Hi,
225 * 1.09 = 245 A. This is more than twice of what you specified in
Class2D (120A). Please use something closer.
At 4.0875 Å/pixels, you don't have to worry about signal
delocalisation due
to CTF. You can work in a tighter box.
Takanori Nakane
> Dear Takanori,
>
> The particles have been properly normalised. The diameter I've specified in
> the Class2D job is 120Å. Pixel size of the not-downscaled
micrographs was
> 1.09Å and the background diameter I used in the Extract job I ran
before t
> he 2D class was 225 pixels (with a particle box size of 300). I've also
down
> scaled particles to 80 pixels, getting a new pixel size of 4.0875
Å/pixels.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> All the best,
>
> Leonardo
>
> ########################################################################
>
> To unsubscribe from the CCPEM list, click the following link:
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCPEM&A=1
>
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the CCPEM list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCPEM&A=1
|