Figure 1 | Scientific Reports

Figure 1

From: Towards real-time image deconvolution: application to confocal and STED microscopy

Figure 1

Comparison between SGP- and RL-based restorations of 2D synthetic data.

(a) Phantom mimicking the micro-tubulin cytoskeleton of a cell (512 × 512 pixels, 20 nm pixel size). In particular the map depicts the distribution of fluorescent photons being emitted by each pixel. The two color bars represent respectively the CLSM and STED microscopy case. Since STED microscopy improves the resolution by reducing the effective area from which fluorescence is emitted, the amount of photons in the STED microscopy case reduces. (b) Synthetic images for the CLSM (upper left, SNR ~13 db) and STED microscope (lower right, SNR ~11 db). Insets represent the respective PSFs magnified by a factor 2. (c,d) Magnified views of the area denoted by the dashed box in (b) for CLSM and STED microscopy, respectively. (e,f,i,j) RL-based (e,f) and SGP-based (i,j) restorations of CLSM (e,i) and STED (f,j) images. (g,h,k,l) Magnified views of the area denoted by the white box in (e,f,i,j). All the magnified views are renormalized in signal intensity. Algorithms were stopped using the minimization of the KL-divergence as criterium (Eq. (S28)). Scale bars: 1 μm.

Back to article page