CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

August 1993

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Guy Cox (University of Sydney)" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 26 Aug 1993 11:13:10 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
My message seems to have got chopped by the Internet, so here is a repeat:
 
Patty Jansma wrote:
>We are having problems with the 256 optimized merge function on the Bio-Rad
>comos 6.01 program. If you merge two identical files on all pixels or the
>first image of a zseries on the 256 optimized merges, everything works fine.
>If you choose a section from the middle of a data set to merge with the same
>section, there is a pixel shift of 40-50 pixels in the y direction. We have
>tried reinstalling Comos 6.01 and this didn't solve the problem. Bio-Rad
>doesn't have any idea why it is happening. Any suggestions?
 
What happens if you write the individual slices you wish to merge to
single-slice images (temp1 and temp2).  Does this resolve the problem?
If it does presumably you could write a .cmd file to do it automatically.
(Incidentally, the most recent release of SOM that I have hangs the
entire computer if you attempt ANY sort of merge - I am still using a
3-year old version which lacks many of the new features but is at least
reliable).
                Guy Cox
                [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2