cleaning of filters

[Boswell, Carl A - (cboswell)]

Hi all,
I have some emission filters with dust that will not blow off, and one with
an obvious fingerprint, all of which show up as blurry smutz in the image.
I appreciate the need for caution when cleaning filters with soft coatings;
e.g. no organic solvents, no touching, etc.  But what about a simple soak in
dilute soap and water, followed by dH2O rinse?  Or, will a polymerizing
cleaners, such as Photonic's First Contact work?  Obviously there is a
solvent in this to keep the material liquid until applied.

Thanks,

c

Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
Molecular and Cellular Biology
University of Arizona
520-954-7053
FAX [phone]

[John Oreopoulos]

Carl,

Yes, you have to be very careful cleaning optics like this that have  
special coatings that affect their function. The only advice I have  
is this: A couple of times our lab has ordered some specialized  
dichroic mirrors and emission filters from Chroma and when they  
arrive in their box they come with a small orange slip of paper that  
talks about cleaning them. This slip says that if there a smudge of  
something that you really need to get remove that can't be taken off  
by a stream of air, just use a piece of lens paper and put a few  
drops of warm water on it. Then lightly drag this wet tissue across  
the optic's surface in one direction slowly. Repeat if necessary.

As I recall, this topic of cleaning filters has come up on the server  
before about a year ago or less and several people had recommended  
the First Contact polymer. Try searching the archives on this for  
more information.

(No commercial interest for Chroma or Photonic)

John Oreopoulos


On 7-Oct-09, at 1:42 PM, Carl Boswell wrote:

> Hi all,
> I have some emission filters with dust that will not blow off, and  
> one with an obvious fingerprint, all of which show up as blurry  
> smutz in the image. I appreciate the need for caution when cleaning  
> filters with soft coatings; e.g. no organic solvents, no touching,  
> etc.  But what about a simple soak in dilute soap and water,  
> followed by dH2O rinse?  Or, will a polymerizing cleaners, such as  
> Photonic's First Contact work?  Obviously there is a solvent in  
> this to keep the material liquid until applied.
>
> Thanks,
>
> c
>
> Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
> Molecular and Cellular Biology
> University of Arizona
> 520-954-7053
> FAX [phone]

[Craig Brideau]

I usually clean coated optics with a single swipe of methanol on a
lens tissue.  Take a lens tissue and fold it a few times, put a drop
or two of methanol on it, and do a single swipe across the surface.
If the fingerprint refuses to come off, refold the tissue you just
used to expose a clean surface, add another drop of methanol and swipe
again.  If you are uncertain that your particular coatings are
Methanol-compatible then test a tiny corner of the optic first!
Also, make sure to use 'molecular grade' or ultra-high purity
methanol, as standard stuff contains things that will contaminate your
optic.

Craig


On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Carl Boswell
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all,
> I have some emission filters with dust that will not blow off, and one with
> an obvious fingerprint, all of which show up as blurry smutz in the image. I
> appreciate the need for caution when cleaning filters with soft coatings;
> e.g. no organic solvents, no touching, etc.  But what about a simple soak in
> dilute soap and water, followed by dH2O rinse?  Or, will a polymerizing
> cleaners, such as Photonic's First Contact work?  Obviously there is a
> solvent in this to keep the material liquid until applied.
>
> Thanks,
>
> c
>
> Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
> Molecular and Cellular Biology
> University of Arizona
> 520-954-7053
> FAX [phone]
>

[Dan Osborn]

I would agree with Craig on this.  Whether it is a filter or a dichroic
mirror, "soft-coated" or "hard-coated" filter, the preferred method is first
with compressed dry air and perhaps a soft lense cloth.  If that fails to
remove the smudge(s) a small amount of MeOH, EtOH, or even Acetone will not
affect the coating if it is not repeated a multitude of times.  Remember,
"soft-coated" filters are not exposed coatings, so there is either just
glass on the filter surface, or an AR coating.  "Hard-coated" filters many
times are exposed but are more resistant to solvent attack.  At least by the
ones mentioned here.
Water cleaning can also damage filters and as water does not evaporate as
quickly as the organics, if any gets behind the filter ring it will hang
around  longer.  
However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it is OK
to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a Qtip or wipe
to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed by a dry wipe should
be fine as well.
-Dan

 


Dan Osborn
Product Marketing Manager

Omega Optical, Inc.
Delta Campus
Omega Drive
Brattleboro, VT 05301
Phone: Direct line: [phone]  or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
Fax: [phone]
Email: [hidden email]
Web: www.omegafilters.com

 

 

Celebrating 40 Years


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 1:53 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

I usually clean coated optics with a single swipe of methanol on a lens
tissue.  Take a lens tissue and fold it a few times, put a drop or two of
methanol on it, and do a single swipe across the surface.
If the fingerprint refuses to come off, refold the tissue you just used to
expose a clean surface, add another drop of methanol and swipe again.  If
you are uncertain that your particular coatings are Methanol-compatible then
test a tiny corner of the optic first!
Also, make sure to use 'molecular grade' or ultra-high purity methanol, as
standard stuff contains things that will contaminate your optic.

Craig


On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Carl Boswell <[hidden email]>
wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have some emission filters with dust that will not blow off, and one
> with an obvious fingerprint, all of which show up as blurry smutz in
> the image. I appreciate the need for caution when cleaning filters
> with soft coatings; e.g. no organic solvents, no touching, etc.  But
> what about a simple soak in dilute soap and water, followed by dH2O
> rinse?  Or, will a polymerizing cleaners, such as Photonic's First
> Contact work?  Obviously there is a solvent in this to keep the material
liquid until applied.

>
> Thanks,
>
> c
>
> Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
> Molecular and Cellular Biology
> University of Arizona
> 520-954-7053
> FAX [phone]
>

[Craig Brideau]

Another problem with using water is if it is not ultra-pure you will
leave residue behind.  The same is true for using any of the alcohols;
they need to be ultra high purity to avoid leaving behind gunk when
they evaporate.  Fingerprints are remarkably stubborn.  It usually
takes me two or three wipes with methanol to get them off.
Dan's comment about using compressed clean air first is also very
important.  This takes the big particulate off the filter before you
try to wipe it.  That way you are not dragging 'gravel' over the
surface of your optic when you wipe with lens tissue.
Also, Kimwipes are not lens tissue.  Use real lens tissue.

Craig

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Dan Osborn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I would agree with Craig on this.  Whether it is a filter or a dichroic
> mirror, "soft-coated" or "hard-coated" filter, the preferred method is first
> with compressed dry air and perhaps a soft lense cloth.  If that fails to
> remove the smudge(s) a small amount of MeOH, EtOH, or even Acetone will not
> affect the coating if it is not repeated a multitude of times.  Remember,
> "soft-coated" filters are not exposed coatings, so there is either just
> glass on the filter surface, or an AR coating.  "Hard-coated" filters many
> times are exposed but are more resistant to solvent attack.  At least by the
> ones mentioned here.
> Water cleaning can also damage filters and as water does not evaporate as
> quickly as the organics, if any gets behind the filter ring it will hang
> around  longer.
> However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it is OK
> to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a Qtip or wipe
> to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed by a dry wipe should
> be fine as well.
> -Dan
>
>
>
>
> Dan Osborn
> Product Marketing Manager
>
> Omega Optical, Inc.
> Delta Campus
> Omega Drive
> Brattleboro, VT 05301
> Phone: Direct line: [phone]  or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
> Fax: [phone]
> Email: [hidden email]
> Web: www.omegafilters.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Celebrating 40 Years
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Craig Brideau
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 1:53 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: cleaning of filters
>
> I usually clean coated optics with a single swipe of methanol on a lens
> tissue.  Take a lens tissue and fold it a few times, put a drop or two of
> methanol on it, and do a single swipe across the surface.
> If the fingerprint refuses to come off, refold the tissue you just used to
> expose a clean surface, add another drop of methanol and swipe again.  If
> you are uncertain that your particular coatings are Methanol-compatible then
> test a tiny corner of the optic first!
> Also, make sure to use 'molecular grade' or ultra-high purity methanol, as
> standard stuff contains things that will contaminate your optic.
>
> Craig
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Carl Boswell <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I have some emission filters with dust that will not blow off, and one
>> with an obvious fingerprint, all of which show up as blurry smutz in
>> the image. I appreciate the need for caution when cleaning filters
>> with soft coatings; e.g. no organic solvents, no touching, etc.  But
>> what about a simple soak in dilute soap and water, followed by dH2O
>> rinse?  Or, will a polymerizing cleaners, such as Photonic's First
>> Contact work?  Obviously there is a solvent in this to keep the material
> liquid until applied.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> c
>>
>> Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
>> Molecular and Cellular Biology
>> University of Arizona
>> 520-954-7053
>> FAX [phone]
>>
>

[Mark Cannell]

We also use MaOH, but never reuse a tissue. One tissue, one drop, one
wipe. If using your fingers to hold/fold the tissue, you need to be
gloved to stop finger grease entering the tissue. The test on a corner
as suggested is a good idea but so far I've never seen a problem with MeOH.

Cheers

> I usually clean coated optics with a single swipe of methanol on a
> lens tissue.  Take a lens tissue and fold it a few times, put a drop
> or two of methanol on it, and do a single swipe across the surface.
> If the fingerprint refuses to come off, refold the tissue you just
> used to expose a clean surface, add another drop of methanol and swipe
> again.  If you are uncertain that your particular coatings are
> Methanol-compatible then test a tiny corner of the optic first!
> Also, make sure to use 'molecular grade' or ultra-high purity
> methanol, as standard stuff contains things that will contaminate your
> optic.
>
> Craig
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Carl Boswell
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> Hi all,
>> I have some emission filters with dust that will not blow off, and one with
>> an obvious fingerprint, all of which show up as blurry smutz in the image. I
>> appreciate the need for caution when cleaning filters with soft coatings;
>> e.g. no organic solvents, no touching, etc.  But what about a simple soak in
>> dilute soap and water, followed by dH2O rinse?  Or, will a polymerizing
>> cleaners, such as Photonic's First Contact work?  Obviously there is a
>> solvent in this to keep the material liquid until applied.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> c
>>
>> Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
>> Molecular and Cellular Biology
>> University of Arizona
>> 520-954-7053
>> FAX [phone]
>>
>>    

[Martin Wessendorf-2]

Dan Osborn wrote:

> However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it is OK
> to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a Qtip or wipe
> to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed by a dry wipe should
> be fine as well.

I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and were
thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton wool
and an applicator stick.  Not so?

Martin
--
Martin Wessendorf, Ph.D.                   office: [phone]
Assoc Prof, Dept Neuroscience                 lab: [phone]
University of Minnesota             Preferred FAX: [phone]
6-145 Jackson Hall, 321 Church St. SE    Dept Fax: [phone]
Minneapolis, MN  55455                    e-mail: [hidden email]

[Patricia Masso-Welch]

I have unsubscribed twice following the original posting information. Does
anyone have an updated way to do this?

--On Wednesday, October 07, 2009 2:41 PM -0500 Martin Wessendorf
<[hidden email]> wrote:

Dan Osborn wrote:

> However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it is OK
> to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a Qtip or
> wipe to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed by a dry wipe
> should be fine as well.

I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and were
thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton wool
and an applicator stick.  Not so?

Martin



--
Patricia Masso-Welch, Ph.D.
Dept. Biotechnical and Clinical Laboratory Sciences
School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences
University of Buffalo
3435 Main Street
Buffalo, NY  14214

Ph  716 829-5191
Fax [phone]
[hidden email]

[Deron Walters]

The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton together
and a glue that attaches the cotton to the stick.  Either of these could
dissolve in solvents and redeposit on optics.  However, there is a
glue-free, binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from
Puritan:

http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?id=336&item=869-WC

I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and
doublets, although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.
One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton fibers.
In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of pressurized
air.

No financial interest.

Deron Walters
R&D Scientist, Physics
Asylum Research


> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf
>
> Dan Osborn wrote:
>
> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it
> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a
> > Qtip or wipe to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed
by
> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.
>
> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and
were
> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton
wool
> and an applicator stick.  Not so?

[Dan Osborn]

Martin/ Deron,
        We use several of the Puritan products on protected coatings and
mirrors: the same product as Deron listed, and 806 and 826 WC item numbers.
The 869 was called out as the preferred product.  And it true about the
fibers, there is tendency for some to be left behind after cleaning, but
usually a circular swabbing motion from the inside out can reduce this.
There is also a fine polyester cleaning wipe used by some, but I do not have
the catalog number on that.
Best,
Dan


Dan Osborn
Product Marketing Manager

Omega Optical, Inc.
Delta Campus
Omega Drive
Brattleboro, VT 05301
Phone: Direct line: [phone]  or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
Fax: [phone]
Email: [hidden email]
Web: www.omegafilters.com

 

 

Celebrating 40 Years


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Deron Walters
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:02 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton together and a
glue that attaches the cotton to the stick.  Either of these could dissolve
in solvents and redeposit on optics.  However, there is a glue-free,
binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from
Puritan:

http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?id=336&item=869-WC

I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and doublets,
although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.
One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton fibers.
In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of pressurized air.

No financial interest.

Deron Walters
R&D Scientist, Physics
Asylum Research


> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf
>
> Dan Osborn wrote:
>
> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it
> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a
> > Qtip or wipe to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed
by
> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.
>
> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and
were
> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton
wool
> and an applicator stick.  Not so?

[Jerry (Gerald) Sedgewick]

Hi Patricia,

Unsubscribe info is as follows:

Send an email to [hidden email] and put the following into the
body of the message:

*signoff confocalmicroscopy*


Patricia Masso-Welch wrote:
> I have unsubscribed twice following the original posting information.
> Does anyone have an updated way to do this?
>
>
>
>
>


--
Jerry (Gerald) Sedgewick
Core Facility Director, Biomedical Image Processing Lab (BIPL)
University of Minnesota, Department of Neuroscience
1-205 Hasselmo Hall
312 Church St. S.E.
Minneapolis, MN  55455
612-624-6607
[hidden email]
http://www.bipl.umn.edu
Author: "Scientific Imaging with Photoshop: Methods, Measurement and Output."

Rawlight.com (dba "Sedgewick Initiatives")
965 Cromwell Avenue
Saint Paul, MN  55114
651-788-2261
[hidden email]
http://www.quickphotoshop.com
http://www.rawlight.com
http://www.jerrysedgewick.com

[Craig Brideau]

I still swear by lens tissues over cotton swabs, mainly because the
lens tissues won't leave fibers behind.  Most of the major optics
companies sell their 'house brand' of these and they're all usually
fairly good.  I've used Edmund Optics and Thorlabs brands with good
success.  Edmund even sells large 'sheet-sized' pieces in packs.

Craig


On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Dan Osborn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Martin/ Deron,
>        We use several of the Puritan products on protected coatings and
> mirrors: the same product as Deron listed, and 806 and 826 WC item numbers.
> The 869 was called out as the preferred product.  And it true about the
> fibers, there is tendency for some to be left behind after cleaning, but
> usually a circular swabbing motion from the inside out can reduce this.
> There is also a fine polyester cleaning wipe used by some, but I do not have
> the catalog number on that.
> Best,
> Dan
>
>
> Dan Osborn
> Product Marketing Manager
>
> Omega Optical, Inc.
> Delta Campus
> Omega Drive
> Brattleboro, VT 05301
> Phone: Direct line: [phone]  or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
> Fax: [phone]
> Email: [hidden email]
> Web: www.omegafilters.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Celebrating 40 Years
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Deron Walters
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:02 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: cleaning of filters
>
> The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton together and a
> glue that attaches the cotton to the stick.  Either of these could dissolve
> in solvents and redeposit on optics.  However, there is a glue-free,
> binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from
> Puritan:
>
> http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?id=336&item=869-WC
>
> I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and doublets,
> although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.
> One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton fibers.
> In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of pressurized air.
>
> No financial interest.
>
> Deron Walters
> R&D Scientist, Physics
> Asylum Research
>
>
>> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf
>>
>> Dan Osborn wrote:
>>
>> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it
>> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a
>> > Qtip or wipe to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed
> by
>> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.
>>
>> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and
> were
>> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton
> wool
>> and an applicator stick.  Not so?
>

[Gary Laevsky-2]

Hi All,

First, before I used First Contact, I spoke with a person that is very prominent in the filter industry (trying to limit commercial conflict).

That person said the polymer does not damage their coatings.

I purchased the product.  While reading this thread, I took out an emission filter and put a big old thumbprint on it.

The polymer pulled it and all other impurities very nicely.

You do have to be very careful near the edges of the mount.

0 commercial interest, but very happy.

Best,

 

Gary Laevsky, Ph.D.

Imaging Application Specialist

 

Andor Technology

discover new ways of seeing

 

[hidden email]

Cell         (774) 291 - 9992

Office       (860) 290 - 9211 x219

Fax          (860) 290 - 9566

Web:       www.andor.com

 

Please visit the following links for further information on the Andor microscopy systems

 

http://www.andor.com/learning/movie_library/

please scroll down to the microscopy systems movie

 

http://www.andor.com/microscopy_systems/default.aspx


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:00 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

I still swear by lens tissues over cotton swabs, mainly because the
lens tissues won't leave fibers behind.  Most of the major optics
companies sell their 'house brand' of these and they're all usually
fairly good.  I've used Edmund Optics and Thorlabs brands with good
success.  Edmund even sells large 'sheet-sized' pieces in packs.

Craig


On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Dan Osborn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Martin/ Deron,
>        We use several of the Puritan products on protected coatings and
> mirrors: the same product as Deron listed, and 806 and 826 WC item numbers.
> The 869 was called out as the preferred product.  And it true about the
> fibers, there is tendency for some to be left behind after cleaning, but
> usually a circular swabbing motion from the inside out can reduce this.
> There is also a fine polyester cleaning wipe used by some, but I do not have
> the catalog number on that.
> Best,
> Dan
>
>
> Dan Osborn
> Product Marketing Manager
>
> Omega Optical, Inc.
> Delta Campus
> Omega Drive
> Brattleboro, VT 05301
> Phone: Direct line: [phone]  or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
> Fax: [phone]
> Email: [hidden email]
> Web: www.omegafilters.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Celebrating 40 Years
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Deron Walters
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:02 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: cleaning of filters
>
> The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton together and a
> glue that attaches the cotton to the stick.  Either of these could dissolve
> in solvents and redeposit on optics.  However, there is a glue-free,
> binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from
> Puritan:
>
> http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?id=336&item=869-WC
>
> I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and doublets,
> although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.
> One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton fibers.
> In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of pressurized air.
>
> No financial interest.
>
> Deron Walters
> R&D Scientist, Physics
> Asylum Research
>
>
>> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf
>>
>> Dan Osborn wrote:
>>
>> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it
>> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a
>> > Qtip or wipe to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed
> by
>> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.
>>
>> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and
> were
>> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton
> wool
>> and an applicator stick.  Not so?
>

[Cameron Nowell]

You can get lint/fibre free cotton swabs, they are usually used for opthamology.


Cheers

Cam



-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Thursday, 8 October 2009 10:00 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

I still swear by lens tissues over cotton swabs, mainly because the
lens tissues won't leave fibers behind.  Most of the major optics
companies sell their 'house brand' of these and they're all usually
fairly good.  I've used Edmund Optics and Thorlabs brands with good
success.  Edmund even sells large 'sheet-sized' pieces in packs.

Craig


On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Dan Osborn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Martin/ Deron,
>        We use several of the Puritan products on protected coatings and
> mirrors: the same product as Deron listed, and 806 and 826 WC item numbers.
> The 869 was called out as the preferred product.  And it true about the
> fibers, there is tendency for some to be left behind after cleaning, but
> usually a circular swabbing motion from the inside out can reduce this.
> There is also a fine polyester cleaning wipe used by some, but I do not have
> the catalog number on that.
> Best,
> Dan
>
>
> Dan Osborn
> Product Marketing Manager
>
> Omega Optical, Inc.
> Delta Campus
> Omega Drive
> Brattleboro, VT 05301
> Phone: Direct line: [phone]  or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
> Fax: [phone]
> Email: [hidden email]
> Web: www.omegafilters.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Celebrating 40 Years
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Deron Walters
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:02 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: cleaning of filters
>
> The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton together and a
> glue that attaches the cotton to the stick.  Either of these could dissolve
> in solvents and redeposit on optics.  However, there is a glue-free,
> binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from
> Puritan:
>
> http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?id=336&item=869-WC
>
> I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and doublets,
> although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.
> One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton fibers.
> In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of pressurized air.
>
> No financial interest.
>
> Deron Walters
> R&D Scientist, Physics
> Asylum Research
>
>
>> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf
>>
>> Dan Osborn wrote:
>>
>> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it
>> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a
>> > Qtip or wipe to clean it.  A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed
> by
>> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.
>>
>> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and
> were
>> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton
> wool
>> and an applicator stick.  Not so?
>

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.5/2418 - Release Date: 10/07/09 05:18:00


This communication is intended only for the named recipient and may contain information that is confidential, legally privileged or subject to copyright; the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research Ltd does not waiver any rights if you have received this communication in error.
The views expressed in this communication are those of the sender and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research Ltd.

[Boswell, Carl A - (cboswell)]

Thanks, Gary.  My big concern is the worry over "soft" vs "hard" coatings,
and all the warnings associated with the former.  Apparently older filters
are more delicate than the newer ones.  I'm told that what I have are soft
coatings.  I guess I'll take the cautious approach and try a small area
first.

Thanks to all for your input.  If nothing else, it gives me courage to at
least try something.

C

Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
Molecular and Cellular Biology
University of Arizona
520-954-7053
FAX [phone]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Laevsky" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters


Hi All,

First, before I used First Contact, I spoke with a person that is very
prominent in the filter industry (trying to limit commercial conflict).

That person said the polymer does not damage their coatings.

I purchased the product.  While reading this thread, I took out an emission
filter and put a big old thumbprint on it.

The polymer pulled it and all other impurities very nicely.

You do have to be very careful near the edges of the mount.

0 commercial interest, but very happy.

Best,



Gary Laevsky, Ph.D.

Imaging Application Specialist



Andor Technology

discover new ways of seeing



[hidden email]

Cell         (774) 291 - 9992

Office       (860) 290 - 9211 x219

Fax          (860) 290 - 9566

Web:       www.andor.com



Please visit the following links for further information on the Andor
microscopy systems



http://www.andor.com/learning/movie_library/

please scroll down to the microscopy systems movie



http://www.andor.com/microscopy_systems/default.aspx


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:00 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

I still swear by lens tissues over cotton swabs, mainly because the
lens tissues won't leave fibers behind.  Most of the major optics
companies sell their 'house brand' of these and they're all usually
fairly good.  I've used Edmund Optics and Thorlabs brands with good
success.  Edmund even sells large 'sheet-sized' pieces in packs.

Craig


On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Dan Osborn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Martin/ Deron,
> We use several of the Puritan products on protected coatings and
> mirrors: the same product as Deron listed, and 806 and 826 WC item
> numbers.
> The 869 was called out as the preferred product. And it true about the
> fibers, there is tendency for some to be left behind after cleaning, but
> usually a circular swabbing motion from the inside out can reduce this.
> There is also a fine polyester cleaning wipe used by some, but I do not
> have
> the catalog number on that.
> Best,
> Dan
>
>
> Dan Osborn
> Product Marketing Manager
>
> Omega Optical, Inc.
> Delta Campus
> Omega Drive
> Brattleboro, VT 05301
> Phone: Direct line: [phone] or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
> Fax: [phone]
> Email: [hidden email]
> Web: www.omegafilters.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Celebrating 40 Years
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]]
> On
> Behalf Of Deron Walters
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:02 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: cleaning of filters
>
> The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton together and
> a
> glue that attaches the cotton to the stick. Either of these could dissolve
> in solvents and redeposit on optics. However, there is a glue-free,
> binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from
> Puritan:
>
> http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?id=336&item=869-WC
>
> I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and
> doublets,
> although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.
> One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton fibers.
> In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of pressurized air.
>
> No financial interest.
>
> Deron Walters
> R&D Scientist, Physics
> Asylum Research
>
>
>> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf
>>
>> Dan Osborn wrote:
>>
>> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it
>> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a
>> > Qtip or wipe to clean it. A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed
> by
>> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.
>>
>> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and
> were
>> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton
> wool
>> and an applicator stick. Not so?
>

[Keith Morris]

Hi all,

In my youth I was always advised never to clean dichroic and similar optical
coated filters unless you really have to, and that dust and even minor
fingerprints generally don't affect the fluorescence image quality - i.e.
damaging the delicate filter coatings can degrade image quality more than
the stuff you want to remove. Abrasive dust can be blown off, and I use a
large hand puffer mostly now that filtered compressed air isn't available in
the lab. Beware when using invertible 'aerosol can' dusters though as these
can squirt the propellant all the filter surface [tried that with a Newvicon
camera sensor years ago, didn't like it]. That said I have found sticky
immersion oil and media type deposits all over such filter optics and this
has required physical contact for removal. I tend to avoid water based
products unless the deposit is likely to water soluble and perhaps fixed by
solvents. I suppose for best results follow the makers instructions [Glen
Spectra in this case]:

From:  http://www.glenspectra.co.uk/glen/filters/clean.htm

"Cleaning of Optical Components
Note: You follow this advice at your own risk.

All optical elements are delicate and should be handled as carefully as
possible. The glass and antireflective (AR) coated surfaces will be damaged
by any contact, especially if abrasive particles have come into contact with
the surface. In most cases, it is best to leave minor debris on the surface.

Use of oil-free dry air or nitrogen under moderate pressure is the best tool
for removing excessive debris from an optical surface. In the case that the
contamination is not dislodged by the flow of gas, please use the following
protocol for cleaning the part:

1. Clean the part using an absorbent towel such as Kimwipes™, not lens
paper. Use enough toweling so that solvents do not dissolve oils from your
hands which can make their way through the toweling onto the coated surface.

2. Wet the towel with an anhydrous reagent grade ethanol.

3. The use of powder-free gloves will help to keep fingerprints off the part
while cleaning.

4. Drag the trailing edge of the ethanol soaked Kimwipe across the surface
of the component, moving in a single direction. A minimal amount of pressure
can be applied while wiping. However, too much pressure will damage the
component.

5. If the surface requires additional cleaning, always switch to a new
Kimwipe before repeating the process.

The purpose of the solvent is only to dissolve any adhesive contamination
that is holding the debris on the surface. The towel needs to absorb both
the excessive solvent and entrap the debris so that it can be removed from
the surface. Surface coatings on interference filters and dichroics are
typically less hard than the substrate. It is reasonable to expect that any
cleaning will degrade the surface at an atomic level. Consideration should
be given as to whether the contamination in question is more significant to
the application than the damage that may result from cleaning the surface.
In many cases, the AR coatings that are provided to give maximum light
transmission amplify the appearance of contamination on the surface."

So as usual, it's a clear case of yes.....and no.

There are things like Newport cleaning tissues for 'drop & drag' cleaning
coated optics [expensive but you don't need to use them much]
http://search.newport.com/?q=cleaning
that look a bit like glorified lens tissues.

I tend to use clean soft tissues/cloths [depending on the problem & filter
type/coatings, all with no 'rubbing'] with air blowing before and after.
 
Regards

Keith

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Keith J. Morris,
Molecular Cytogenetics and Microscopy Core,
Laboratory 00/069 and 00/070,
The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics,
Roosevelt Drive,
Oxford  OX3 7BN,
United Kingdom.

Telephone:  [phone]
Email:  [hidden email]
Web-pages: http://www.well.ox.ac.uk/molecular-cytogenetics-and-microscopy

-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Carl Boswell
Sent: 08 October 2009 02:06
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

Thanks, Gary.  My big concern is the worry over "soft" vs "hard" coatings,
and all the warnings associated with the former.  Apparently older filters
are more delicate than the newer ones.  I'm told that what I have are soft
coatings.  I guess I'll take the cautious approach and try a small area
first.

Thanks to all for your input.  If nothing else, it gives me courage to at
least try something.

C

Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
Molecular and Cellular Biology
University of Arizona
520-954-7053
FAX [phone]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Laevsky" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters


Hi All,

First, before I used First Contact, I spoke with a person that is very
prominent in the filter industry (trying to limit commercial conflict).

That person said the polymer does not damage their coatings.

I purchased the product.  While reading this thread, I took out an emission
filter and put a big old thumbprint on it.

The polymer pulled it and all other impurities very nicely.

You do have to be very careful near the edges of the mount.

0 commercial interest, but very happy.

Best,



Gary Laevsky, Ph.D.

Imaging Application Specialist



Andor Technology

discover new ways of seeing



[hidden email]

Cell         (774) 291 - 9992

Office       (860) 290 - 9211 x219

Fax          (860) 290 - 9566

Web:       www.andor.com



Please visit the following links for further information on the Andor
microscopy systems



http://www.andor.com/learning/movie_library/

please scroll down to the microscopy systems movie



http://www.andor.com/microscopy_systems/default.aspx


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:00 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

I still swear by lens tissues over cotton swabs, mainly because the
lens tissues won't leave fibers behind.  Most of the major optics
companies sell their 'house brand' of these and they're all usually
fairly good.  I've used Edmund Optics and Thorlabs brands with good
success.  Edmund even sells large 'sheet-sized' pieces in packs.

Craig


On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Dan Osborn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Martin/ Deron,
> We use several of the Puritan products on protected coatings and
> mirrors: the same product as Deron listed, and 806 and 826 WC item
> numbers.
> The 869 was called out as the preferred product. And it true about the
> fibers, there is tendency for some to be left behind after cleaning, but
> usually a circular swabbing motion from the inside out can reduce this.
> There is also a fine polyester cleaning wipe used by some, but I do not
> have
> the catalog number on that.
> Best,
> Dan
>
>
> Dan Osborn
> Product Marketing Manager
>
> Omega Optical, Inc.
> Delta Campus
> Omega Drive
> Brattleboro, VT 05301
> Phone: Direct line: [phone] or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
> Fax: [phone]
> Email: [hidden email]
> Web: www.omegafilters.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Celebrating 40 Years
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]]
> On
> Behalf Of Deron Walters
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:02 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: cleaning of filters
>
> The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton together and
> a
> glue that attaches the cotton to the stick. Either of these could dissolve
> in solvents and redeposit on optics. However, there is a glue-free,
> binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from
> Puritan:
>
> http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?id=336&item=869-WC
>
> I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and
> doublets,
> although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.
> One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton fibers.
> In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of pressurized air.
>
> No financial interest.
>
> Deron Walters
> R&D Scientist, Physics
> Asylum Research
>
>
>> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf
>>
>> Dan Osborn wrote:
>>
>> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it
>> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a
>> > Qtip or wipe to clean it. A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed
> by
>> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.
>>
>> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and
> were
>> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton
> wool
>> and an applicator stick. Not so?
>

[Prabhat, Prashant]

** Commercial Response **

Please note that a protocol (including a video presentation) for cleaning all of Semrock filters is available at the following link:

http://www.semrock.com/TechnicalInformation/TN_Cleaning/

Sincerely,

Prashant

Prashant Prabhat, Ph.D.

Applications Specialist

Semrock

A Unit of IDEX Corporation

3625 Buffalo Road, Suite 6

Rochester NY 14624

Email: [hidden email]

Phone: [phone]

Toll Free: 866-SEMROCK

Fax: [phone]

http://www.semrock.com

 

The Standard in Optical Filters for Biotech & Analytical Instrumentation

Hundreds of Thousands of Ion Beam Sputtered filters delivered - extensive inventory now!

The information contained in this message and any attachments may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or any agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication may be unlawful and therefore strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please reply to the message and delete it.

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Confocal Microscopy List [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Keith Morris

Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:41 AM

To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

Hi all,

In my youth I was always advised never to clean dichroic and similar optical coated filters unless you really have to, and that dust and even minor fingerprints generally don't affect the fluorescence image quality - i.e.

damaging the delicate filter coatings can degrade image quality more than the stuff you want to remove. Abrasive dust can be blown off, and I use a large hand puffer mostly now that filtered compressed air isn't available in the lab. Beware when using invertible 'aerosol can' dusters though as these can squirt the propellant all the filter surface [tried that with a Newvicon camera sensor years ago, didn't like it]. That said I have found sticky immersion oil and media type deposits all over such filter optics and this has required physical contact for removal. I tend to avoid water based products unless the deposit is likely to water soluble and perhaps fixed by solvents. I suppose for best results follow the makers instructions [Glen Spectra in this case]:

From: http://www.glenspectra.co.uk/glen/filters/clean.htm

"Cleaning of Optical Components

Note: You follow this advice at your own risk.

All optical elements are delicate and should be handled as carefully as possible. The glass and antireflective (AR) coated surfaces will be damaged by any contact, especially if abrasive particles have come into contact with the surface. In most cases, it is best to leave minor debris on the surface.

Use of oil-free dry air or nitrogen under moderate pressure is the best tool for removing excessive debris from an optical surface. In the case that the contamination is not dislodged by the flow of gas, please use the following protocol for cleaning the part:

1. Clean the part using an absorbent towel such as Kimwipes™, not lens paper. Use enough toweling so that solvents do not dissolve oils from your hands which can make their way through the toweling onto the coated surface.

2. Wet the towel with an anhydrous reagent grade ethanol.

3. The use of powder-free gloves will help to keep fingerprints off the part while cleaning.

4. Drag the trailing edge of the ethanol soaked Kimwipe across the surface of the component, moving in a single direction. A minimal amount of pressure can be applied while wiping. However, too much pressure will damage the component.

5. If the surface requires additional cleaning, always switch to a new Kimwipe before repeating the process.

The purpose of the solvent is only to dissolve any adhesive contamination that is holding the debris on the surface. The towel needs to absorb both the excessive solvent and entrap the debris so that it can be removed from the surface. Surface coatings on interference filters and dichroics are typically less hard than the substrate. It is reasonable to expect that any cleaning will degrade the surface at an atomic level. Consideration should be given as to whether the contamination in question is more significant to the application than the damage that may result from cleaning the surface.

In many cases, the AR coatings that are provided to give maximum light transmission amplify the appearance of contamination on the surface."

So as usual, it's a clear case of yes.....and no.

There are things like Newport cleaning tissues for 'drop & drag' cleaning coated optics [expensive but you don't need to use them much] http://search.newport.com/?q=cleaning

that look a bit like glorified lens tissues.

I tend to use clean soft tissues/cloths [depending on the problem & filter type/coatings, all with no 'rubbing'] with air blowing before and after.

Regards

Keith

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr Keith J. Morris,

Molecular Cytogenetics and Microscopy Core, Laboratory 00/069 and 00/070, The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford  OX3 7BN, United Kingdom.

Telephone:  [phone]

Email:  [hidden email]

Web-pages: http://www.well.ox.ac.uk/molecular-cytogenetics-and-microscopy

-----Original Message-----

From: Confocal Microscopy List [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Carl Boswell

Sent: 08 October 2009 02:06

To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

Thanks, Gary. My big concern is the worry over "soft" vs "hard" coatings, and all the warnings associated with the former. Apparently older filters are more delicate than the newer ones. I'm told that what I have are soft coatings. I guess I'll take the cautious approach and try a small area first.

Thanks to all for your input. If nothing else, it gives me courage to at least try something.

C

Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.

Molecular and Cellular Biology

University of Arizona

520-954-7053

FAX [phone]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Gary Laevsky" <[hidden email]>

To: <[hidden email]>

Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:34 PM

Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

 

Hi All,

First, before I used First Contact, I spoke with a person that is very

prominent in the filter industry (trying to limit commercial conflict).

That person said the polymer does not damage their coatings.

I purchased the product. While reading this thread, I took out an emission

filter and put a big old thumbprint on it.

The polymer pulled it and all other impurities very nicely.

You do have to be very careful near the edges of the mount.

0 commercial interest, but very happy.

Best,

 

 

Gary Laevsky, Ph.D.

Imaging Application Specialist

 

 

Andor Technology

discover new ways of seeing

 

 

[hidden email]

Cell (774) 291 - 9992

Office (860) 290 - 9211 x219

Fax (860) 290 - 9566

Web: <A href="outbind://56/www.andor.com">www.andor.com

 

 

Please visit the following links for further information on the Andor

microscopy systems

 

 

http://www.andor.com/learning/movie_library/

please scroll down to the microscopy systems movie

 

 

http://www.andor.com/microscopy_systems/default.aspx

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Confocal Microscopy List [[hidden email]] On

Behalf Of Craig Brideau

Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:00 PM

To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

I still swear by lens tissues over cotton swabs, mainly because the

lens tissues won't leave fibers behind. Most of the major optics

companies sell their 'house brand' of these and they're all usually

fairly good. I've used Edmund Optics and Thorlabs brands with good

success. Edmund even sells large 'sheet-sized' pieces in packs.

Craig

 

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Dan Osborn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Martin/ Deron,

> We use several of the Puritan products on protected coatings and

> mirrors: the same product as Deron listed, and 806 and 826 WC item

> numbers.

> The 869 was called out as the preferred product. And it true about the

> fibers, there is tendency for some to be left behind after cleaning, but

> usually a circular swabbing motion from the inside out can reduce this.

> There is also a fine polyester cleaning wipe used by some, but I do not

> have

> the catalog number on that.

> Best,

> Dan

>

>

> Dan Osborn

> Product Marketing Manager

>

> Omega Optical, Inc.

> Delta Campus

> Omega Drive

> Brattleboro, VT 05301

> Phone: Direct line: [phone] or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064

> Fax: [phone]

> Email: [hidden email]

> Web: <A href="outbind://56/www.omegafilters.com">www.omegafilters.com

>

>

>

>

>

> Celebrating 40 Years

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Confocal Microscopy List [[hidden email]]

> On

> Behalf Of Deron Walters

> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:02 PM

> To: [hidden email]

> Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

>

> The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton together and

> a

> glue that attaches the cotton to the stick. Either of these could dissolve

> in solvents and redeposit on optics. However, there is a glue-free,

> binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from

> Puritan:

>

> http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?id=336&item=869-WC

>

> I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and

> doublets,

> although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.

> One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton fibers.

> In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of pressurized air.

>

> No financial interest.

>

> Deron Walters

> R&D Scientist, Physics

> Asylum Research

>

>

>> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf

>>

>> Dan Osborn wrote:

>>

>> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents, and it

>> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and either a

>> > Qtip or wipe to clean it. A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed

> by

>> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.

>>

>> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and

> were

>> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton

> wool

>> and an applicator stick. Not so?

>

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

This e-mail is intended solely for the intended recipient or recipients. If this e-mail is addressed to you in error or you otherwise receive this e-mail in error, please advise the sender, do not read, print, forward or save this e-mail, and promptly delete and destroy all copies of this e-mail.

This email may contain information that is confidential, proprietary or secret and should be treated as confidential by all recipients. This e-mail may also be a confidential attorney-client communication, contain attorney work product, or otherwise be privileged and exempt from disclosure. If there is a confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement or protective order covering any information contained in this e-mail, such information shall be treated as confidential and subject to restriction on disclosure and use in accordance with such agreement or order, and this notice shall constitute identification, labeling or marking of such information as confidential, proprietary or secret in accordance with such agreement or order.

The term 'this e-mail' includes any and all attachments.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

[Peter Gabriel Pitrone]

Hello Carl,

If worse comes to worse, you can always replace it with a hard coated  
filter. Soft coated filters are at best 80-90% (more like 60-80%)  
transmission efficiencies, while hard coated filters have 95-99%  
efficiencies. Shorter exposure times are always welcomed.

I have no connections to Semrock, Chroma or Omega. I'm just blown  
away at the comparisons between the two technologies.

Pete

On Oct 8, 2009, at 3:06 AM, Carl Boswell wrote:

Thanks, Gary.  My big concern is the worry over "soft" vs "hard"  
coatings, and all the warnings associated with the former.  
Apparently older filters are more delicate than the newer ones.  I'm  
told that what I have are soft coatings.  I guess I'll take the  
cautious approach and try a small area first.

Thanks to all for your input.  If nothing else, it gives me courage  
to at least try something.

C

Carl A. Boswell, Ph.D.
Molecular and Cellular Biology
University of Arizona
520-954-7053
FAX [phone]
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Laevsky" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters


Hi All,

First, before I used First Contact, I spoke with a person that is  
very prominent in the filter industry (trying to limit commercial  
conflict).

That person said the polymer does not damage their coatings.

I purchased the product.  While reading this thread, I took out an  
emission filter and put a big old thumbprint on it.

The polymer pulled it and all other impurities very nicely.

You do have to be very careful near the edges of the mount.

0 commercial interest, but very happy.

Best,



Gary Laevsky, Ph.D.

Imaging Application Specialist



Andor Technology

discover new ways of seeing



[hidden email]

Cell         (774) 291 - 9992

Office       (860) 290 - 9211 x219

Fax          (860) 290 - 9566

Web:       www.andor.com



Please visit the following links for further information on the Andor  
microscopy systems



http://www.andor.com/learning/movie_library/

please scroll down to the microscopy systems movie



http://www.andor.com/microscopy_systems/default.aspx


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List  
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:00 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: cleaning of filters

I still swear by lens tissues over cotton swabs, mainly because the
lens tissues won't leave fibers behind.  Most of the major optics
companies sell their 'house brand' of these and they're all usually
fairly good.  I've used Edmund Optics and Thorlabs brands with good
success.  Edmund even sells large 'sheet-sized' pieces in packs.

Craig


On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Dan Osborn <[hidden email]>  
wrote:

> Martin/ Deron,
> We use several of the Puritan products on protected coatings and
> mirrors: the same product as Deron listed, and 806 and 826 WC item  
> numbers.
> The 869 was called out as the preferred product. And it true about the
> fibers, there is tendency for some to be left behind after  
> cleaning, but
> usually a circular swabbing motion from the inside out can reduce  
> this.
> There is also a fine polyester cleaning wipe used by some, but I do  
> not have
> the catalog number on that.
> Best,
> Dan
>
>
> Dan Osborn
> Product Marketing Manager
>
> Omega Optical, Inc.
> Delta Campus
> Omega Drive
> Brattleboro, VT 05301
> Phone: Direct line: [phone] or Toll Free: (866)-488-1064
> Fax: [phone]
> Email: [hidden email]
> Web: www.omegafilters.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Celebrating 40 Years
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List  
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Deron Walters
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:02 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: cleaning of filters
>
> The most common Q tips have both a binder to hold the cotton  
> together and a
> glue that attaches the cotton to the stick. Either of these could  
> dissolve
> in solvents and redeposit on optics. However, there is a glue-free,
> binder-free swab that you can special order, the 869-WC from
> Puritan:
>
> http://www.puritanmedproducts.com/search/search_4.asp?
> id=336&item=869-WC
>
> I've used these with success on antireflection-coated singlets and  
> doublets,
> although I haven't tested them on exposed filter coatings.
> One objection to these is that (lacking binder) they shed cotton  
> fibers.
> In my experience those can be blown away with a stream of  
> pressurized air.
>
> No financial interest.
>
> Deron Walters
> R&D Scientist, Physics
> Asylum Research
>
>
>> On Behalf Of Martin Wessendorf
>>
>> Dan Osborn wrote:
>>
>> > However, some grime does come off better in aqueous solvents,  
>> and it
>> > is OK to use a good breath of air on the filter surface and  
>> either a
>> > Qtip or wipe to clean it. A water dampened Qtip or cloth followed
> by
>> > a dry wipe should be fine as well.
>>
>> I had always heard that Q-tips have starch in them as a binder, and
> were
>> thus unsuitable for optics--that we should make our own with cotton
> wool
>> and an applicator stick. Not so?
>