CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

May 1994

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:
"Stamatis N. Pagakis" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 25 May 1994 13:58:05 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
On Tue, 24 May 1994, Paul Goodwin wrote:
 
> Hey folks-
>
> I have acquired 16 frames of an image (in a stack) and saved the file in
> WORD format using COMOS 6.01 on a Biorad MRC-600. When I try to look at
> the images using another system (i.e. Image on a Mac) it appears that any
> value over 256 was scaled to 2^16 (64K). Can anyone explain to me the
> 16-bit coding BioRad uses in COMOS. I've played with byte swapping and
> signed vs unsigned integers. This has only led to further confusion. Any
> ideas?
>
> Paul Goodwin
>
 
I do not know what comos means by 16 bit (in terms of being signed or
unsigned).  What I do know is that intel and motorolla CPUs do use
different byte ordering.  So you definitely have to, at least, swap.
Then all you will have to do is correctly instruct your Mac about the sign.
 
Finally, could the fact that image uses 0 for white and 255 for black, be
confusing things?
 
 
Stamatis Pagakis
University of Oxford, Dept. of Zoology
South Parks Rd                                 FAX:  +44 (0)865 310447
Oxford OX1 3PS,   United Kingdom               Tel:  +44 (0)865 271194

ATOM RSS1 RSS2