Well - in my experience it gives much clearer density for missing features.. E
On 10 February 2017 at 10:59, Kajander, Tommi A <tommi.kajan...@helsinki.fi> wrote: > Dear Eleanor, I will try that, just wondering if excluding solvent masking > completely doenst have detrimental effect on > the overall quality of the map? > > Tommi > > > > > > > On Feb 10, 2017, at 12:43 PM, Eleanor Dodson <eleanor.dod...@york.ac.uk> > wrote: > > Certainly if you are using REFMAC with an incomplete model you should > specify > > > SCALE TYPE BULK > SOLVENT NO > > Otherwise it assumes any density outside the given model is to be > effectively screened out.. > Eleanor > > > > On 10 February 2017 at 09:37, Kajander, Tommi A < > tommi.kajan...@helsinki.fi> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> Was there a convenient way to make a solvent mask for a region with a >> model - its been a while - and use that to generate maps >> (i have a domain that is only partially visible, could not be found be >> molecular replacement), its there though. >> >> Could be that its not well ordered, but I was wondering if the bulk >> solvent masking is just wiping it out. (basicly something like half a >> domain, e.g. half of >> individual beta-strands, are missing.) resolution is bit limited (at best >> 3 Å) so automated building and refinement doesnt work terribly well. >> >> I could just place a model there and make a mask somewhere and include in >> map calculation? >> >> Thanks for suggestions, >> tommi >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
