Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:08:01.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TEM Performance Evaluations with Slow-Scan CCD Cameras

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

M. Pan
M. Pan*
Affiliation:
Gatan R&D, 5933 Coronado Lane, Pleasanton, CA, 94588
Get access

Extract

Digital imaging has made electron microscopy more quantitative, more direct, and more automated. It has vastly changed the way in which microscopy is done today. The conventional photographic emulsion technique for image recording is being replaced by CCD-based digital imaging techniques in virtually all aspects of electron microscopy applications, resulting in increased work efficiency and data accuracy. Many of the microscope's evaluation procedures are traditionally time-consuming and complicated, such as measurements of TEM resolution and spherical aberration coefficient of the objective lens, etc. However, they can be greatly simplified with the use of slow-scan CCD cameras bee and appropriate software.

With many superior properties over other image recording media, slow-scan CCD cameras offer possibilities for many new TEM applications, such as TEM autotuning and automated microscopy. On-line image display and analysis have proved to be the key elements in CCD-based digital imaging.

Type
Advances in Remote Microscopy, Instrument Automation and Data Storage
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 4 , Issue S2: Proceedings: Microscopy & Microanalysis '98, Microscopy Society of America 56th Annual Meeting, Microbeam Analysis Society 32nd Annual Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia July 12-16, 1998 , July 1998 , pp. 28 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Krivanek, O.L. et al., Proc. 51st Ann MSA Meeting (1993) 546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Pan, M., Proc. 55th Ann MSA Meeting (1997) 1107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Krivanek, O.L. and Fan, G.Y., Scan. Micros. Suppl. 6 (1992) 105.Google Scholar
4Zemlin, F. and Weiss, K., Ultramicroscopy 50 (1993) 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Pan, M. and Krivanek, O.L., Proc. 54th Ann MSA meeting (1996) 420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Krivanek, O.L., Ultramicroscopy 55 (1994) 419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar