Are you sure you used the right columns in FFT? AFAIK Coot uses FWT and PHWT.
I thought the more recent PyMOL versions finally had MTZ support, or is this just for the incentive version? Also if it is for looking at the structure and making figures, perhaps try CCP4mg. It has proper MTZ support and it is of course much better integrated with CCP4. It also is boss-proof for figures, i.e. it puts a recovery file next to the figure so you can go back quickly to change the carbon colours to a more mauve-y shade of pinky russet. Cheers, Robbie > -----Original Message----- > From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Chris Fage > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2019 12:37 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ccp4bb] 2Fo-Fc maps in Coot vs. Pymol > > Dear All, > > I recently obtained structures of a protein bound to two different small > molecules. When viewing the structures in Coot with a similar contour > setting, the 2Fo-Fc map around ligand 1 is clearly much weaker than that > around ligand 2.However, after generating 2Fo-Fc maps in FFT and loading > them in Pymol (again, choosing equal contour levels), the maps surrounding > ligands 1 and 2 have nearly the same quality. Is there a difference in scaling > between the two programs that can account for this? Thanks for any advice! > > Best wishes, > Chris > > <http://www.avg.com/email- > signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig- > email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avg.com > <http://www.avg.com/email- > signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig- > email&utm_content=webmail> > > > ________________________________ > > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
