Which deconvolution method to use in the Pro?
I have mostly been using the "QMLE-Time" function because it is simple and because it was suggested by the tutorial. I had expected the "Classic MLE" to work better because there are more parameters to tweak. However, in the limited testing I have done, "QMLE-Time" is always working better than "Classic MLE". Maybe I don't know how to tweak the parameters properly? Or perhaps "QMLE-Time" runs so well in its automated modes that it takes a very experienced user to make the "Classic MLE" run better?
The QMLE-time are roughly 5 times more efficient than the CMLE <br>
iterations while they take also slightly less time per iteration. So 10 QMLE iterations are equivalent to 50 iterations in CMLE. <br>
CMLE is superior in handling low Signal to Noise (SNR) data, like low light level confocal images <br>
In principle CMLE with a SNR setting > 60 converges to the same result as QMLE gives you, but after many more iterations. In short for good quality widefield images QMLE is the best choice.
See Restoration Methods.
<br>
Keywords: CMLE QMLE<br>
Categories: Faq Deconvolution, Huygens Faq, Imported Faqs<br>
Platforms: Irix Linux<br>
Related products: Hu Pro<br>
