Re: photons vs. photoelectrons?

Posted by Mark Cannell on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Precisely-driving-several-devices-from-IgorPro-through-National-Instruments-board-possible-tp4907273p4939192.html

Well I could not let this dumbing down analogy go by. My point is that
if you are a scientist doing research (even publishing a paper) on the
air  intake of your car you should know how the air mass sensor works
and if its accurate!!!

But this still misses the point that knowing what the EM gain is (and
its very easy to measure) doesn't tell you how many photons arrived at
the camera face. You need to know the A/D conversion factor AND some
idea of camera flatness.


Karl Garsha wrote:

> Hello All,
> <snipped>
>
> In my experience the evolve calibration technology is defensible from
> an analytical standpoint; it is also valuable in a practical context.
> I have no commercial interest in making this statement. I concur that
> it’s advisable to understand what such tools do, and I don’t think
> there is any reason to believe that technology obfuscates the theory
> behind it. Most of us probably don’t contemplate how our mass air flow
> sensors affect spark timing in our automobiles on our way to work, yet
> the information is available, and it can be empowering under the right
> circumstances.

Cheers Mark