Posted by
Guy Cox-2 on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Question-about-deconvolution-tp7579203p7579207.html
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy*****
There's no simple answer. Some people have aimed to use deconvolution to go beyond the optical resolution limit. The best example I know is:
Carrington, W.A., Lynch, R.M., Moore, E.D.W., Isenberg, G., Fogarty, K.E. and Fay, F.S., 1995. Superresolution Three-Dimensional Images of Fluorescence in Cells with Minimal Light Exposure. Science 268, 1483-1487
Commercial deconvolution systems are not usually aiming at that. The aim is to separate in focus and out of focus light and thereby achieve optical sectioning in wide field. Since the light budget is always better in wide field than in confocal this has certain advantages, but it has the disadvantage that the wide field OTF has a 'missing cone' of directions in which no information is present. This limits what can be achieved.
The confocal OTF has no missing cone which makes it quite a good target for deconvolution. The confocal PSF Is far from optimal, being very streaked out in the Z direction, and deconvolution can do a lot to improve it. Several people (including me) have advocated 1D deconvolution in just the Z direction, which can greatly improve image quality. My papers on this are a bit hard to find but there is an example in my chapter in Jim Pawley's book. However deconvolution of confocal images hasn't really caught on as much as it should have.
Guy
-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Christophe Leterrier
Sent: Wednesday, 24 October 2012 3:28 AM
To:
[hidden email]
Subject: Question about deconvolution
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy*****
Hi folks,
I have a long-standing question regarding deconvolution (as processing widefield or confocal images to reassign light from where it originated using a PSF).
Is there a theoretical limit to the resolution one could obtain using deconvolution? Is is theoretically possible to "break" the diffraction limit with deconvolution? That is, to get under the classical 200x200x600nm spot? I think it is not the case, but then why would you deconvolve widefield or confocal images? What do you gain by doing so on a system that is reasonably close to its theoretical capabilities in terms of optical performances?
Thanks for your help,
Christophe
--
Christophe Leterrier
Researcher
Axonal Domains Architecture Team
CRN2M CNRS UMR 7286
Aix Marseille University, France