IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Phosphorimager vs. Film

Tim Dunn t.dunn at mailbox.uq.oz.au
Mon Dec 4 06:15:44 EST 1995


> 
> > In article <ege-3011951122280001 at cancer-ctr-mac-24.mit.edu>, ege at mit.edu
> > (ege) wrote:
> > 
> > > Does anyone have a reliable figure for how sensitive a phosphorimager
> > > screen is vs standard X ray film?  I seem to remember that manufacturers
> > > claim 20X greater sensitivity then film but in my experience this figure
> > > seems inflated.
> > 
> > it depends on the phosphorimager.  i don't know the figures for the Fujix
> > BAS1000 since i only recently started using it, but the Molecular Dynamics
> > one claimed about 10:1.  we did our own guesstimates that said it was more
> > like 5-6 times faster.  the best thing about a phosphorimager besides the
> > time savings though is the ease of quantitation compared with either
> > scanning a film or using a densitometer.
> > 
> > eric
> > 
> > -- 

I was wondering if anyone has experience with the Bio-Rad PI machine. My
experience with the Bio-Rad machine/PI screens, the sensitivity is about
the same as X-ray film (-70oC + intensifying screens). ie it take JUST AS
LONG to get a reasonable quantifyable image. Bio-Rad say it is 5-6x
faster!

Tim Dunn
Centre for Molecular and Cellular Biology
University of Queensland
Australia 4075
e-mail t.dunn at mailbox.uq.oz.au
phone  (07) 365 4565
fax    (07) 365 4388 



More information about the Methods mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net