Video compression
Locked
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Dear List, Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? Thanks, Simon |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. Guy -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Video compression ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Dear List, Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? Thanks, Simon |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** The size limits for publication are unfortunate. You essentially have no choice but to reduce the quality of movies so you can publish them. I suppose the purpose of this is for rapid web viewing. We routinely use Quicktime Pro (no commercial connection) with the H.264 compression (also low cost software at around $30). It does a relatively decent job of compressing and preserving sharp features and gives you flexibility on compression level. My typical workflow is to convert to RGB and then save as uncompressed avi from ImageJ. Those movies will import directly into Quicktime Pro. I would also highly recommend providing uncompressed or even raw files via your own website so people can access them there. I have seen situations where authors reference the website from within a publication to direct people there (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7305/full/nature09255.html). Jay -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Guy Cox Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:56 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Video compression ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. Guy -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Video compression ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Dear List, Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? Thanks, Simon |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** I use the same method described by Jay below. This works very well for me. John Oreopoulos On 2013-02-27, at 11:05 AM, "Unruh, Jay" <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > The size limits for publication are unfortunate. You essentially have no choice but to reduce the quality of movies so you can publish them. I suppose the purpose of this is for rapid web viewing. > > We routinely use Quicktime Pro (no commercial connection) with the H.264 compression (also low cost software at around $30). It does a relatively decent job of compressing and preserving sharp features and gives you flexibility on compression level. My typical workflow is to convert to RGB and then save as uncompressed avi from ImageJ. Those movies will import directly into Quicktime Pro. > > I would also highly recommend providing uncompressed or even raw files via your own website so people can access them there. I have seen situations where authors reference the website from within a publication to direct people there (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7305/full/nature09255.html). > > Jay > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Guy Cox > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:56 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. > > Guy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker > Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Dear List, > Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? > Thanks, > Simon |
|
|
In reply to this post by simon walker (BI)
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Uncompressed is the only way to go for reusability. OK to shrink to <10 Mf for the stupid journal - and please feel free to quote me that a 10 Mb limit is stupid, and send the original data to "The Cell - An Image library" (spnsored by ASCB) for access of full data. On 2/27/2013 7:06 AM, Simon Walker wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Dear List, > Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or > licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need > to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this > size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people > using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using > to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? > Thanks, > Simon > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Guy Cox-2
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** I posted to http://works.bepress.com/gmcnamara/27/ an Excel file that can be downloaded. The file contains my evaluation of a large number of codec's to make AVI files from a monochrome data set. Evaluation was done with MetaMorph in 2005-2006. Summary (first worksheet tab of the Excel file): filename filesize Score (sum) VP61 Advanced Profile 1,582,592 1 VP62 Heightened Sharpness 1,584,640 1 VP60 Simple Profile 1,612,288 1 DivX MPEG-4 Fast-Motion 2,459,648 5 DivX MPEG-4 Low-Motion 4,312,064 4 Microsoft MPEG-4 V2 6,698,496 2 Intel Indeo video R3.2 20,154,880 6 Microsoft Windows Media Video 9 28,512,768 2 Cinepak 35,144,192 2 Intel Indeo Video 4.5 38,092,800 2 Microsoft Video 1 65,801,728 3 QuickTime 225,830,571 4 uncompressed 363,842,048 2 average score (of 24 codecs) 50,512,800 3.16 standard deviation 88,101,414 2.13 median 13,934,080 2 maximum possible score (high is bad) 12 Enjoy, George p.s. I am presenting my latest Tattletales poster on how to multiplex fluorescent reporters in live cells, poster at ABRF and CSHL (single cells analyses workshop) next week. I hope some of you can attend. The current poster and two page abstract are the most recent two PDF files inside the zip downloadable from http://works.bepress.com/gmcnamara/26/ I expect to have data by end of summer (2013). On 2/27/2013 7:55 AM, Guy Cox wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. > > Guy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker > Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Dear List, > Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or > licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need > to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this > size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people > using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using > to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? > Thanks, > Simon > > |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** I think we need a bit more explanation before this becomes even remotely comprehensible! But your hard work is certainly appreciated. Guy -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of George McNamara Sent: Thursday, 28 February 2013 11:03 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Video compression ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** I posted to http://works.bepress.com/gmcnamara/27/ an Excel file that can be downloaded. The file contains my evaluation of a large number of codec's to make AVI files from a monochrome data set. Evaluation was done with MetaMorph in 2005-2006. Summary (first worksheet tab of the Excel file): filename filesize Score (sum) VP61 Advanced Profile 1,582,592 1 VP62 Heightened Sharpness 1,584,640 1 VP60 Simple Profile 1,612,288 1 DivX MPEG-4 Fast-Motion 2,459,648 5 DivX MPEG-4 Low-Motion 4,312,064 4 Microsoft MPEG-4 V2 6,698,496 2 Intel Indeo video R3.2 20,154,880 6 Microsoft Windows Media Video 9 28,512,768 2 Cinepak 35,144,192 2 Intel Indeo Video 4.5 38,092,800 2 Microsoft Video 1 65,801,728 3 QuickTime 225,830,571 4 uncompressed 363,842,048 2 average score (of 24 codecs) 50,512,800 3.16 standard deviation 88,101,414 2.13 median 13,934,080 2 maximum possible score (high is bad) 12 Enjoy, George p.s. I am presenting my latest Tattletales poster on how to multiplex fluorescent reporters in live cells, poster at ABRF and CSHL (single cells analyses workshop) next week. I hope some of you can attend. The current poster and two page abstract are the most recent two PDF files inside the zip downloadable from http://works.bepress.com/gmcnamara/26/ I expect to have data by end of summer (2013). On 2/27/2013 7:55 AM, Guy Cox wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. > > Guy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker > Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Dear List, > Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or > licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that > we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than > 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe > there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What > codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? > Thanks, > Simon > > |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi Guy, sorry about the formatting of the text table here (it looked good in my email editor). Best to look in the Excel file downloadable from http://works.bepress.com/gmcnamara/27/ The data was a timelapse cell motility study done with a video camera (on a Nikon inverted microscope in a 37 C room) digitized by a Matrox frame grabber. George On 2/28/2013 7:13 AM, Guy Cox wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > I think we need a bit more explanation before this becomes even remotely comprehensible! But your hard work is certainly appreciated. > > Guy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of George McNamara > Sent: Thursday, 28 February 2013 11:03 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > I posted to http://works.bepress.com/gmcnamara/27/ an Excel file > that can be downloaded. The file contains my evaluation of a large number of codec's to make AVI files from a monochrome data set. > Evaluation was done with MetaMorph in 2005-2006. Summary (first worksheet tab of the Excel file): > > filename > filesize Score (sum) > VP61 Advanced Profile 1,582,592 1 > VP62 Heightened Sharpness 1,584,640 1 > VP60 Simple Profile 1,612,288 1 > DivX MPEG-4 Fast-Motion 2,459,648 5 > DivX MPEG-4 Low-Motion 4,312,064 4 > Microsoft MPEG-4 V2 6,698,496 2 > Intel Indeo video R3.2 20,154,880 6 > Microsoft Windows Media Video 9 28,512,768 2 > Cinepak 35,144,192 2 > Intel Indeo Video 4.5 38,092,800 2 > Microsoft Video 1 65,801,728 3 > QuickTime 225,830,571 4 > uncompressed 363,842,048 2 > average score (of 24 codecs) 50,512,800 3.16 > standard deviation 88,101,414 2.13 > median 13,934,080 2 > maximum possible score (high is bad) 12 > > Enjoy, > > George > p.s. I am presenting my latest Tattletales poster on how to multiplex fluorescent reporters in live cells, poster at ABRF and CSHL (single cells analyses workshop) next week. I hope some of you can attend. The current poster and two page abstract are the most recent two PDF files inside the zip downloadable from http://works.bepress.com/gmcnamara/26/ > I expect to have data by end of summer (2013). > > On 2/27/2013 7:55 AM, Guy Cox wrote: > >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. >> >> Guy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker >> Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Dear List, >> Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or >> licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that >> we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than >> 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe >> there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What >> codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? >> Thanks, >> Simon >> >> >> > |
|
|
In reply to this post by John Oreopoulos
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi, we used several different of the newer video compression codecs, like XviD or DivX and Quicktime, they all give surprisingly good results if you don't have too much noise. You can prefilter a bit to reduce noise and improve compression further. With XviD we often compress 500MB TIFF time series of 2MP to ~10MB, with acceptable quality, good enough for Beamer presentation. Thats of course all depending on your noise and variance between images, but I would anticipate a 10 - 50 fold decrease of size. XviD is well sup- ported and freeware on most platforms, and we export from MetaXpress directly. Best, Mario On 02/27/2013 05:08 PM, John Oreopoulos wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > I use the same method described by Jay below. This works very well for me. > > John Oreopoulos > > > On 2013-02-27, at 11:05 AM, "Unruh, Jay" <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> The size limits for publication are unfortunate. You essentially have no choice but to reduce the quality of movies so you can publish them. I suppose the purpose of this is for rapid web viewing. >> >> We routinely use Quicktime Pro (no commercial connection) with the H.264 compression (also low cost software at around $30). It does a relatively decent job of compressing and preserving sharp features and gives you flexibility on compression level. My typical workflow is to convert to RGB and then save as uncompressed avi from ImageJ. Those movies will import directly into Quicktime Pro. >> >> I would also highly recommend providing uncompressed or even raw files via your own website so people can access them there. I have seen situations where authors reference the website from within a publication to direct people there (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7305/full/nature09255.html). >> >> Jay >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Guy Cox >> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:56 AM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. >> >> Guy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker >> Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Dear List, >> Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? >> Thanks, >> Simon > |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Three comments on compression: 1. I haven't found anything truly acceptable to my tastes, but compression is required, so the next two suggestions are more constructive. 2. I have tried a few freeware packages and have to say that the $30 for QuicktimePro is well worth the money (I have used it on XP, Vista, and Windows7). 3. With fluorescent imaging where there is black background, filtering (not convolving, that's a different discussion) noise to pure black and bringing up the gamma to show the dim values better makes prettier and far smaller files even at higher quality compression. Non-moving solid areas makes for small files. ________________________________________________________ Michael Cammer, Assistant Research Scientist Skirball Institute of Biomolecular Medicine Lab: (212) 263-3208 Cell: (914) 309-3270 -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mario Emmenlauer Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:18 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Video compression ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi, we used several different of the newer video compression codecs, like XviD or DivX and Quicktime, they all give surprisingly good results if you don't have too much noise. You can prefilter a bit to reduce noise and improve compression further. With XviD we often compress 500MB TIFF time series of 2MP to ~10MB, with acceptable quality, good enough for Beamer presentation. Thats of course all depending on your noise and variance between images, but I would anticipate a 10 - 50 fold decrease of size. XviD is well sup- ported and freeware on most platforms, and we export from MetaXpress directly. Best, Mario On 02/27/2013 05:08 PM, John Oreopoulos wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > I use the same method described by Jay below. This works very well for me. > > John Oreopoulos > > > On 2013-02-27, at 11:05 AM, "Unruh, Jay" <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> The size limits for publication are unfortunate. You essentially have no choice but to reduce the quality of movies so you can publish them. I suppose the purpose of this is for rapid web viewing. >> >> We routinely use Quicktime Pro (no commercial connection) with the H.264 compression (also low cost software at around $30). It does a relatively decent job of compressing and preserving sharp features and gives you flexibility on compression level. My typical workflow is to convert to RGB and then save as uncompressed avi from ImageJ. Those movies will import directly into Quicktime Pro. >> >> I would also highly recommend providing uncompressed or even raw files via your own website so people can access them there. I have seen situations where authors reference the website from within a publication to direct people there (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7305/full/nature09255.html). >> >> Jay >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Guy Cox >> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:56 AM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. >> >> Guy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker >> Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Dear List, >> Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? >> Thanks, >> Simon > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Mario Emmenlauer
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi All, I routinely use Handbrake (http://handbrake.fr/) its open source and quite easy to use. With handbrake installed and the latest FFDShow codec packs (http://ffdshow-tryout.sourceforge.net/) you have a lot of power at your fingertips to compress to any format you want. Cheers Cam Cameron J. Nowell Centre for Dynamic Imaging The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research 1G Royal Parade Parkville, Victoria 3052 Australia Phone: +61 3 9345 2871 Mobile: +61422882700 Fax: +61 3 9347 0852 Facility Website LinkedIn Profile -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mario Emmenlauer Sent: Friday, 1 March 2013 3:18 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Video compression ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi, we used several different of the newer video compression codecs, like XviD or DivX and Quicktime, they all give surprisingly good results if you don't have too much noise. You can prefilter a bit to reduce noise and improve compression further. With XviD we often compress 500MB TIFF time series of 2MP to ~10MB, with acceptable quality, good enough for Beamer presentation. Thats of course all depending on your noise and variance between images, but I would anticipate a 10 - 50 fold decrease of size. XviD is well sup- ported and freeware on most platforms, and we export from MetaXpress directly. Best, Mario On 02/27/2013 05:08 PM, John Oreopoulos wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > I use the same method described by Jay below. This works very well for me. > > John Oreopoulos > > > On 2013-02-27, at 11:05 AM, "Unruh, Jay" <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> The size limits for publication are unfortunate. You essentially have no choice but to reduce the quality of movies so you can publish them. I suppose the purpose of this is for rapid web viewing. >> >> We routinely use Quicktime Pro (no commercial connection) with the H.264 compression (also low cost software at around $30). It does a relatively decent job of compressing and preserving sharp features and gives you flexibility on compression level. My typical workflow is to convert to RGB and then save as uncompressed avi from ImageJ. Those movies will import directly into Quicktime Pro. >> >> I would also highly recommend providing uncompressed or even raw files via your own website so people can access them there. I have seen situations where authors reference the website from within a publication to direct people there (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7305/full/nature09255.html). >> >> Jay >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Guy Cox >> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:56 AM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. >> >> Guy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker >> Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Dear List, >> Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? >> Thanks, >> Simon > ______________________________________________________________________ The information in this email is confidential and intended solely for the addressee. You must not disclose, forward, print or use it without the permission of the sender. ______________________________________________________________________ |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Thanks for all the suggestions with this. If nothing else, this has shown that there are many options and no accepted standard. Maybe it's time for a recognised standard method of compression for use with fluorescence microscopy data. It would be useful if there were an option available in ImageJ/FIJI to implement this. In the meantime we have managed to shrink our movie files using Adobe Media Encoder into MP4 format using H.264. The result is a little blurry, but the file size is ~10 fold smaller and it's still possible to see what we're trying to show. As suggested we'll upload the raw data somewhere for reviewers to access if required. Simon -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Cameron Nowell Sent: 28 February 2013 23:50 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Video compression ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi All, I routinely use Handbrake (http://handbrake.fr/) its open source and quite easy to use. With handbrake installed and the latest FFDShow codec packs (http://ffdshow-tryout.sourceforge.net/) you have a lot of power at your fingertips to compress to any format you want. Cheers Cam Cameron J. Nowell Centre for Dynamic Imaging The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research 1G Royal Parade Parkville, Victoria 3052 Australia Phone: +61 3 9345 2871 Mobile: +61422882700 Fax: +61 3 9347 0852 Facility Website LinkedIn Profile -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mario Emmenlauer Sent: Friday, 1 March 2013 3:18 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Video compression ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi, we used several different of the newer video compression codecs, like XviD or DivX and Quicktime, they all give surprisingly good results if you don't have too much noise. You can prefilter a bit to reduce noise and improve compression further. With XviD we often compress 500MB TIFF time series of 2MP to ~10MB, with acceptable quality, good enough for Beamer presentation. Thats of course all depending on your noise and variance between images, but I would anticipate a 10 - 50 fold decrease of size. XviD is well sup- ported and freeware on most platforms, and we export from MetaXpress directly. Best, Mario On 02/27/2013 05:08 PM, John Oreopoulos wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > I use the same method described by Jay below. This works very well for me. > > John Oreopoulos > > > On 2013-02-27, at 11:05 AM, "Unruh, Jay" <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> The size limits for publication are unfortunate. You essentially have no choice but to reduce the quality of movies so you can publish them. I suppose the purpose of this is for rapid web viewing. >> >> We routinely use Quicktime Pro (no commercial connection) with the H.264 compression (also low cost software at around $30). It does a relatively decent job of compressing and preserving sharp features and gives you flexibility on compression level. My typical workflow is to convert to RGB and then save as uncompressed avi from ImageJ. Those movies will import directly into Quicktime Pro. >> >> I would also highly recommend providing uncompressed or even raw files via your own website so people can access them there. I have seen situations where authors reference the website from within a publication to direct people there (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7305/full/nature09255.html). >> >> Jay >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Guy Cox >> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:56 AM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. >> >> Guy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker >> Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Video compression >> >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Dear List, >> Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? >> Thanks, >> Simon > ______________________________________________________________________ The information in this email is confidential and intended solely for the addressee. You must not disclose, forward, print or use it without the permission of the sender. ______________________________________________________________________ The Babraham Institute, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge CB22 3AT Registered Charity No. 1053902. The information transmitted in this email is directed only to the addressee. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete this email from your system. The contents of this e-mail are the views of the sender and do not necessarily represent the views of the Babraham Institute. Full conditions at: www.babraham.ac.uk<http://www.babraham.ac.uk/email_disclaimer.html> |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Other options worth considering: 1. Upload to youtube, which will compress it for you. Download as a compressed MP4. You can upload as a private video if you're worried about other people seeing it. 2. Use ffmpeg! This is a very powerful tool, gives you lots of control, and it's free. You could read their documentation to unlock the full power, or just google for an example of the thing you want to do. A few simple examples here: http://www.catswhocode.com/blog/19-ffmpeg-commands-for-all-needs On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 7:26 AM, simon walker <[hidden email]>wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Thanks for all the suggestions with this. If nothing else, this has shown > that there are many options and no accepted standard. Maybe it's time for > a recognised standard method of compression for use with fluorescence > microscopy data. It would be useful if there were an option available in > ImageJ/FIJI to implement this. In the meantime we have managed to shrink > our movie files using Adobe Media Encoder into MP4 format using H.264. The > result is a little blurry, but the file size is ~10 fold smaller and it's > still possible to see what we're trying to show. As suggested we'll upload > the raw data somewhere for reviewers to access if required. > Simon > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] > On Behalf Of Cameron Nowell > Sent: 28 February 2013 23:50 > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi All, > > I routinely use Handbrake (http://handbrake.fr/) its open source and > quite easy to use. With handbrake installed and the latest FFDShow codec > packs (http://ffdshow-tryout.sourceforge.net/) you have a lot of power at > your fingertips to compress to any format you want. > > > Cheers > > Cam > > > > Cameron J. Nowell > Centre for Dynamic Imaging > The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research 1G Royal Parade > Parkville, Victoria 3052 Australia > > Phone: +61 3 9345 2871 > Mobile: +61422882700 > Fax: +61 3 9347 0852 > > Facility Website > LinkedIn Profile > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] > On Behalf Of Mario Emmenlauer > Sent: Friday, 1 March 2013 3:18 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi, > > we used several different of the newer video compression codecs, like XviD > or DivX and Quicktime, they all give surprisingly good results if you don't > have too much noise. You can prefilter a bit to reduce noise and improve > compression further. > > With XviD we often compress 500MB TIFF time series of 2MP to ~10MB, with > acceptable quality, good enough for Beamer presentation. Thats of course > all depending on your noise and variance between images, but I would > anticipate a 10 - 50 fold decrease of size. XviD is well sup- ported and > freeware on most platforms, and we export from MetaXpress directly. > > Best, > > Mario > > > > > On 02/27/2013 05:08 PM, John Oreopoulos wrote: > > ***** > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > > ***** > > > > I use the same method described by Jay below. This works very well for > me. > > > > John Oreopoulos > > > > > > On 2013-02-27, at 11:05 AM, "Unruh, Jay" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > >> ***** > >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > >> ***** > >> > >> The size limits for publication are unfortunate. You essentially have > no choice but to reduce the quality of movies so you can publish them. I > suppose the purpose of this is for rapid web viewing. > >> > >> We routinely use Quicktime Pro (no commercial connection) with the > H.264 compression (also low cost software at around $30). It does a > relatively decent job of compressing and preserving sharp features and > gives you flexibility on compression level. My typical workflow is to > convert to RGB and then save as uncompressed avi from ImageJ. Those movies > will import directly into Quicktime Pro. > >> > >> I would also highly recommend providing uncompressed or even raw files > via your own website so people can access them there. I have seen > situations where authors reference the website from within a publication to > direct people there ( > http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7305/full/nature09255.html). > >> > >> Jay > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Confocal Microscopy List > >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Guy Cox > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:56 AM > >> To: [hidden email] > >> Subject: Re: Video compression > >> > >> ***** > >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > >> ***** > >> > >> Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which > offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are > good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost > software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. > >> > >> Guy > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Confocal Microscopy List > >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker > >> Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM > >> To: [hidden email] > >> Subject: Video compression > >> > >> ***** > >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > >> ***** > >> > >> Dear List, > >> Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or > licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we > need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB > (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still > people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are > people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of > information? > >> Thanks, > >> Simon > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > The information in this email is confidential and intended solely for the > addressee. > You must not disclose, forward, print or use it without the permission of > the sender. > ______________________________________________________________________ > The Babraham Institute, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge CB22 3AT > Registered Charity No. 1053902. > The information transmitted in this email is directed only to the > addressee. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and > delete this email from your system. The contents of this e-mail are the > views of the sender and do not necessarily represent the views of the > Babraham Institute. Full conditions at: www.babraham.ac.uk< > http://www.babraham.ac.uk/email_disclaimer.html> > |
|
|
In reply to this post by simon walker (BI)-2
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** [Sorry, reposting with the correct email address] On Fri, 1 Mar 2013, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi Simon, > > On Fri, 1 Mar 2013, simon walker wrote: > > > Thanks for all the suggestions with this. If nothing else, this has > > shown that there are many options and no accepted standard. Maybe it's > > time for a recognised standard method of compression for use with > > fluorescence microscopy data. > > > > It would be useful if there were an option available in ImageJ/FIJI to > > implement this. > > It appears to me that there is a way, however, there is no update site for > this (at least not yet): > > https://sites.google.com/site/qingzongtseng/save-as-movie > > Ciao, > Johannes > |
|
|
In reply to this post by simon walker (BI)-2
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Any compressed movie will be blurred to some degree. One of the reasons there is no standard algorithm is that the impact of any compression scheme will depend upon the nature of the image. As was suggested, do retain the uncompressed file(s). If you need to edit the movie, make the changes on a copy of the uncompressed file. Re-editing the the compressed version will often turn it to mush. thanks to all who made suggestions for movie making tools. Glen MacDonald Core for Communication Research Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center Cellular Morphology Core Center on Human Development and Disability Box 357923 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-7923 USA (206) 616-4156 [hidden email] [hidden email] On Mar 1, 2013, at 4:26 AM, simon walker <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Thanks for all the suggestions with this. If nothing else, this has shown that there are many options and no accepted standard. Maybe it's time for a recognised standard method of compression for use with fluorescence microscopy data. It would be useful if there were an option available in ImageJ/FIJI to implement this. In the meantime we have managed to shrink our movie files using Adobe Media Encoder into MP4 format using H.264. The result is a little blurry, but the file size is ~10 fold smaller and it's still possible to see what we're trying to show. As suggested we'll upload the raw data somewhere for reviewers to access if required. > Simon > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Cameron Nowell > Sent: 28 February 2013 23:50 > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi All, > > I routinely use Handbrake (http://handbrake.fr/) its open source and quite easy to use. With handbrake installed and the latest FFDShow codec packs (http://ffdshow-tryout.sourceforge.net/) you have a lot of power at your fingertips to compress to any format you want. > > > Cheers > > Cam > > > > Cameron J. Nowell > Centre for Dynamic Imaging > The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research 1G Royal Parade Parkville, Victoria 3052 Australia > > Phone: +61 3 9345 2871 > Mobile: +61422882700 > Fax: +61 3 9347 0852 > > Facility Website > LinkedIn Profile > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mario Emmenlauer > Sent: Friday, 1 March 2013 3:18 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: Video compression > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi, > > we used several different of the newer video compression codecs, like XviD or DivX and Quicktime, they all give surprisingly good results if you don't have too much noise. You can prefilter a bit to reduce noise and improve compression further. > > With XviD we often compress 500MB TIFF time series of 2MP to ~10MB, with acceptable quality, good enough for Beamer presentation. Thats of course all depending on your noise and variance between images, but I would anticipate a 10 - 50 fold decrease of size. XviD is well sup- ported and freeware on most platforms, and we export from MetaXpress directly. > > Best, > > Mario > > > > > On 02/27/2013 05:08 PM, John Oreopoulos wrote: >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> I use the same method described by Jay below. This works very well for me. >> >> John Oreopoulos >> >> >> On 2013-02-27, at 11:05 AM, "Unruh, Jay" <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> ***** >>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >>> ***** >>> >>> The size limits for publication are unfortunate. You essentially have no choice but to reduce the quality of movies so you can publish them. I suppose the purpose of this is for rapid web viewing. >>> >>> We routinely use Quicktime Pro (no commercial connection) with the H.264 compression (also low cost software at around $30). It does a relatively decent job of compressing and preserving sharp features and gives you flexibility on compression level. My typical workflow is to convert to RGB and then save as uncompressed avi from ImageJ. Those movies will import directly into Quicktime Pro. >>> >>> I would also highly recommend providing uncompressed or even raw files via your own website so people can access them there. I have seen situations where authors reference the website from within a publication to direct people there (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7305/full/nature09255.html). >>> >>> Jay >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Confocal Microscopy List >>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Guy Cox >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:56 AM >>> To: [hidden email] >>> Subject: Re: Video compression >>> >>> ***** >>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >>> ***** >>> >>> Jasc Software Paint Shop Pro also comes with Animation Shop which offers a wide range of compression options. Some are terrible, others are good - it needs a fair bit of experimentation. But it is low cost software. I use it a lot, but otherwise have no commercial connection. >>> >>> Guy >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Confocal Microscopy List >>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Simon Walker >>> Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:06 PM >>> To: [hidden email] >>> Subject: Video compression >>> >>> ***** >>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >>> ***** >>> >>> Dear List, >>> Can anyone recommend software for video compression (either free or licensed)? We have some large files from live cell imaging exps that we need to submit to a journal and somehow get them down to less than 10 MB (this size limit seems crazy in this day and age, but maybe there are still people using dial-up to access journals..). What codecs/file formats are people using to obtain the best compression with minimal loss of information? >>> Thanks, >>> Simon >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ > The information in this email is confidential and intended solely for the addressee. > You must not disclose, forward, print or use it without the permission of the sender. > ______________________________________________________________________ > The Babraham Institute, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge CB22 3AT Registered Charity No. 1053902. > The information transmitted in this email is directed only to the addressee. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete this email from your system. The contents of this e-mail are the views of the sender and do not necessarily represent the views of the Babraham Institute. Full conditions at: www.babraham.ac.uk<http://www.babraham.ac.uk/email_disclaimer.html> |
«
Return to Confocal Microscopy List
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |