[FMO] Re: Stardust@home experiences
- From: "Matson, Robert" <ROBERT.D.MATSON@xxxxxxxx>
- To: fmo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 15:09:51 -0700
Hi Tavi,
> There are also those movies wherein various quadrants are sharply
> focused at various levels, yet the whole slide is ultimately and
> thoroughly reviewable. Have you noticed these? Are these actually
> varying levels of particle entrenchment (sp) - are the overall
> project conditions such that this would happen? I dont recall that
> any of these particular slides showed any signs of real tracks.
Yes, I've noticed that occasionally you'll have different parts of
the field of view "in focus" at different focus settings. Usually
when this happens it progresses from one side of the frame to the
other, which is probably simply due to the plane of the tile not
being perfectly perpendicular to the microscope optical axis.
But other times there is definitely a Z-component, where interior
bubbles, cracks, flaws, what-have-you, come into focus at different
focus positions. I've often wondered if the depth of focus is
sufficient that on occasion we actually focus all the way down to
the back side of the tile?
> I am confused about one of your statements. What do you mean they
> tell us when we have a test movie? Do you mean simply by the
> movies' familiarity or is there some text of note somewhere that
> I'm missing?
The latter. It may be browser-dependent as to whether you see it,
but the URL of the image frames (as you slide the focus bar) gives
away the movie type. It tells you both the current movie type
and the prior one.
> I'm tiring of the calibration movies. Beyond my initial poor start
> with the slow server (mis-labeling four!), I've had no errors.
Occasionally the program will *itself* hiccup and fail to give you
credit for correctly answering a calibration movie. It's only
happened to me twice, so I haven't been able to diagnose the
error, but the end result is that my score + the number of calibration
movies I've gotten wrong (3) is two less than my total number of
calibration movies.
> I think those should be virtually eliminated beyond a certain
> error-free viewing point. Have you noticed any change in ratio
> with your 700 views?
It was more frequent early-on -- perhaps 1 out of 3? Now it's
more like 1 out of 4 or 1 out of 5. Still, a lot.
Aside from the calibration movies, I'm convinced I've had repeat REAL
movies on many occasions. Not surprising, given that every movie
created so far has already been viewed by at least 10 different
people.
--Rob
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
** The FMO Mailinglist ** For information on the list, subscribe/unsubscribe
info etc. go to http://home.wanadoo.nl/marco.langbroek/fmo.html ** Post
messages to: fmo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ** list admin: Marco Langbroek,
fmo-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ** Message archive:
//www.freelists.org/archives/fmo/ **
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
