Abstract
WITHOUT criticizing the vector treatment of amplitude and phase-contrast microscopy kindly given by Dr. Barer in his comment on my letter1, I would like to make the following comments: (1) Using my second method, phase-advancing objects appear darker than the background. The soot layer appears to cause a considerable phase retardation in addition to the absorption. (2) If the absorbing annulus is made substantially darker, the resulting image becomes peculiarly glossy and too unsharp to be of any value. Thus the “central dark-ground illumination” does not seem to be very promising in this connexion. (3) According to Oettlé2, as well as from my own observations, ordinary negative phase-contrast methods do not produce images comparable with those of positive phase-contrast in clarity. The inherent haziness and glare of the negative phase-contrast picture may be due entirely to the light reflected from the phase plate and converged back to the area under observation. Due to the reflectivity of absorbing annuli evaporated by ordinary means, this additional surface illumination may reach higher values than the light passing the objective annulus. My method does not suffer from this in the same degree since the reflectivity of soot is small.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
References
Wilska, A., Nature, 171, 353 (1953).
Oettlé, A. G., J. Roy. Micr. Soc., 70, 232, (1950).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
WILSKA, A. A New Method of Light Microscopy. Nature 171, 698 (1953). https://doi.org/10.1038/171698a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/171698a0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.