Pat,
at least give it a try with the one sweep approach.
We have collected plenty of 360deg data sets on a Rigaku system which requires two omega sweeps at phi 0 and 180 deg. These data sets are for in-house phasing. We haven't seen big issues with running XDS over these images as one continuous sweep. Monitoring scalefactors might be a good indicator.
Good luck
Jan
On Mar 31, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Patrick Loll wrote:
> We've just collected a number of inverse beam data sets. It turns out the crystals showed little radiation damage, so we have a lot of data: 2 x 360 deg for each crystal, broken up into 30 deg wedges. The collection order went like this: 0-30 deg, 180-210, 30-60, 210-240, etc.
>
> Now, assuming no slippage, I could simply integrate the first set of data (non-inverse?) in one run: 0-360 deg. However, since the 12 individual wedges making up this 360 deg sweep were not collected immediately one after the other, I don't expect the scale factors for individual images to vary smoothly (there should be discontinuities at the boundaries between wedges). If I do integrate the data in one fell swoop, am I in danger of introducing errors? For example, I seem to recall that denzo had built-in restraints to ensure that scale factors for adjacent images didn't vary by too much. Is there a similar restraint that in XDS that I might run afoul of?
>
> The alternative is to integrate each each wedge separately, but with 24 wedges per xtal, this is starting to look a little tedious.
>
> Cheers,
> Pat
--
Jan Abendroth
Emerald BioStructures
Seattle / Bainbridge Island WA, USA
home: Jan.Abendroth_at_gmail.com
work: JAbendroth_at_embios.com
http://www.emeraldbiostructures.com
|