Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Last revision Both sides next revision
docs:comparison_with_confocal [2015/08/06 20:04]
Jon Daniels
docs:comparison_with_confocal [2016/01/26 17:51]
Jon Daniels
Line 5: Line 5:
 Spinning disk confocal (SDCM) is just a massively parallel confocal implementation so it's faster but otherwise has the some characteristics as laser scanning confocal. Spinning disk confocal (SDCM) is just a massively parallel confocal implementation so it's faster but otherwise has the some characteristics as laser scanning confocal.
  
-  * **Light dose:** Confocal has much more photobleaching/phototoxicity than SPIM (i.e. SPIM uses the excitation light much more efficiently).  Low light dose is the main motivation for most SPIM users.+  * **Light dose:** diSPIM has much lower dose and hence less photobleaching/phototoxicity than confocalReducing light dose is the main motivation for most SPIM users.
       * A rule of thumb is that you need X times as much light for confocal as you do for SPIM where X is the number of slices in your stack.       * A rule of thumb is that you need X times as much light for confocal as you do for SPIM where X is the number of slices in your stack.
       * [[http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n11/fig_tab/nbt.2713_F3.html|Figure 3]] and [[http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n11/fig_tab/nbt.2713_SV2.html|Supplementary Video 2]] of Wu et al. offer bleaching comparisons of imaging with diSPIM and SDCM.  Other papers such as [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbio.201200144|this one]] offer comparisons of light sheet with confocal which should apply to diSPIM.       * [[http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n11/fig_tab/nbt.2713_F3.html|Figure 3]] and [[http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n11/fig_tab/nbt.2713_SV2.html|Supplementary Video 2]] of Wu et al. offer bleaching comparisons of imaging with diSPIM and SDCM.  Other papers such as [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbio.201200144|this one]] offer comparisons of light sheet with confocal which should apply to diSPIM.
Line 11: Line 11:
       * Using Bessel beams to create the sheet can improve Z-resolution for single-view SPIM, but won't meaningfully change dual view resolution after registration/fusion.       * Using Bessel beams to create the sheet can improve Z-resolution for single-view SPIM, but won't meaningfully change dual view resolution after registration/fusion.
   * **XY resolution:** confocal and SPIM are comparable.   * **XY resolution:** confocal and SPIM are comparable.
-  * **Speed:** SPIM (per view) and SDCM have comparable speed (assuming SDCM has higher laser intensity to make up for the ~3% open area of the spinning disks)+  * **Speed:** SPIM (per view) and SDCM have comparable speed if SDCM laser intensity is increased to compensate for the ~3% open area of the disks. 
-      * Camera readout bounds the maximum achievable frame rate.  For example, 512 pixels high ROI is 2.5 ms readout time for sCMOS.  Allowing 2.5 ms illumination time results in 5 ms total per image or 200 frames per second.+      * Camera readout speed bounds the maximum achievable frame rate.  For example, 512 pixels high ROI is 2.5 ms readout time for sCMOS.  Allowing 2.5 ms illumination time results in 5 ms total per image or 200 frames per second.