Phosphoimagers vs Instantimager

[Nigel Eastmond]

Graham Atherton (grggta at uk.ac.manchester.christie-hospital.paterson) wrote:
: I have looked at both of these devices recently. The instantimager seemed
: to be far more sensitive (thus quicker), but the machine is tied up while
: you are exposing. I tested a CAT assay TLC plate and got a good result in
: around 10 min. Similar plates take 4-8hrs exposure to the phoshoimager
: plates. For my purposes (14C) the phosphoimager is no quicker than
: autoradiography, and the screens are very expensive (approx #1000 sterling).
: I believe the phosphoimager is good for what would be long exposures by
: autoradiography with 32P.
:   The instantimager scores strongly for me in that the output is given
: in CPM measured direct from the TLC plate - very fast and accurate.
:   Neither machine gives publishable figure quality output - autoradiography
: is still king here!
:   Given a choice I would get the Instantimager (far cheaper too at #35000
: compared with at least #80000 for the phosphoimager - get two 
: Instantimagers!
: Graham Atherton


Lets face it.  It is not an autorad.  The thing has been nowhere near
film so how can you expect it to look like film?  How can you expect
an motorbike to be as comfy as a car?  The only similarity between the
two is that they go on a road.  The only similarity between phosphor
and autorad imaging is that they both pick up light.  We have a phopshor
imager and an instant imager.  For P32 the instant imager has the edge
for detectability but the machine is tied up.  This is bad.  Th phosphor
system is much more flexible and will cope with the gradual move to
chemiluminescence.

As for output, journals will just have to accept that a phosphor-image
is just that - a phosphor image.  NO FILM!

Try doing the output in pseudocolour.  This allows the printer to use 4
pigments to colour the image instead of dot-patterns of one pigment.
Even using a poxy inkjet costing 400 dollars, you can get journal
quality output in colour.  Dye sub just isn't required.

o------------------------------oOo------------------------------o
| Nigel C. Eastmond             |   Email nce at rri.sari.ac.uk    |
| Rowett Research Institute     |   Tel   +44 244 712751        |
| Aberdeen                      |   Fax   +44 244 715349        |
| Scotland                      |                               |
o------------------------------oOo------------------------------o
Opinions are my own and not those of my Organization