Dr. Tytus Bernaś
Post doctoral Researcher at
SPIE Involvement:
Author | Instructor
Publications (5)

PROCEEDINGS ARTICLE | September 7, 2018
Proc. SPIE. 10834, Speckle 2018: VII International Conference on Speckle Metrology
KEYWORDS: Confocal microscopy, Microscopes, Holography, Biomedical optics, Statistical analysis, Digital holography, Microscopy, Quantitative analysis, Confocal laser scanning microscopy

PROCEEDINGS ARTICLE | March 2, 2006
Proc. SPIE. 6142, Medical Imaging 2006: Physics of Medical Imaging
KEYWORDS: MATLAB, Cameras, Image restoration, Distortion, Feature extraction, Medical imaging, Image quality, Discretization errors, Image retrieval, Computer engineering

PROCEEDINGS ARTICLE | February 21, 2006
Proc. SPIE. 6088, Imaging, Manipulation, and Analysis of Biomolecules, Cells, and Tissues IV
KEYWORDS: Signal to noise ratio, Microscopes, Image compression, Imaging systems, Wavelets, Denoising, Luminescence, Interference (communication), Distortion, JPEG2000

SPIE Journal Paper | November 1, 2005
JBO Vol. 10 Issue 06
KEYWORDS: Luminescence, Signal to noise ratio, Image quality, Image resolution, Wavelets, Microscopes, Modulation transfer functions, Photons, Confocal microscopy, Image information entropy

PROCEEDINGS ARTICLE | March 29, 2005
Proc. SPIE. 5699, Imaging, Manipulation, and Analysis of Biomolecules and Cells: Fundamentals and Applications III
KEYWORDS: Signal to noise ratio, Confocal microscopy, Optical transfer functions, Image compression, Wavelets, Microscopy, Luminescence, JPEG2000, Image quality, Bohrium

Course Instructor
SC738: Biological Constraints of Optical Imaging
The physical limitations of biological optical microscopy are well established. However, considerably less attention is paid to the fact that the biological nature of the objects studied imposes additional constraints on microscopic imaging of cells and tissues. Biological systems are, by definition, dynamic. Therefore, any experimental procedure should address the biological and chemical changes during measurement in the studied system. The imaging itself may induce some of such changes, whereas others variations occur independently of microscopic observations. The goal of this short course is to present the factors that limit the accuracy, resolution, and reproducibility of microscopic imaging of biological objects. The discussion will focus on two methods of 3D optical imaging: confocal microscopy and two-photon microscopy. The course will recapitulate the fundamental physical limitations of optical imaging, and reevaluate their meaning in the context of practical biological microscopy. The following subjects will be discussed: influence of photon statistics and instrumental noise on accuracy and resolution, photophysical and biochemical stability of fluorescence labels, photodamage and phototoxicity, autofluorescence, and intrinsic optical properties of biological specimens. The course will also address the important issues of calibration and standardization. The performance of microscopic imaging of biological samples is usually evaluated in qualitative and subjective manner. There is no versatile, widely adopted standard for evaluation of optical microscopes used for biological studies, or for the quality of biological images collected. One of the aims of this short-course is to identify a set of statistical procedures for evaluation of microscope performance in the context of cell studies.
SIGN IN TO:
  • View contact details

UPDATE YOUR PROFILE
Is this your profile? Update it now.
Don’t have a profile and want one?

Back to Top