Janice-
I have tried using CCD cameras and have found them to be inferior to the
flatbed scanner/transmissive light method. I suspect the quality with a
digital camera will be similar to the CCD. The problem with cameras is that
the 'detector' is necessarily very far from the image source, especially
when dealing with large-format 2D gels. I have found that varying the image
levels and contrast (either in Melanie or Photoshop) will usually reveal
even the faintest of spots. I use a UMAX PowerLook III for silver-stained
and colloidal coomassie-stained gels, scan at 150 dpi, and use the .tif
files directly in Melanie III.
Good luck-
David
__________________________________________________
David B. Friedman, Ph.D.
Dept. of Cellular and Structural Biology,
University of Colorado School of Medicine
UCHSC, B-111, SOM 4538
4200 E. Ninth Ave.
Denver, Colorado 80262
-----Original Message-----
From: Bleibaum, Janice {Mass~Palo Alto}
[mailto:JANICE.BLEIBAUM@roche.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 5:40 PM
To: Recipients of ABRF List
Subject: Misc.: Scanners vs. Digital Cameras for Capturing Gel Images
> Dear List,
>
> We would like to know if anyone has tried using a digital camera for
> capturing gel images. We have been using a flatbed scanner equipped to
> handle transparent images (transmissive light rather than merely
> reflective light) but not all the images captured with the scanner have
> been of the quality we would like. Specifically, we see spots in our gels
> that the scanner does not always record. If you are using a digital
> camera, we would like answers to the following questions:
>
> Which model?
> If you switched from a scanner, why did you switch? How much improvement
> in image quality do you see?
> What stain are you using? (We've been using colloidal Coomassie blue.)
> What format are using for the captured image? (We've been recording
> images as .tif files from the scanner.)
> Do you import the captured image into a gel analysis program such as
> Melanie or Imagemaster? Any problems with file formats?
>
> Any other comments which come to mind on this issue are welcome.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Janice Bleibaum
>
> Janice Bleibaum
> Roche Bioscience
> Protein Sequencing and Proteomics
> 3401 Hillview Ave.
> M/S S3-1
> Palo Alto CA 94304
> (650)852-1639
> janice.bleibaum@roche.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 05 2001 - 08:42:46 EST