Resolution; um/pix to DPI
Locked
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Hi All, I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've been given. I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should be? I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's going to be an 8' x 11' print. Little help please? Thank you. -- Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Confocal Imaging Facility Manager Dept. of Molecular Biology Washington Rd. Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 (O) 609 258 5432 (C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** On 8/3/2015 11:14 AM, Gary Laevsky wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi All, > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've > been given. > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should > be? > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > Little help please? Thank you. > You'll quickly find that most microscopy images are too small by the standards of art departments: 300 dpi * 11" = 3300 pixels on the long side. However, since your images should be acquired at the resolution limit of the microscope, you can just upsample them by interpolation - the extra magnification is empty, but it should look fine. Kurt -- Kurt Thorn Associate Professor Director, Nikon Imaging Center http://thornlab.ucsf.edu/ http://nic.ucsf.edu/blog/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by Gary Laevsky
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Hi Gary, DPI is just dots-per-inch, so 8''x11'' (inches) at 300 dpi is an image of 2400x3300 pixels. If your camera outputs, say, 1392x1040, you have three options, assuming your na+objective+magnification+pixel size combination is already calibrated to capture the maximum resolution efficiently: A. perform a mosaic of 3x3. You get a larger area of your sample. B. perform a mosaic of 3x3, with a higher magnification (3 times, e.g.). You get the a higher resolution image of the same area. You might have to deal with the different depth-of-field of the different objective (e.g. stacks+EDF). C. scale the image up by a factor of 3 (in ImageJ/Fiji the menu item is "Image/Scale..."). You get a "bigger" image, you comply with the requirements, but you're going to get a blurry image, because you're "guessing" what values are between pixels. Hope this helps! Thomas On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Gary Laevsky <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi All, > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've > been given. > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should > be? > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > Little help please? Thank you. > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Gary Laevsky
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Hi,Please try this link.[PDF]Confocal Application Notesmedicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdfConfocal Application Notes. Vol. 3 January 2005. Leica Microsystems Inc. ... The theoretical lateral optical resolution in wide field microscopy is given as: .. *61.0. On page five you will see the dpi output for 300 dpi and how it's related to your image resolution. Hope this help!Best, Myriam Myriam Gastard, PhD Bioptechs, Inc. Sales and Applications Specialist North East Marketing Manager 215-407-4488 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:15 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" <[hidden email]> wrote: ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Hi All, I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've been given. I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should be? I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's going to be an 8' x 11' print. Little help please? Thank you. -- Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Confocal Imaging Facility Manager Dept. of Molecular Biology Washington Rd. Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 (O) 609 258 5432 (C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Hi Miriam, That link is not working, but thank you. Thomas, what about when using a point scanner? I'm just trying to figure out how many of what size pixels I need?! Thanks both for speedy responses! On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi,Please try this link.[PDF]Confocal Application > Notesmedicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdfConfocal > Application Notes. Vol. 3 January 2005. Leica Microsystems Inc. ... The > theoretical lateral optical resolution in wide field microscopy is given > as: .. *61.0. > > On page five you will see the dpi output for 300 dpi and how it's related > to your image resolution. > Hope this help!Best, > Myriam > Myriam Gastard, PhD > Bioptechs, Inc. > Sales and Applications Specialist > North East Marketing Manager > 215-407-4488 > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:15 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > [hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi All, > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've > been given. > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should > be? > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > Little help please? Thank you. > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 > -- Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Confocal Imaging Facility Manager Dept. of Molecular Biology Washington Rd. Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 (O) 609 258 5432 (C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Gary Laevsky
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** HI Gary As I understand it, you need to make prints suitable for wall art? The 300 dpi resolution you mention is (I’m certain) a ~ minimum printed resolution for image display. The image you start with/print should have this resolution or more in the displayed print. Therefore, (with an 8 bit RGB image) the image size would be 3300 px (11 in.) x 2550 px (8.5 in.) = ~24 MB. The image you start with will need to be scaled to that size before printing one way or another. Many microscope images are smaller than this - and require “scaling up” using a suitable image program (ImageJ-Fiji or Photoshop). Be aware that when you do this you are not changing the actual image resolution, which is fixed by the microscope acquisition parameters. The only thing that has changed is the number of pixels needed to display is distance across the image (usually measured in microns or nanometers). You will need to keep track of the ration between the original pixlel to micron relationship and the new “scaled” one. The is best done be creating and embedding an image magnification bar BEFORE scaling the image for printing. To calculate the magnification, I would calculate the pixel per micron based on the pixel size in the original. This image can be found through lens/detector calibration with a microscope scale slide, or in the digital image metadata of the captured image. If you wish to know the distance measured by counting pixels, simple multiple by the pixel size. If you wish to create a magnification bar, simply take the inverse of the pixel size to convert to pixels/micron [pixel x-y size in microns divided by 1] then multiply by the chosen length of the magnification bar to find the number of pixels in the mag bars length. I hope this helps. Dan Once you have the pixels per microns number simply multiple the measured number of pixels > On Aug 3, 2015, at 11:14 AM, Gary Laevsky <[hidden email]> wrote: > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi All, > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've > been given. > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should > be? > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > Little help please? Thank you. > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Gary Laevsky
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Hi Gary, The short answer is 2400 x 3300 pixels (300*8 and 300*11), doable with scanning confocals or stitching, but I think it is worth asking what is necessary for this application. Journals choose that target resolution because even under ideal conditions it beats the resolving power of the human eye. Apple uses a similar calculation with their 'retina' displays - according to research they trust 227 dpi (=pixels per inch) is about as high-res as you can make a screen before it stops making sense to add more pixels. 'Ideal' usually means excellent light and your face is close enough to leave noseprints. I have pictures on my wall from a DSLR that round to about 100 dpi (cropped from the original and printed 30" x 30" square), and you really can't see grain without standing impractically close to the picture. If you have no leeway then I guess that's how it is, but granting a little slack could make this more practical for most users. I bet 150 dpi works fine on a wall; it's worth testing. On the other hand if they want to adapt it for the cover or full-page spread in a school brochure, people should just use that 4096x4096 scan size or choose good stitching tool. Best, Tim Timothy Feinstein, Ph.D. Research Scientist University of Pittsburgh Department of Developmental Biology On 8/3/15, 2:14 PM, "Confocal Microscopy List on behalf of Gary Laevsky" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote: >***** >To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. >***** > >Hi All, > >I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it >should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > >I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number >I've >been given. > >I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't >know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should >be? > >I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's >going to be an 8' x 11' print. > >Little help please? Thank you. > >-- >Best, > >Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. >Confocal Imaging Facility Manager >Dept. of Molecular Biology >Washington Rd. >Princeton University >Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 >(O) 609 258 5432 >(C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Gary Laevsky
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Sorry Gary, Try the one:http://medicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdf Myriam Gastard, PhD Bioptechs, Inc. Sales and Applications Specialist North East Marketing Manager 215-407-4488 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:56 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" <[hidden email]> wrote: ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Hi Miriam, That link is not working, but thank you. Thomas, what about when using a point scanner? I'm just trying to figure out how many of what size pixels I need?! Thanks both for speedy responses! On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi,Please try this link.[PDF]Confocal Application > Notesmedicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdfConfocal > Application Notes. Vol. 3 January 2005. Leica Microsystems Inc. ... The > theoretical lateral optical resolution in wide field microscopy is given > as: .. *61.0. > > On page five you will see the dpi output for 300 dpi and how it's related > to your image resolution. > Hope this help!Best, > Myriam > Myriam Gastard, PhD > Bioptechs, Inc. > Sales and Applications Specialist > North East Marketing Manager > 215-407-4488 > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:15 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > [hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi All, > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've > been given. > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should > be? > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > Little help please? Thank you. > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 > -- Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Confocal Imaging Facility Manager Dept. of Molecular Biology Washington Rd. Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 (O) 609 258 5432 (C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Perfect Myriam, thank you! On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Sorry Gary, > Try the one:http://medicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdf > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > Bioptechs, Inc. > Sales and Applications Specialist > North East Marketing Manager > 215-407-4488 > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:56 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > [hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi Miriam, > > That link is not working, but thank you. > > Thomas, what about when using a point scanner? I'm just trying to figure > out how many of what size pixels I need?! > > Thanks both for speedy responses! > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > posting. > > ***** > > > > Hi,Please try this link.[PDF]Confocal Application > > Notesmedicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdfConfocal > > Application Notes. Vol. 3 January 2005. Leica Microsystems Inc. ... The > > theoretical lateral optical resolution in wide field microscopy is given > > as: .. *61.0. > > > > On page five you will see the dpi output for 300 dpi and how it's related > > to your image resolution. > > Hope this help!Best, > > Myriam > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > > Bioptechs, Inc. > > Sales and Applications Specialist > > North East Marketing Manager > > 215-407-4488 > > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:15 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > posting. > > ***** > > > > Hi All, > > > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than > it > > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > > > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number > I've > > been given. > > > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should > > be? > > > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's > > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > > > Little help please? Thank you. > > > > -- > > Best, > > > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > > Dept. of Molecular Biology > > Washington Rd. > > Princeton University > > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > > (O) 609 258 5432 > > (C) 508 507 1310 > > > > > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 > -- Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Confocal Imaging Facility Manager Dept. of Molecular Biology Washington Rd. Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 (O) 609 258 5432 (C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** You are welcome! Myriam Gastard, PhD Bioptechs, Inc. Sales and Applications Specialist North East Marketing Manager 215-407-4488 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:05 PM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" <[hidden email]> wrote: ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Perfect Myriam, thank you! On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Sorry Gary, > Try the one:http://medicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdf > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > Bioptechs, Inc. > Sales and Applications Specialist > North East Marketing Manager > 215-407-4488 > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:56 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > [hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi Miriam, > > That link is not working, but thank you. > > Thomas, what about when using a point scanner? I'm just trying to figure > out how many of what size pixels I need?! > > Thanks both for speedy responses! > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > posting. > > ***** > > > > Hi,Please try this link.[PDF]Confocal Application > > Notesmedicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdfConfocal > > Application Notes. Vol. 3 January 2005. Leica Microsystems Inc. ... The > > theoretical lateral optical resolution in wide field microscopy is given > > as: .. *61.0. > > > > On page five you will see the dpi output for 300 dpi and how it's related > > to your image resolution. > > Hope this help!Best, > > Myriam > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > > Bioptechs, Inc. > > Sales and Applications Specialist > > North East Marketing Manager > > 215-407-4488 > > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:15 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > posting. > > ***** > > > > Hi All, > > > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than > it > > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > > > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number > I've > > been given. > > > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should > > be? > > > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's > > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > > > Little help please? Thank you. > > > > -- > > Best, > > > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > > Dept. of Molecular Biology > > Washington Rd. > > Princeton University > > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > > (O) 609 258 5432 > > (C) 508 507 1310 > > > > > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 > -- Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Confocal Imaging Facility Manager Dept. of Molecular Biology Washington Rd. Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 (O) 609 258 5432 (C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Kurt, may have to do that. Not a big issue. I imagine that's what people must do for the REALLY big images. Great fast responses people. Thank you! On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > You are welcome! > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > Bioptechs, Inc. > Sales and Applications Specialist > North East Marketing Manager > 215-407-4488 > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:05 PM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > [hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Perfect Myriam, thank you! > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > posting. > > ***** > > > > Sorry Gary, > > Try the one: > http://medicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdf > > > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > > Bioptechs, Inc. > > Sales and Applications Specialist > > North East Marketing Manager > > 215-407-4488 > > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:56 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > posting. > > ***** > > > > Hi Miriam, > > > > That link is not working, but thank you. > > > > Thomas, what about when using a point scanner? I'm just trying to figure > > out how many of what size pixels I need?! > > > > Thanks both for speedy responses! > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > ***** > > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > > posting. > > > ***** > > > > > > Hi,Please try this link.[PDF]Confocal Application > > > Notesmedicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdfConfocal > > > Application Notes. Vol. 3 January 2005. Leica Microsystems Inc. ... The > > > theoretical lateral optical resolution in wide field microscopy is > given > > > as: .. *61.0. > > > > > > On page five you will see the dpi output for 300 dpi and how it's > related > > > to your image resolution. > > > Hope this help!Best, > > > Myriam > > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > > > Bioptechs, Inc. > > > Sales and Applications Specialist > > > North East Marketing Manager > > > 215-407-4488 > > > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:15 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > ***** > > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > > posting. > > > ***** > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than > > it > > > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and > ask. > > > > > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number > > I've > > > been given. > > > > > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > > > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel > should > > > be? > > > > > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say > it's > > > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > > > > > Little help please? Thank you. > > > > > > -- > > > Best, > > > > > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > > > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > > > Dept. of Molecular Biology > > > Washington Rd. > > > Princeton University > > > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > > > (O) 609 258 5432 > > > (C) 508 507 1310 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best, > > > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > > Dept. of Molecular Biology > > Washington Rd. > > Princeton University > > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > > (O) 609 258 5432 > > (C) 508 507 1310 > > > > > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 > -- Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Confocal Imaging Facility Manager Dept. of Molecular Biology Washington Rd. Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 (O) 609 258 5432 (C) 508 507 1310 |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** I have a color printer capable of printing on 'Super B' format mini-posters (19x13") that I use for vanity pictures of some of our prettier samples on occasion. I find it's not worth printing the full size of the poster unless the picture was taken with 2k x 2k pixels. Anything less and you start to see pixelation. Craig On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Gary Laevsky <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Kurt, may have to do that. Not a big issue. I imagine that's what people > must do for the REALLY big images. > > Great fast responses people. Thank you! > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > posting. > > ***** > > > > You are welcome! > > > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > > Bioptechs, Inc. > > Sales and Applications Specialist > > North East Marketing Manager > > 215-407-4488 > > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:05 PM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > posting. > > ***** > > > > Perfect Myriam, thank you! > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > ***** > > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > > posting. > > > ***** > > > > > > Sorry Gary, > > > Try the one: > > http://medicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdf > > > > > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > > > Bioptechs, Inc. > > > Sales and Applications Specialist > > > North East Marketing Manager > > > 215-407-4488 > > > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:56 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > ***** > > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > > posting. > > > ***** > > > > > > Hi Miriam, > > > > > > That link is not working, but thank you. > > > > > > Thomas, what about when using a point scanner? I'm just trying to > figure > > > out how many of what size pixels I need?! > > > > > > Thanks both for speedy responses! > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Myriam Gastard <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > > > > > ***** > > > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > > > posting. > > > > ***** > > > > > > > > Hi,Please try this link.[PDF]Confocal Application > > > > Notesmedicine.osu.edu/neuroscience/documents/Resolution.pdfConfocal > > > > Application Notes. Vol. 3 January 2005. Leica Microsystems Inc. ... > The > > > > theoretical lateral optical resolution in wide field microscopy is > > given > > > > as: .. *61.0. > > > > > > > > On page five you will see the dpi output for 300 dpi and how it's > > related > > > > to your image resolution. > > > > Hope this help!Best, > > > > Myriam > > > > Myriam Gastard, PhD > > > > Bioptechs, Inc. > > > > Sales and Applications Specialist > > > > North East Marketing Manager > > > > 215-407-4488 > > > > 1-877-LIVE-CELL ((548-3235) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:15 AM -0700, "Gary Laevsky" < > > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > > ***** > > > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your > > > posting. > > > > ***** > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer > than > > > it > > > > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and > > ask. > > > > > > > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the > number > > > I've > > > > been given. > > > > > > > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I > don't > > > > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel > > should > > > > be? > > > > > > > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say > > it's > > > > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > > > > > > > Little help please? Thank you. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > > > > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > > > > Dept. of Molecular Biology > > > > Washington Rd. > > > > Princeton University > > > > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > > > > (O) 609 258 5432 > > > > (C) 508 507 1310 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best, > > > > > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > > > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > > > Dept. of Molecular Biology > > > Washington Rd. > > > Princeton University > > > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > > > (O) 609 258 5432 > > > (C) 508 507 1310 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best, > > > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > > Dept. of Molecular Biology > > Washington Rd. > > Princeton University > > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > > (O) 609 258 5432 > > (C) 508 507 1310 > > > > > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 > |
 
|
Lloyd Donaldson |
Re: Resolution; um/pix to DPI
|
|
In reply to this post by Gary Laevsky
Gary
We recently provided artwork for a display in our reception foyer. The final print is about 3m x 4m so larger than your 8' x 11'. The original image that I provided was 3000 x 2500 ( a montage of many individual images - the original object is about 1 cm square and we used a 10x objective, 15 images @ 1024x1024). At 300 dpi that is about 25 x 19 cm so the image must have been interpolated quite considerably if it was actually printed at 300 dpi. The end result is however spectacular - no visible pixilation. My suggestion would be to go for a big image with a lot of fine detail. Regards Dr Lloyd Donaldson Microscopy & Wood Identification Senior Scientist – Plant Cell Walls & Biomaterials Scion – Forests, Products, Innovation 49 Sala Street, Rotorua 3010 New Zealand Ph 07 343 5581 www.scionresearch.com -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gary Laevsky Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 6:15 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Resolution; um/pix to DPI ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Hi All, I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've been given. I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should be? I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's going to be an 8' x 11' print. Little help please? Thank you. -- Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Confocal Imaging Facility Manager Dept. of Molecular Biology Washington Rd. Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 (O) 609 258 5432 (C) 508 507 1310 This e-mail and any attachments may contain information which is confidential or subject to copyright. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it. Scion does not accept responsibility for anything in this e-mail which is not provided in the course of Scion’s usual business or for any computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from this e-mail. |
|
|
Michael Giacomelli |
Re: Resolution; um/pix to DPI
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Its fairly rare in microscopy that you actually have a properly sampled 300 DPI image unless the figure is very small. Generally you compose a figure with the image you have in a drawing program, and then render the final figure at 300 DPI (or even 600 DPI). The image itself ends up highly oversampled, but most drawing programs will give you a very clean interpolation while the higher DPI will make sure that text and lines are sharp and clean. Mike On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Lloyd Donaldson <[hidden email]> wrote: > Gary > > We recently provided artwork for a display in our reception foyer. The final print is about 3m x 4m so larger than your 8' x 11'. The original image that I provided was 3000 x 2500 ( a montage of many individual images - the original object is about 1 cm square and we used a 10x objective, 15 images @ 1024x1024). At 300 dpi that is about 25 x 19 cm so the image must have been interpolated quite considerably if it was actually printed at 300 dpi. The end result is however spectacular - no visible pixilation. My suggestion would be to go for a big image with a lot of fine detail. > > Regards > > > Dr Lloyd Donaldson > Microscopy & Wood Identification > Senior Scientist – Plant Cell Walls & Biomaterials > Scion – Forests, Products, Innovation > 49 Sala Street, Rotorua 3010 > New Zealand > Ph 07 343 5581 > www.scionresearch.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gary Laevsky > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 6:15 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Resolution; um/pix to DPI > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Hi All, > > I'm trying to wrap my head around this, but it's taking way longer than it > should, so I'm just going to expose my ineptness in this subject and ask. > > I need "high res" images to turn into wall art. 300 dpi is the number I've > been given. > > I'm trying to make a contest out of this in the department, but I don't > know what resolution image I have to ask for, ie how big the pixel should > be? > > I'm sure the size of the ultimate "art" is important, but let's say it's > going to be an 8' x 11' print. > > Little help please? Thank you. > > -- > Best, > > Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. > Confocal Imaging Facility Manager > Dept. of Molecular Biology > Washington Rd. > Princeton University > Princeton, New Jersey, 08544-1014 > (O) 609 258 5432 > (C) 508 507 1310 > > > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain information which is confidential or subject to copyright. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it. > Scion does not accept responsibility for anything in this e-mail which is not provided in the course of Scion’s usual business or for any computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from this e-mail. |
|
|
Hi all,
I figured I'd add my two cents to this little debate. So as stated before 300dpi is a sort of standard dogma to get images where you did not see the grain of the data. This is why we talk DOTs per inch and not Pixels per inch. Because these two were often confused, what people usually mean is PPI or Pixels Per Inch. Now onwards to talking about scientific imaging, design and art. There seems to be this impression that bigger is always better. Make tiles, zoom in or upsample with interpolation. But is all this really necessary? Pixels are beautiful, pixels represent the reality of how the data was acquired. You don't Gaussian blur histograms because they look to blocky, do you? so what if they are big? Sometimes imaging requires it or there is no point in making the pixels smaller or the images bigger... Pixels have their own beauty http://www.ixxidesign.com/fr/producten/special-collectie/pixel If we are talking about making something pretty for the sake of it, then go for it, acquire above nyquist, tile (and deal with those problems) or resize with interpolation. The most honest and usually more interesting approach in my opinion is to show the image with the actual pixels in all their beauty.(See That is, upscale it until you have reached the right size in inches but without interpolation. Sure it looks pixelated, but it’s closer to the reality of what you have acquired and worked on. I trust an image more if I see some pixels than a smooth image that means that some interpolation took place in-between. But of course this is just a matter of personal taste :) All the best Oli |
|
|
In reply to this post by Gary Laevsky
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Dear Olivier and listers Olivier brought up an interesting viewpoint as not to trust an interpolated image. I have the opinion that a properly Nyquist sampled image can be interpolated on a finer grid without changing its information content if one uses zero padding of its Fourier transform. That is, take the Fourier transform of the image and put the resulting spectrum in the center of a larger array consisting of zeros. The inverse Fourier transform then yields an image that is represented on a finer grid. Adding zeros outside of the object spectrum does not add or subtract any information in my opinion. Further, you can always retrieve the original raw data via an FFT and extracting the original spectrum in the center region, so the raw information has not been changed and is not lost. Thus I trust a representation of image data on a finer grid provided that it was done properly (Nyquist sampling to start with and zero padding for interpolation). What are the opinions of the experts on this? Best, Reto |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** On 8/6/2015 2:58 PM, Reto Fiolka wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. > ***** > > Dear Olivier and listers > > Olivier brought up an interesting viewpoint as not to trust an interpolated image. > > I have the opinion that a properly Nyquist sampled image can be interpolated on a finer > grid without changing its information content if one uses zero padding of its Fourier > transform. That is, take the Fourier transform of the image and put the resulting > spectrum in the center of a larger array consisting of zeros. The inverse Fourier > transform then yields an image that is represented on a finer grid. > > Adding zeros outside of the object spectrum does not add or subtract any information in > my opinion. Further, you can always retrieve the original raw data via an FFT and > extracting the original spectrum in the center region, so the raw information has not been > changed and is not lost. > > Thus I trust a representation of image data on a finer grid provided that it was done > properly (Nyquist sampling to start with and zero padding for interpolation). > > What are the opinions of the experts on this? Relevant to this discussion is this famous Microsoft white paper: "A Pixel is Not a Little Square": http://alvyray.com/Memos/CG/Microsoft/6_pixel.pdf I haven't thought through all the issues myself, but I tend to agree that upsampling of a Nyquist sampled image is OK, if done properly. Kurt > > Best, > Reto > -- Kurt Thorn Associate Professor Director, Nikon Imaging Center http://thornlab.ucsf.edu/ http://nic.ucsf.edu/blog/ |
|
|
Andreas Bruckbauer |
Re: Resolution; um/pix to DPI
|
|
In reply to this post by olivier.burri
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting. ***** Good point Oliver! As it is meant to be art, one could also do one of these mosaic images where every pixel is represented by a little image! Regarding ppi and dpi, the dots per inch are usually a larger value as the printer needs many dots to do one properly coloured pixel. But this depends on the printer. So you would have some leeway for the acquisition. Best wishes Andreas -----Original Message----- From: "Burri Olivier" <[hidden email]> Sent: 06/08/2015 23:39 To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: Resolution; um/pix to DPI Hi all, I figured I'd add my two cents to this little debate. So as stated before 300dpi is a sort of standard dogma to get images where you did not see the grain of the data. This is why we talk DOTs per inch and not Pixels per inch. Because these two were often confused, what people usually mean is PPI or Pixels Per Inch. Now onwards to talking about scientific imaging, design and art. There seems to be this impression that bigger is always better. Make tiles, zoom in or upsample with interpolation. But is all this really necessary? Pixels are beautiful, pixels represent the reality of how the data was acquired. You don't Gaussian blur histograms because they look to blocky, do you? so what if they are big? Sometimes imaging requires it or there is no point in making the pixels smaller or the images bigger... Pixels have their own beauty http://www.ixxidesign.com/fr/producten/special-collectie/pixel If we are talking about making something pretty for the sake of it, then go for it, acquire above nyquist, tile (and deal with those problems) or resize with interpolation. The most honest and usually more interesting approach in my opinion is to show the image with the actual pixels in all their beauty.(See That is, upscale it until you have reached the right size in inches but without interpolation. Sure it looks pixelated, but it’s closer to the reality of what you have acquired and worked on. I trust an image more if I see some pixels than a smooth image that means that some interpolation took place in-between. But of course this is just a matter of personal taste :) All the best Oli |
«
Return to Confocal Microscopy List
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |