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:
Paul Goodwin <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 20 Jan 1995 16:29:17 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
Just to add on to Matt's comments...
 
We no longer use TMax because it is so contrast-y. Since computer images
in general and confocal images in particular have such high contrast, it
can be difficult to generate a satisfactory print from ha high contrast
film like TMax. We have been using Ilford XP2 instead. It is an
incredible film that is not silver based. Instead it is chromagenic which
means that it uses dyes like color film. The film must be processed C41
(color processing) but it generates a B&W negative like a silver based
film. The advantages are that the film is lower contrast which make it
more forgiving (you can over or under expose it by 2 stops and still get
good negatives without pushing the film) and the grain density is
phenomenal. A photographer friend had switched to a large format portrait
camera for most of his work because he makes big blow-ups of his work.
With XP2, he can use a 35mm camera and still make as large of blow-ups
with no additional graininess.
 
Second of all, we have been using the Tektronix Phaser IISDX for 2.5
years now and we have seen no appreciable fading in our images.
 
 
 
________________________________________________________________________________
 
 
Paul Goodwin
Image Analysis Lab
FHCRC, Seattle, WA

ATOM RSS1 RSS2