You’ve got a point about including data, but on the other hand, I would assume one would (almost always) set the collection parameters so as not to require use of the corners. And “swung out” mode is pretty atypical, so would be strange to set a default for it.
JPK From: herman.schreu...@sanofi.com [mailto:herman.schreu...@sanofi.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 2:44 AM To: Keller, Jacob <kell...@janelia.hhmi.org>; CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: AW: [ccp4bb] include corners in mosflm With a detector in swing-out position, one has to include the corners. Also, why should one discard potential data during processing? Based on the statistics, one can always discard data afterwards if it is not good or too incomplete. HS Von: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] Im Auftrag von Keller, Jacob Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. September 2017 22:14 An: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK<mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> Betreff: Re: [ccp4bb] include corners in mosflm Why on earth would one want that to be the *default*? I understand that there may be the odd unrepeatable dataset collected too close, or there may be occasionally be hardward limitations, but I cannot understand how this would be a recurring problem…. JPK From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of CCP4BB Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 4:11 PM To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK<mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] include corners in mosflm Hi Ed I'm afraid not; that's one thing that can't be changed to a different default. Harry -- Dr Harry Powell Chairman of European Crystallographic Association SIG9 (Crystallographic Computing) On 26 Sep 2017, at 20:34, Edwin Pozharski <pozharsk...@gmail.com<mailto:pozharsk...@gmail.com>> wrote: By default, iMosflm excludes corners from processing. Is there a simple way to make it the default to go all the way to the corner instead of detector edge? I could of course set the max resolution for processing to some outrageous value that is guaranteed to be outside of the image, but perhaps I am missing a more intelligent option in the gui. (I vaguely recall HKL2000 having a Edge/Corner/Other) radiobutton). There is a whole separate question as to wisdom of including corners, of course. Yes, adding a resolution shell with robust data will improve model quality even if such shell is woefully incomplete. On the other hand, it's possible that fill-in option for missing reflections in map calculation may make maps more biased. A reasonable solution to this would be to use 2 different resolution limits in refinement and map calculation - not hard to script for that yet I don't know if any refinement software provides such option natively. Ed.
