Yes, I agree! This (“Please look at my structure, and here are my files from the last cycle of refinement") happens to me almost every week. :)
Diana ************************************************** Diana R. Tomchick Professor Departments of Biophysics and Biochemistry University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center 5323 Harry Hines Blvd. Rm. ND10.214A Dallas, TX 75390-8816 diana.tomch...@utsouthwestern.edu (214) 645-6383 (phone) (214) 645-6353 (fax) On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:48 AM, James Holton <jmhol...@slac.stanford.edu> wrote: As someone who uses those "superfluous" columns all the time, I would like to chime in in favor of keeping the default output columns of refmac. If only I had a nickle for every time someone asked me to "look at" a structure and only gave me the output files of refinement. Kind of ties your hands. I have always been a fan of erring on the side of providing information in output files. How hard is it to delete something? How hard is it to get it back after you deleted it? My two cents, -James Holton MAD Scientist On 7/31/2017 8:57 AM, Edwin Pozharski wrote: > I know space is cheap these days, but is there a reason for Refmac to > generate all those extra columns in the output mtz file? Refmac (as well as > phenix.refine and buster-tnt) output mtz file is almost always used for only > one purpose - look at the map in coot. You only need 4 columns for that, not > 14. Other columns are useful for testing, but why not make them optional? > > This would certainly be a low priority - one can easily delete extra columns > using, say, sftools. > > Cheers, > > Ed. > > --- > Hurry up, before we all come to our senses! > Julien, King of Lemurs > ________________________________ UT Southwestern Medical Center The future of medicine, today.
