Talk:Confocal microscopy

message: Patent Date is 1961.  I changes the date from 1957 to 1961 for the reasons stated in Talk: Marvin Minsky.
Note as well the following excerpt from August 1994 Scientific American "Confocal Microscopy" by Dr. Jeffrey Lichtman:
:Confocal Microscopy; August 1994; Scientific American Magazine; by Lichtman; 6 Page(s)
:Marvin Minsky is famous as the father of artificial intelligence, but he was also the author of another signal achievement. In the 1950s, as a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard University, he built a revolutionary light microscope that enabled him to view successively deeper layers in a specimen with astonishing clarity, without first having to undertake the laborious task of cutting the specimen into thin sections. Minsky's invention did not earn wide acclaim at the time. In fact, when he patented his "double-focussing stage-scanning microscope" in 1961, few people understood what it could do. During the 17-year life of the patent, he received no royalties, and no instruments of similar design were manufactured. Unappreciated for his foray into optics, Minsky moved on to other challenges, leaving his prototype to rust in a corner of his basement.
:Thirty years later his approach--otherwise known as confocal microscopy--has caught on with a vengeance. Indeed, the technology is proving to be one of the most exciting advances in optical microscopy in this century. The extent to which current interest was sparked by rediscovery of Minsky's early work or by independent reinvention of his concept by others is not completely clear. Nevertheless, the happy result is that scores of different kinds of confocal microscopes are now available--in forms that range from rudimentary to baroque. Whether researchers need to image the ultrastructure of potato chips or computer chips, the diseased eye or the developing brain, confocal microscopy is allowing them to see their subjects quite literally in a new light.
It seems this article should be read and incorporated into this wiki.  --SafeLibraries 03:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you are quite correct. Conventional Light microscopy can (and originally did exclusively) use direct light (brightfield illumination), and fluorescence techniques came much later. There are a variety of other methods of illumination too, such as dark-field illumination (which reverses the contrast so that the background is dark and  the specimen is bright, phase contrast and various types of interference contrast including Differential interference contrast microscopy and phase contrast. Don't be afraid to edit the text.  Plantsurfer (talk) 13:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Early discussion

message: This just needs to be translated to English. You can do it easily using SVG Translate. --pfctdayelise (talk) 12:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Diagram

message: What is "point illumination" and a "spatial pinhole"? Blafreniere (talk) 06:03, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  I feel like an explanation is needed 

message: I suggest merging Confocal laser scanning microscopy with Confocal microscopy. Confocal laser scanning microscopy should be a subsection of Confocal microscopy. Both articles contain the same diagram and the introductory information is redundant. Mllyjn (talk) 03:43, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Butterfly reflections (talk) 21:49, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

text: I would also agree. While I have not used other forms of confocal microscopy I have used confocal laser scanning and it belongs as a subsection of confocal microscopy. Just need someone with the time to do it. -Tgru001 (talk) 02:07, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

text: I don't quite agree. Confocal laser scanning microscopy is only one technique, and it's already mentioned in the article. It would disrupt the flow of the article to include a full section on confocal laser scanning microscopy without also providing more detailed explanations of the other techniques. Until we have those, the article would be incomplete. --Iamozy (talk) 17:44, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

text: As it's written now, much of the Confocal laser scanning microscopy article is redundant with Confocal microscopy. The "Image Formation" section could be merged into "Basic Concept." (and perhaps renamed "Physical Principals.") The "Uses" section really applies to all confocal microscopy and "Resolution Enhancement" could be merged with "Variants and enhancements."  Mllyjn (talk) 21:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

text: I would add that a diagram of a laser scanning microscope would be really welcome for visitors to see the differences with the original design, if anybody has that ... (if I remember, it should be quite a bit simpler than the original design) PierreBarbierDeReuille (talk) 12:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what you mean by 'original design'. would that image help? Dietzel65 (talk) 21:59, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging confocal laser scanning microscopy into confocal microscopy  

message: "The point spread function of the pinhole is an ellipsoid,"
someone needs to say why a point (actually a tiny circle) allows an asymmetric (non-circular) pattern of light through 
67.162.165.126 (talk) 21:20, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Ellipsoid, not ellipse. The long axis of this ellipsoid is along the microscope axis, not radially. There's no asymmetry as you describe. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:55, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  ellipsoid? 

message: While cleaning up after 's spamming of leica-microsystems.com, I came across this article. I removed the external links section because the links appeared to fail WP:EL, especially WP:ELNO#1. I've copied them below for discussion. --Ronz (talk) 19:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: The last paragraph in this section currently states 
> Developments at the University of Stockholm around the same time led to a commercial clsm distributed by the Swedish company Sarastro
I would guess that clsm stands for Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope, but I'm not sure. The acronym (if used) needs to be clearly defined earlier and then capitalized on every use. Ideally, the article can be written without using the acrpnym at all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.212.192.131 (talk) 09:56, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starting 1985: Laser point scanners with beam scanning 

message: This article is all over the place. Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy may be most often used as a biological fluorescence technique, but that's not what CLSM is. This article describes CLSM as a fluorescence technique, but somehow the opening diagram is of red light illuminating a sample that then gives off blue light. Make up your minds!
This is a badly written article. I've been thoroughly put in my place in the past for attempting to edit the crap out of science articles on Wikipedia (yeah, I know, it's my fault for not being nice in the face of 8-year-old shit piles, or, probably it's my fault for being female and appearing to have some level of expertise). I'd just like to add a "this article sucks big time and shouldn't be read, indexed, or returned by search engines" tag rather than gather the article's owner trolls to attack for not agreeing with it. Is there such a tag?
--2602:306:CD1E:44B0:689D:1280:6D04:BC35 (talk) 19:38, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confocal Microscopy versus Fluorescence Microscopy 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Depth Coded Phalloidin Stained Actin Filaments Cancer Cell.png will be appearing as picture of the day on December 24, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-12-24. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Depth Coded Phalloidin Stained Actin Filaments Cancer Cell.png]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: Does the animation of the operating principle show the correct scheme? Shouldn't there be a lens to focus light on to the detector?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.222.145.169 (talk) 17:18, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animation