Premium
An optical sectioning programmable array microscope implemented with a digital micromirror device
Author(s) -
Quentin S. Hanley,
Peter J. Verveer,
Mark J Gemkow,
Donna J. ArndtJovin,
Thomas M. Jovin
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
journal of microscopy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.569
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1365-2818
pISSN - 0022-2720
DOI - 10.1046/j.1365-2818.1999.00602.x
Subject(s) - optical sectioning , full width at half maximum , optics , digital micromirror device , materials science , microscopy , microscope , spatial light modulator , subpixel rendering , point spread function , optical microscope , offset (computer science) , optoelectronics , physics , computer science , scanning electron microscope , pixel , programming language
The defining feature of a programmable array microscope (PAM) is the presence of a spatial light modulator in the image plane. A spatial light modulator used singly or as a matched pair for both illumination and detection can be used to generate an optical section. Under most conditions, the basic optical properties of an optically sectioning PAM are similar to those of rotating Nipkow discs. The method of pattern generation, however, is fundamentally different and allows arbitrary illumination patterns to be generated under programmable control, and sectioning strategies to be changed rapidly in response to specific experimental conditions. We report the features of a PAM incorporating a digital micromirror device, including the axial sectioning response to fluorescent thin films and the imaging of biological specimens. Three axial sectioning strategies were compared: line scans, dot lattice scans and pseudo‐random sequence scans. The three strategies varied widely in light throughput, sectioning strength and robustness when used on real biological samples. The axial response to thin fluorescent films demonstrated a consistent decrease in the full width at half maximum (FWHM), accompanied by an increase in offset, as the unit cells defining the patterns grew smaller. Experimental axial response curves represent the sum of the response from a given point of illumination and cross‐talk from neighbouring points. Cross‐talk is minimized in the plane of best focus and when measured together with the single point response produces a decrease in FWHM. In patterns having constant throughput, there appears to be tradeoff between the FWHM and the size of the offset. The PAM was compared to a confocal laser scanning microscope using biological samples. The PAM demonstrated higher signal levels and dynamic range despite a shorter acquisition time. It also revealed more structures in x ‐ z sections and less intensity drop‐off with scanning depth.