Re: Phase Contrast Microscopy ... defense of brightfield microscopy

Posted by Zdenek Svindrych-2 on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Phase-Contrast-Microscopy-tp7590859p7590871.html

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

According to this paper:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280600830_High_resolution_optical_microscope

provocatively titled " Resolution of 90 nm (lambda/5) in an optical
transmission microscope with an annular condenser " (spoiler alert:
misleading title), a brightfield microscope with annular condenser has
astonishing resolution.
Well, in this case the most likely cause for these astonishing results is
just misunderstanding of the calibration patterns, according to the
official Richardson test slide pattern description (
https://www.grayfieldoptical.com/files/innerpattern.pdf ) the "100 nm"
pattern has a period of 200 nm, the same factor of two applies to the "99
nm" horizontal and vertical bars.
Arguably, a title stating "lambda/2.5 resolution" would not have the same
distressing effect onto a regular microscopist...
So, while transmitted light images look impressive with a well tuned
instrument, it is well known that the resolution can match the resolution
of fluorescence imaging only if the condenser NA is greater than or equal
to the objective lens NA. That's perfectly doable, but not widely practiced
these days...
Best, zdenek

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 8:48 PM Benjamin Smith <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> It is true that bright field is still the resolution champion (especially
> with a DAPI filter cube in the light path).  Although, why settle for poor
> visibility when you can use Rheinberg illumination and get the best of both
> worlds with both a high resolution brightfield image and a high contrast
> edge image (aka dark field).
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 3:15 PM George McNamara <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > *****
> > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your
> posting.
> > *****
> >
> > Ben wrote: "As others have said, phase contrast is fixing a fundamental
> > issue with brightfield imaging of poorly diffractive objects (such as
> > adherent cells)."
> >
> > In defense of brightfield microscopy:
> >
> > A correctly working brightfield microscope with a video camera or
> > digital camera, or the transmitted light path of a confocal microscope,
> > is perfectly capable of imaging very thin objects (such as very flat
> > adherent cells or very thin unlabeled tissue sections). The camera on a
> > smartphone likely works too. Helps to use MetaMorph, ImageJ, Adobe
> > Photoshop (has had math capability for a long time), etc, to be able to
> > subtract background, and add back offset. They key is contrast control.
> > Optional: unsharp masking. Some of the (GPU) deconvolution software
> > vendors even offer deconvolution of brightfield image data. Bonus: no
> halo.
> >
> > Reference:
> >
> > Shinya Inoue and Ken Spring 1997 Video Microscopy
> >
> > https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9780306455315
> >
> > I don't see the 1997 book online, the 1st edition, 1986 is
> >
> > https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-1-4757-6925-8
> >
> > See also Shinya's publications ... online or Collected Works,
> > https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/6315
> >
> > Bob and Nina Allen's papers.
> >
> > Also nanovid papers (single molecule imaging before STORM, PALM, etc).
> >
> > To quote (and add to) Yogi Berra: "You can see a lot by just looking"
> > ... especially if you switch the light path from your (hopefully not
> > covid-19 contaminated) eyepiece to your camera port ... and then use
> > your instrumentation well.
> >
> > For MetaMorph, see http://mdc.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/18800
> > disclosure: I wrote most of the article (took over from Ted Inoue, whose
> > self-portrait may - or not - be inside the monitor figure ...
> > "Acquisition rules for Quantitative Fluorescence" section has stood up
> > pretty well since circa 1993).
> >
> >
> > On 5/1/2020 12:35 PM, Benjamin Smith wrote:
> > > *****
> > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your
> > posting.
> > > *****
> > >
> > > I've found the best way to understand phase contrast is on a phase
> > contrast
> > > microscope.  On a phase contrast microscope, take out one of the
> oculars
> > so
> > > you can see the focal planes.  In the path without the ocular, you
> should
> > > see a ring of light perfectly aligned to an annular neutral density
> > filter
> > > (switch between brightfield and phase contrast to see how the
> > illumination
> > > perfectly aligns with the ND filter).  If they are not aligned, then
> the
> > > annulus is not setup properly and you are not getting phase contrast
> > (check
> > > your manual to fix this).
> > >
> > > Next. make a slide with a Kim-Wipe or lens paper on it, or grab an
> > > unstained test slide (although tissue paper makes this effect very
> > clear) .
> > > As you move the sample into the light path, you will see all the
> > diffracted
> > > light miss the annular ring of light and fill the rest of the focal
> > plane.
> > > Move the sample out of the light path, and you will see this diffracted
> > > light disappear.
> > >
> > > Next, get a poor phase object like adherent cells or anything else that
> > is
> > > hard to see with bright field, and put it under the phase contrast
> > > microscope.  Once you are focused on the sample, look at the focal
> plane
> > > (side without the occular) and slide the annulus out of the way just a
> > bit
> > > (it should look like the sun just peaking around the moon after a solar
> > > eclipse).  Now look at your sample, and it should look like just
> > > brightfield (i.e. poorly contrasting).  Then put the annulus back into
> > > place, while looking at the sample, and you see a sudden jump in
> > contrast.
> > > This is one of the striking features of phase contrast where it really
> is
> > > all or none, and if the annulus is at all out of alignment you just get
> > > brightfield.
> > >
> > > As others have said, phase contrast is fixing a fundamental issue with
> > > brightfield imaging of poorly diffractive objects (such as adherent
> > > cells).  The issue is that bright field microscopy works by having the
> > > diffracted light undergo a phase shift relative to the undiffracted
> light
> > > (as it follows a different path length in the microscope).  Then, these
> > > rays are allowed to interfere with each other at the image plane,
> > producing
> > > an image.  You can see this effect in bright field in a similar manner
> to
> > > the phase contrast trick described above, but instead close the
> aperture
> > > stop and you will again be able to see the diffracted light separated
> > from
> > > the non-diffracted light in the focal plane.  The problem with poorly
> > > diffracting objects is two fold, 1) very little light gets diffracted
> > > leaving not much light for interference, and 2) the phase shift of the
> > > diffracted light is very small.  The end result being that samples like
> > > adherent cells only cause a very small decreases in intensity, and
> since
> > we
> > > perceive light on a logarithmic scale, this is very hard for us to see.
> > >
> > > Therefore, phase contrast fixes both of these issues.  One way (which
> you
> > > can see by looking at the focal planes) is that it uses a cone of light
> > as
> > > the illumination pattern (due to the annulus at the front focal plane),
> > and
> > > this cone perfectly lines up with an annular neutral density filter
> (the
> > > phase plate) at the back focal plane.  This ring illumination is a
> clever
> > > way to spatially separate the diffracted light from the undiffracted
> > light
> > > at the focal plane, allowing us to attenuate the undiffracted light
> > without
> > > impacting the diffracted light, balancing the amount of diffracted and
> > > undiffracted light.  Why use a ring to do this instead of say an
> aperture
> > > stop?  The ring illumination simply preserves more of the illumination
> NA
> > > and therefore preserves more of your resolution.
> > >
> > > However, the phase plate doesn't stop there, as its name suggests, it
> > also
> > > enhances the phase difference between the diffracted and undiffracted
> > light
> > > (ideally such that the highest diffractive orders are phase shifted to
> > > 180°) such that the sharpest edges get perfect destructive
> interference.
> > >
> > > Now at this point, you may be asking yourself, how do they know how
> much
> > to
> > > attenuate the undiffracted light (i.e. how dark to make the annular ND
> > > filter) and how much of a phase shift to impose, as some samples may be
> > > more diffractive than others.  And this is why there are actually many
> > > different phase contrast objectives with different phase plates.  In
> life
> > > sciences, most of the time we're only using phase contrast to check
> cell
> > > culture, so we wind up only ever dealing with just one phase plate
> > > optimized for that task.
> > >
> > > Hope this helps, and I really do recommend checking it out on your own
> > > microscope.  I've found with students, looking at the correlation
> between
> > > the focal plane and image plane with and without sample can really
> > inspire
> > > that "aha" moment.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >     Ben Smith
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 12:35 AM Kai Schleicher <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> *****
> > >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> > >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> > >> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your
> > posting.
> > >> *****
> > >>
> > >> Hi David,
> > >>
> > >> I think that you understanding of phase contrast is correct and that
> you
> > >> have explained it yourself properly and in a concise way.
> > >> Diffraction and refraction are different indeed. It is in fact the
> > >> diffraction of light that plays an important role in phase contrast
> > >> microscopy.
> > >>
> > >> Have a look at the Leica tutorial:
> > >>
> >
> https://www.leica-microsystems.com/science-lab/the-principles-of-phase-contrast
> > >> and figure 4 in the link you shared:
> > >>
> > >> 1. The illumination light passes through the annual ring in the
> > condenser,
> > >> resulting in a hollow cone of illumination.
> > >> 2.1 A higher refractive index in the sample causes retardation, on
> > average
> > >> generating a phase shift of -1/4 λ in the light that interacted with
> the
> > >> specimen compared to freely passing light.
> > >> 2.2 Light interacting with the specimen (cell, granule, nucleus...) is
> > >> diffracted to the outside of the illuminating light cone.The smaller
> the
> > >> object, the larger the angle of diffraction [1].
> > >> 2.3 Light that does not interact with the specimen is not diffracted
> and
> > >> hence stays on the inside of the illumination cone.
> > >> 3. In the phase plate, only the light on the inside of the light-cone
> is
> > >> then advanced +1/4  λ .
> > >> 4. This result in a phase difference between illuminating light and
> > sample
> > >> light of 1/2 λ, generating destructive interference and hence maximum
> > >> contrast in the imaging plane wherever there was a structure in the
> > sample
> > >>
> > >> Here is also a very nice iBology talk on the subject:
> > >> https://www.ibiology.org/talks/phase-contrast-microscopy
> > >> Hope this helps!
> > >>
> > >> [1] Abbe Diffraction:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8Tqoo0S6gc
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Benjamin E. Smith, Ph. D.
> Imaging Specialist, Vision Science
> University of California, Berkeley
> 195 Life Sciences Addition
> Berkeley, CA  94720-3200
> Tel  (510) 642-9712
> Fax (510) 643-6791
> e-mail: [hidden email]
>
> https://vision.berkeley.edu/faculty/core-grants-nei/core-grant-microscopic-imaging/
>


--
--
Zdenek Svindrych, Ph.D.
Research Scientist - Microscopy Imaging Specialist
Department of Biochemistry and Cell Biology
Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth