Dear CCP4BB,
For further research of a particular structure wouldn't hints on
expressing, purifying and crystalizing the protein often be more
useful than images or amplitudes?
Liz
On 18 Mar 2009, at 17:00, Ethan Merritt wrote:
On Wednesday 18 March 2009 09:41:59 Garib Murshudov wrote:
Dear all
Before going into and trying to find a technical solution to the
problem it would be good if decide if we need images. As far as I
know
if we face with a problem to solve and we know that it is necessary
to
solve then we find technical solution to the problem (either from
other fields or we find our own solution with some elements of
reinvention of new MX wheels).
Do we need images to store? What kind of information we can extract
from images that we cannot from amplitudes, intensities (even
unmerged)? Does anybody have a convincing argument for favour of
images?
Overlooked superlattice?
Incorrect point group assignment?
Failure to recognize a non-merohedral twin?
Thermal diffuse scatter?
Subsequent improvements in integration programs?
Ethan
regards
Garib
On 18 Mar 2009, at 16:32, Herbert J. Bernstein wrote:
Actually the radiologists who manage CT and PET scans of brains do
have
a solution, called DICOM, see http://medical.nema.org/. If we work
together as a community we should be able to do as well as the
rocket scientists and the brain surgeons' radiologists, perhaps even
better. -- Herbert
=====================================================
Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769
+1-631-244-3035
[email protected]
=====================================================
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Jacob Keller wrote:
Apparently it DOES take a rocket scientist to solve this problem.
Maybe the brain surgeons also have a solution?
JPK
*******************************************
Jacob Pearson Keller
Northwestern University
Medical Scientist Training Program
Dallos Laboratory
F. Searle 1-240
2240 Campus Drive
Evanston IL 60208
lab: 847.491.2438
cel: 773.608.9185
email: [email protected]
*******************************************
----- Original Message ----- From: "Klaas Decanniere"
<[email protected]
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 5:36 AM
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] images
Herbert J. Bernstein wrote:
Other sciences have struggled with this and seem to have found an
answer.
Have e.g. a look at http://heasarc.nasa.gov/docs/heasarc/fits.html
kind regards,
Klaas
This is a good time to start a major crystallogrpahic image
archiving effort. Money may well be available now that will
not be
avialable six month from now, and we have good, if not perfect,
solutions available for many, if not all, of the technical issues
involved. Is it really wise to let this opportunity pass us by?
The deposition of images would be possible providing some
consistent
imagecif format was agreed.
This would of course be of great use to developers for certain
pathological cases, but not I suspect much value to the user
community - I down load structure factors all the time for test
purposes but I probably would not bother to go through the data
processing, and unless there were extensive notes associated
with
each set of images I suspect it would be hard to reproduce
sensible
results.
--
Ethan A Merritt
Biomolecular Structure Center
University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742
