Hello,
Personally I don't really care if I have a stereo setup or not. I
have not really used stereo to build in probably 3-4 years. The
majority of the users of my facility on the other hand really want
stereo. Usually in the initial and final stages of building and
analysis. It is becoming harder to maintain stereo systems
overall. You are tied in to a very limited number of graphics cards
and as seen on the BB setup of the drivers/libraries can sometimes
lead to the urge to pitch the systems out of highest window
possible. It would be nice to have some sort of 'standard' 3D system
for crystallography, but with the rapid change in computers and
graphics hardware it probably is not a really viable possibility.
We are currently looking to upgrade our systems and the biggest
problems I have encountered in building a system is the on the
graphics end.
Just my 1/2 a cent worth.
Len
On Jun 20, 2007, at 9:45 AM, P Hubbard wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for the e-mail. The current results of the survey would
certainly put you in the minority! Stereo graphics are not dead
after all.
I have used systems with and without stereo graphics. I personally
prefer them, and think they are great for helping newbies refine,
and for non-structural biologists and students to look at molecular
architecture. It seems a lot of other people, for whatever reason,
like them too.
Paul
From: Kevin Cowtan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Kevin Cowtan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Survey on computer usage in crystallography
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:27:04 +0100
More likely the issue is that some of us do not find stereo to be
necessary of beneficial for crystallographic model building.
In which case, given the power of modern PCs and graphics cards, a
basic off-the-shelf PC costing $1000/£500 is completely adaquate
for typical structure solution and model building problems.
I use coot a lot and I haven't even bothered installing the
graphics drivers for my graphics card. All the 3D stuff gets gone
in software, and most of the graphics hardware sits around doing
nothing. If I needed the performance, it would be a 5 minute job
to install the drivers, but I haven't needed it.
Kevin
P Hubbard wrote:
I am sorry you are unhappy with the questions, David.
As I am sure you know, I half-decent system with stereo graphics
doesn't come cheap, and if you price things together to make
something that performs well I doubt you'll get much change out
of $2000.
I am aware of other 3D systems (such as those listed on
www.stereo3d.com). However, the price of peripherals like a 3D
LCD monitor are prohibitively expensive (and the quality of the
images is supposed to be poor). Do you know of a relatively
inexpensive way of displaying 3D images on PCs?
Any other comments would be greatly appreciated.
Paul
_________________________________________________________________
Get a preview of Live Earth, the hottest event this summer - only
on MSN http://liveearth.msn.com?source=msntaglineliveearthhm
Leonard M. Thomas Ph.D.
Director, Macromolecular Crystallography Laboratory
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
California Institute of Technology
Division of Biology
1200 E. California Blvd. MC 114-96
Pasadena, CA 91125
626-395-2453
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.br.caltech.edu/cmclab
