics which contribute absolutely NOTHING to the image.   This is really fundamental to understanding digital imaging.
>> 
>> 
>> Guy
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Confocal Microscopy List 
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Cannell
>> Sent: Sunday, 15 April 2012 11:35 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Nyquist and Image size
>> 
>> *****
>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>> *****
>> 
>> Hi Johannes
>> 
>> Sorry I disagree. You are recording an image. The point is that the pixels integrate over their entire face which is square so that this may be represented by square pixels perfectly faithfully. I have no idea what your analogy to the images of the sun through leaves has to do with this, the leavers are apertures. 
>> 
>> Cheers Mark
>> 
>> 
>> On 14/04/2012, at 6:43 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Mark,
>>> 
>>> On Sat, 14 Apr 2012, Mark Cannell wrote:
>>> 
>>>> That's a nice 'rant' but it does of course ignore the fact that many 
>>>> cameras have square pixels...
>>> 
>>> But it is not the square detectors of the camera you are recording. 
>>> There is a whole optical path up until then.
>>> 
>>> Pixels are not the physical dimension of the detector, they are an 
>>> abstract construct to describe what the number (or numbers) attached 
>>> to it
>>> -- the pixel value -- actually mean.
>>> 
>>> To say that pixels are square because the CCD is organized in a grid 
>>> is like saying that the spots the sun is leaving in a forest of trees 
>>> are as oddly shaped as the holes made by leaves through which the 
>>> sun's rays reach the soil.
>>> 
>>> Ciao,
>>> Johannes