>>My understanding is that EM people will routinely switch to diffraction mode >>when they want accurate measurements. You lose the phase information but, >>since EM lenses tend to have imperfections, you get better measurements of >>the intensities.
Only to my knowledge in the case of crystalline samples like 2D crystals. >>Of course the loss of phases is a serious problem when you don't have a model >>of the object as precise as our atomic models. From where does this precision arise, I wonder? I guess priors for atom-based models are pretty invariant. On the other hand, who says that such priors, albeit of many more varieties, don't exist for larger biological samples, such as zebrafish brains and drosophila embryos/larvae? Anyway, right now, the state of the art of modelling in these fluorescence data sets is hand-drawing circles around things that look interesting, hoping the sample does not shift too much, or perhaps using some tracking. But it could be so much better! JPK
