tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7556050465385247470.post361414903323627925..comments2023-12-31T09:40:12.648-08:00Comments on Bob Hoover's Blog: California LivingBob Hooverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15861126799745704555noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7556050465385247470.post-9536216332981209022008-11-03T05:42:00.000-08:002008-11-03T05:42:00.000-08:00Ah, the tomato hornworms. The first I ever saw of...Ah, the tomato hornworms. The first I ever saw of them, I was too intimidated to forcefully go after them. <BR/><BR/>Jimson weed, (aka moonflowers, or devil's trumpets), makes for a good canary-in-the-coal-mine for hornworms. They choose the moonflowers first, and buy me the extra time to notice them before they get to the tomatoes.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244818454949340901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7556050465385247470.post-90813835547017795602008-10-19T14:48:00.000-07:002008-10-19T14:48:00.000-07:00In fact you are correct. You needn't even use a l...In fact you are correct. You needn't even use a layer of phosphorescent material over a sensor. You can build Charge-Coupled Devices (CCDs) and CMOS sensors that are directly sensitive to X-rays. These were first used in fluroscopes (X-ray moving pictures) which were much more sensitive that the fluorescent screens that were previous used and hence lowered the patient's exposure to X-rays. They also lent themselves to storing these moving images more easily and as far as I know have all but completely replace the old fluorescent screens we remember from years past. Digital sensors are also beginning to replace photographic film for still image X-rays, but they are not quite as sensitive nor as fine detail in some applications, though they are rapidly getting there. Of course, digital fluoroscopes have the advantage of being able to look at the image immediately without photographic development and they naturally lend themselves to transmission over communications networks and easy storage and retrieval.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7556050465385247470.post-37156966938782010612008-10-14T10:55:00.000-07:002008-10-14T10:55:00.000-07:00I find it both amusing and annoying that my dentis...I find it both amusing and annoying that my dentist and the vet both have moved away from using film but the local doctor's office (and the hospital's emergency room) is still using film.<BR/><BR/>From a quick google search I found the Kodak Carestream DRX-1 System which replaces existing x-ray film cassettes. It looks to be pending FDA approval so perhaps there is hope.Stephen Hepnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04937699927129602353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7556050465385247470.post-20343917334847832482008-10-13T20:32:00.001-07:002008-10-13T20:32:00.001-07:00The idea of using a sensor as the receptor for an ...The idea of using a sensor as the receptor for an x-ray image is certainly gaining acceptance, my dentist has been doing it for at least 3-4 years now. Granted that sensor fits in your mouth and its one hell of a lot smaller than anything a cancer patient would require. But my dentist claims the required dose of radiation for an electronic image to be an order of magnitude less(!) than if one was exposing x-ray film.C Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15576903050231004925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7556050465385247470.post-17466813920567919662008-10-13T20:32:00.000-07:002008-10-13T20:32:00.000-07:00The idea of using a sensor as the receptor for an ...The idea of using a sensor as the receptor for an x-ray image is certainly gaining acceptance, my dentist has been doing it for at least 3-4 years now. Granted that sensor fits in your mouth and its one hell of a lot smaller than anything a cancer patient would require. But my dentist claims the required dose of radiation for an electronic image to be an order of magnitude less(!) than if one was exposing x-ray film.C Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15576903050231004925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7556050465385247470.post-60065891517425796302008-10-13T20:10:00.000-07:002008-10-13T20:10:00.000-07:00Film is still used in aerial survey where stereo i...Film is still used in aerial survey where stereo is required. The resolution (pixcel size) and size (number of pixcels) needed is orders of magitude from where we are now.<BR/><BR/>Looking at digital images in a stereoscope is like looking at a flat plain with rows of neatly planted bushes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com