CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

January 1995

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:
"k.a. rogers" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
k.a. rogers
Date:
Sun, 15 Jan 1995 14:05:36 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
I have recently run into some rather obnoxious comments from a reviewer
of one of my manuscripts, who implied that we had been less than honest
in our presentation of our images.  So I put the question to you all.
How much enhancement is too much?  What is acceptable?
 
In this particular case, we had a double labelled FISH sample, using
propidium iodide and FITC.  The image was enhanced by setting all
green pixels below ca. 40 to 0 (to remove backgound FITC) and then enhancing
contrast by mapping the remaining pixel values over the entire 256 range for
each channel.  No other manuipulation was carried out.
 
If we are out of line with this approach, I would appreciate some
guidance.  If the approach is appropriate, I would like to see your
comments. I hope to get back to the editor by weeks end.
 
Thanks:
 
Kem Rogers
Department of Anatomy
University of Western Ontario

ATOM RSS1 RSS2