Hello,
It looks like an screen resolution problem.
Try dilating the output mask and see if you really miss nuclei.
best regards,
Dimiter Prodanov
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:00 AM, IMAGEJ automatic digest system <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2015 14:17:41 -0700
> From: jswalker <
[hidden email]>
> Subject: Counting nuclear foci - getting strange results
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm following the protocol outlined here:
>
http://microscopy.duke.edu/HOWTO/countfoci.html>
> And the commands I'm using are enclosed below.
>
> My problem is that I'm working on massive images (25k x 17k pixels) and
> sometimes I get accurate values but sometimes I get what I see below. Going
> by results table (and by RawIntDen/255 to get the actual number of nuclear
> foci), the cluster highlighted has around 60,000 nuclei! ...which is not
> the
> case as you can see by a quick visual examination.
>
> <
http://imagej.1557.x6.nabble.com/file/n5013961/nuclear_foci.jpg>
>
> Any idea why this is or what I can do about it?
>
> I've tried re-binarizing the image in the step immediately before
> measuring.
> That didn't work. I get this problem whether I do the commands manually or
> whether I do it via the macro. Any other ideas?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
>
http://imagej.1557.x6.nabble.com/Counting-nuclear-foci-getting-strange-results-tp5013961.html> Sent from the ImageJ mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> --
> ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of IMAGEJ Digest - 8 Aug 2015 to 9 Aug 2015 (#2015-253)
> ***********************************************************
>
--
ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html