On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 18:19 +0000, Frank von Delft wrote: > Maybe, but images without experimental context (sequence? ligands? > purification? crystallization format? -- PURPOSE OF EXPERIMENT!?!! > relationship to the other 15 similar datasets) are as good as no > images. And as far as I know, there's no good discussion on the table > for that. At least, no-one on the thread mentioned it, so they're > probably not thinking about it either. > > I suppose efforts like PIMS or are a start, and maybe they can even have > enough information (my feeling is they currently don't). But that's > where the discussion should start: how to index (in sense of annotate) > the datasets. The technicalities are just that: technicalities. > > Or even closer to home: does ANY detector/beamline write even timestamps > into the image header...? Never mind ring current, intensity of the > beam, size of beam, size of crystal, length of direct beam path, etc > etc... >
As far as I know, most detectors write the current time into the image header. Certainly our in house MAR image plate systems do, as do the detectors at Diamond and ESRF (for those that I've looked at this morning).
