My 2 cents worth on the stereo-dependent:
1) They have carpal tunnel syndrome that makes it painful to keep the molecule in motion while rebuilding it (NOTE: enough constant mouse-wiggling and you will get carpal tunnel problems if you don't have them yet!)
2) They work on big, low-resolution structures where you need to see a bigger-picture view. I've had people tell me that can fit 3-3.5A maps just fine without stereo, but having viewed their work, I beg to differ.
Phoebe
---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 22:30:54 +0000
>From: CCP4 bulletin board <[log in to unmask]> (on behalf of Jan Löwe <[log in to unmask]>)
>Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] while on the subject of stereo
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Ah! The question of to stereo or not to stereo! There has to be a
>scientific reason why this question is more popular than asking for what
>Linux distro is more fashionable this spring or why an Rmerge of 0.90 in
>the outermost shell is good for you and your structure.
>
>I am offering my two (conflicting) theories (and apologies that both
>seem to imply some problem):
>
>A) people who do use stereo have a problem with their brain because they
>cannot produce three dimensional vision from depth cues alone.
>
>B) people who do not use stereo have a problem with their brain because
>they cannot see properly in three dimensions and rely on depth cues alone.
>
>I personally prefer people with A) when I am their passenger in a car
>since they do not need to rotate by 90° to see how far the braking
>lights of the car in front are away :-)
>
>jan
>
>
>
>On 01/03/2011 21:35, Jim Pflugrath wrote:
>> I will offer my view.
>>
>> I hate stereo glasses and hate stereo in general.
>>
>> One should be able to see 3D from the depth-cueing and by keeping the view
>> in motion. For fitting, I like to flip the view by 90 degrees. I know I am
>> going to move in displayX and displayY, but never in displayZ. I then
>> rotate the view around the vertical axis so thatn the old displayZ becomes
>> displayX.
>>
>> Furthermore, I don't waste too much time fitting. I know the software can
>> fit the map better than me, so I let it do its job. I only need to get the
>> coordinates within the radius of convergence of the refinement program. I
>> also know that 9 times out of 10, the displayed electron density is probably
>> suspect, so I believe in stereochemistry more than I believe in the map.
>>
>> The main trick is to realize that as a human being, you really are not that
>> good at fitting the map or that it is unnecessary to waste your time since
>> the software is really so much better than you. Refinement is quick enough
>> that you can try various hypotheses as in: "If I move this here, then
>> refinement will do the trick" and "Well, that didn't work, so I will move
>> that over there and see if refinement will do the trick."
>>
>> As for stereo figures, you should be able to convey what you want to say
>> from a good figure with depth-cueing, shadows, etc. Don't ever use stereo
>> glasses in a public seminar. Maybe my opinion will change with better
>> stereo technology.
>>
>> OK, I know quite a lot of people will disagree with me. :)
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David
>> Roberts
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 10:29 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [ccp4bb] while on the subject of stereo
>>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> I'd like to ask a question about the pedagogy of stereo. That is, using
>> stereo with students in the classroom.
>>
>> Do you all find that, after setting up these elaborate stereo devices,
>> students really use the stereo or do they tend not to?
>>
>> I am a huge fan of stereo - and frankly here we have quite a few options for
>> doing stereo - from the active Nvidia systems that people have recently been
>> discussing to passive zalmans. ...
>>
>> As I mentioned, I like stereo a lot, but really projecting on a nice bright
>> lcd monitor also has it's advantages, and with the ease of moving things
>> using the mouse (or whatever device you use), the overall need for stereo
>> seems to be decreasing. I don't know - I just wonder what peoples views are
>> out there for the actual "need" for stereo. It's incredibly cool - and I
>> think is a very powerful way to show things - but I'm wondering if we focus
>> too much on it because it's cool and not because it's pedagogically
>> necessary.
>>
>> Just wondering, no worries. Thanks
>>
>> Dave
|
