> I think the real challenge (and one that makes for an excellent > macromolecular crystallographer) is how well one can interpret a map with > poor phases.
Let me disagree ... An excellent macromolecular crystallographer, is one that given some crystals can derive the best strategy to collect data, process the data optimally, derive phases using all available information, build a model and refine it in such a way that it best explains both data and geometrical expectations, and do these as efficiently as possible. Efficiency may suggest using one automated suite or another - or indeed may best be achieved by manual labor - be it in the map or in data collection strategy or refinement or another step: and here I am ignoring the art of transforming hair-needle-crystalline-like-dingbits to a diffracting crystal. One that can interpret a map with poor phases can be either a genius in 3d orientation - or a not necessarily too intelligent nor experienced but determined student that can drink and breathe this map for a few weeks in a row until a solution is in place. Neither would make an excellent macromolecular crystallographer by necessity. Tassos
