>the top-hat profile is one of the reasons why inhouse machines produce better
>quality data than synchrotrons. However, the often much increased resolution
>you achieve at the synchrotron is generally worth more than the quality of the
>data at restricted resolution.
>
>Cheers,
>Tim
Several su
Hi Jacob,
at the beginning of my experience of S-SAD about 10 years ago, it was
not too difficult to do S-SAD phasing with inhouse data provided the
resolution was better than 2.0A, while it did not always work with
synchrotron data. Purely personal experience.
However, the inhouse machines I am
>at the beginning of my experience of S-SAD about 10 years ago, it was not too
>difficult to do S-SAD phasing with inhouse data provided the resolution was
>better than 2.0A, while it did not always work with synchrotron data. Purely
>personal experience.
I assume that the synchrotron data were
Hi Tim, Jacob,
I must admit that I was very surprised by the
suggestion of a top-hat profile for a in-house rotating anode. We have a Rigaku
Fr-E generator, and Rigaku provided a plot of the beam profile for that (with
VariMax-HR Optic) and it is very far from being top
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Jacob,
both George Sheldrick and Andrew Leslie explained to me that the
machine I had in mind - a sealed tube generator with a graphite
monochromator - is not really state of the art and merely a technology
from 20 years ago. Hence my comment about
Jacob,
Background subtraction is unfortunately not as forgiving as you think it
is. You can subtract the background, but you can't subtract the noise.
This is because noise (by definition) is never the same twice. Yes, the
"average" or "true" background under a spot may be flat, but any give
: [ccp4bb] X-ray Source Differences (WAS: RE: [ccp4bb] How far does
rad dam travel?)
Jacob,
Background subtraction is unfortunately not as forgiving as you think it is.
You can subtract the background, but you can't subtract the noise.
This is because noise (by definition) is never the
-Original Message-
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Dom
Bellini
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:25 PM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] X-ray Source Differences (WAS: RE: [ccp4bb] How far does
rad dam travel?)
Dear Jacob,
To add
ce at high intensity, for a given total dose!
Jacob
-Original Message-
From: James Holton [mailto:jmhol...@lbl.gov]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:00 PM
To: Keller, Jacob; CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] X-ray Source Differences (WAS: RE: [ccp4bb] How far does
ra
igh intensity, for a given total dose!
Jacob
-Original Message-
From: James Holton [mailto:jmhol...@lbl.gov]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:00 PM
To: Keller, Jacob;CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] X-ray Source Differences (WAS: RE: [ccp4bb] How far does
rad dam travel?)
10 matches
Mail list logo
