CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

February 2008

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:
Aryeh Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:25:13 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (34 lines)
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Stephen Cody wrote:
> 
> Presumably if you have CLEM fitted to your confocal you can choose to 
> turn it off for quantitative measurements of fluorescence. Turning it on 
> only when required for long time-lapse experiments where reducing 
> bleaching is paramount, and where you are interested primarily in 
> morphology rather than pixel to pixel intensity. Can someone please 
> confirm it is implemented this way on the A1?
> 

A couple of posts have noted that CLEM might interfere with intensity 
measurement. I see no reason why this should be so. The CLEM system has all of 
the information it needs to know how much exposure a given pixel received. That 
being the case, the resulting intensity levels can be corrected accordingly. 
Moreover, it would appear that CLEM operation allows one to avoid approaching 
the edges of the detector's dynamic range, so that the detector can be operated 
with a more linear response to intensity changes. Therefore, intensity 
measurements should at least a accurate as a non-CLEM system.

Perhaps the developers can comment on whether my understanding is correct.

--aryeh
-- 
Aryeh Weiss
School of Engineering
Bar Ilan University
Ramat Gan 52900 Israel

Ph:  972-3-5317638
FAX: 972-3-7384050

ATOM RSS1 RSS2