David Walker said I might try you as a possible answerer of a question that I have about the first photograph taken down a microscope.

I've been trying to find out who took the first photograph/Daguerreotype with a microscope. I found a Powerpoint slide on the web about John Dancer using a camera lucida in 1840 to make a Daguerreotype of a flea in 1840, but have subsequently discovered that Fox Talbot showed something of an exhibition in London (Royal Institution) in January 1839 - a 'microscopic sketch' of the 'reticulation on the wing of an insect'. And there is a reference to a J.B.Reade in 1836 taking a solar photomicrograph in 1836, to which there is an added note that this might possibly be the first photograph.

A 'photomicrograph' means to me a photo taken with a microscope (or essentially that). I say this because of a fascinating article I read about what Dancer and Suter called photomicrographs which appear to be negatives of things like London Bridge captured on a microscope slide - he'd have a job getting a bridge onto a microscope stage! The camera lucida was clearly used around 1840 to allow chaps to trace the object, and from there capturing the image on 'film' becomes straightforward (though not easy if one hasn't yet invented film!). So is Dancer's & Suter's work referred to by Roy Winsby on the Micscope webpage, ACTUALLY a photographic image captured with a microscope?

My specific interest is when was the first photomicrograph of a crystalline protein taken? Although the protein haemoglobin was crystallised in 1840, and there are some stunning images in 1852 in the Atlas accompanying Lehmann's Physiological Chemistry, these are in fact drawings ('of a quality hitherto unsurpassed' says the artist humbly!). The interest in crystalline proteins really got going in the 1850's. Bentley was taking snowflake images in 1885 so the likelihood is that there are photomicrographs in the (mostly German) literature sometime between 1850 and 1890. I would be most grateful for any thoughts that you might have of where to start looking! And indeed for the answer to my queries above.

Many thanks.

Lindsay Sawyer -- Professor Lindsay Sawyer
Institute of Structural and Molecular Biology School of Biological Sciences
The University of Edinburgh Swann Building, King's Buildings Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JR Scotland
Tel: +44-(0)131-650-7062; Fax: +44-(0)131-650-7055

[I'm hopeful that someone out there who reads the Quekett pages may be able to help Prof. Sawyer]

From:* "JOHN GREGORY" *To:*
*Date:* Thu, 23 Mar 2006 20:42:49 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)

Hi Tony,

The Chironomid insect fossilized within amber featured on the Quekett Web page is very interesting. The BBC featured such insects on a program which they did about a year ago, it was based loosely around the Jurassic Park movies posing the question is it possible to extract Dinosaur DNA from blood sealed in the stomachs of these insects.. The conclusion was that it was not ( Watch this space).

Anyway, I expect someone has already mentioned this but the caption with the picture states that the amber is 90 million years old and that it is from the Triassic period. If it is indeed 90 million years old , which I suspect is the case, this puts it in the cretaceous period, that is 65 to 145 million years old. To be Triassic it would need to be 215 to 250 million years old. Hope you don't mind me commenting. One thing which did emerge on the BBC program was the fact that pieces of amber which have insect imbedded within them are very valuable. Amber is generally regarded as a semi precious stone in its own right, however imagine you had a space craft and could travel anywhere in the universe, you would be able to find any amount of rare gem stones gold etc, but where could you find amber.

All the best,

John

[Oh dear! My bad as they say these days. Of course 90ma is Cretaceous; thanks for pointing that out

(I think this is the nicest letter I have received in my years as Webmaster)

From Jim-Helena

Dear Quekett Webmaster,

I love your website, it is so interesting!I particularly like seeing the pictures of my Grandpa, Maurice Moss. I never knew he was your President!

Your exhibition is always my birthday weekend but this year we hope to come.

Yours sincerely, Jenny Crouch (Age 9)

---

 

From John Grieg
john@grieg51.freeserve.co.uk

Dear Anthony,

I have been collecting together information about 19th century members of the Croydon Natural History & Scientific Society (CNHSS), then the Croydon Microscopical and Natural History Club, in particular George Jennings Hinde FRS FGS who joined in 1887. I note that on the occasion of the club's Soirées of the Novembers of 1880 and 1881 there is a G Hind listed as a member of the Quekett exhibiting a microscope. I know that Hinde was in Mitcham at the time of the 1881 census and wonder whether it is possible that 'Hind' is a mis-spelling of 'Hinde'. This may be only a wild shot as there is also another Quekett member exhibiting at the same time 'F H P Hind'.
Are you able to tell me any more about the G Hind who was a Quekett member? Anything would be much appreciated, even if negative.

With my best regards,
John Greig CNHSS Hon Curator

[Firstly it is nice to know that your society still exists with such a long pedigree, secondly I have searched the CDROM for any details that might remotely be associated with this member, and regrettably can find nothing - but who knows? Someone in the Club may know something]

---

 

From Mike Dingley
dingley@tpq.com.au

Hi Tony,

It has been a long time since we last communicated and I hope that you are fit and well and still doing interesting things. I have semi retired from the Museum (1 year now) and am working on Australian Desmids and catching up with Landscape photography which I couldn't do when I had a job as I didn't fine the time to do it. My main reason for contacting you isa to ask you if you know of an up-to-date membership list? The last one I have is 2003.

I am trying to find Philip Rhodes who used to live in Perth, W.A. and then moved to Ireland. He is listed in the 2003 list as living in W.A. again but I'm not sure if he is using the address as a repository for mail of whether he does in fact live there. If the 2003 list is current I might write to the address and see if he responds.

Regards and a Prosperous 2005 to you.

Mike Dingley

[The latest membership list is indeed July 2003, so best to mail him and see if he responds]

Peter_Weedon@compuserve.com

Hi there, Tony,

I recently bought (through eBay) a 'Mikrops' section knife, made by Flatters & Garnett. It came complete with original cardboard box and instruction sheet but, unfortunately, with no blades. (One of the two handle securing screws is also missing but this is a standard 4 BA countersunk screw and I'm confident that a replacement is lurking in one of the tobacco tins on my workshop shelves!) I've attached a picture of the item to this message. As I have bought it to use, rather than as an antique, I would like to fit it with a blade or two. I am writing in the hope that other Quekett members might have a spare blade for sale or may know where they might be obtained. Failing that, I would welcome the opportunity to examine someone else's blade to see whether it would be feasible to make one. (The illustrations on the instruction sheet do not give sufficient detail for this purpose.) If any other member has one of these knives but has no instruction sheet, I shall be happy to furnish a copy. Best regards, Pete W.

[Perhaps someone can help Peter?]

From Don Thomson, donjthomson@supanet.com

Dear Tony,

There have been available from Maplin for sometime, LEDs, including white ones listed under the name "Luxeon", possibly the name of the manufacturer. These are expensive, high power devices, one of which, belonging to a rich friend, has just passed through my hands. I know Tony Dutton has one of these also. They look very attractive as light sources for microscopy etc. but are very bright indeed, the output quoted as 18 lumens. Perhaps you might think it worthwhile to put a note on the website warning members that these are so bright that direct viewing is not a good idea, and, I suspect could lead to retinal damage. We do not want to start a scare that would result in these useful devices being banned by Brussels, or anyone else, but some advice might be useful at this time. Hope you do not mind me bothering you with this. Cheers, Don.

[A timely word of warning. Perhaps one should treat them with the same care as lasers]

From Don Thomson, donjthomson@supanet.com

Dear Tony, I have recently, ie last month, been getting good White LEDs from Maplin, Cat No.N29AT £2-99 each. These seem to work very well for various lighting jobs. Just in case people are looking for these devices. Output at 20mA quoted as 9200mcd. They appear to me to be sufficiently bright to make direct viewing of the LED itself on axis possibly hazardous, certainly uncomfortble.

The blue light hazard is one to be aware of I feel, with these devices, but the blink reflex would probably prevent damage to the retina, unless it were wilfully suppressed. There was some interest some years ago in the possible hazard posed to users of microscopes due to the blue light hazard with modern halogen light sources. In fact an instruction was issued in Government departments, that all microscopes should have yellow filters fitted in the illuminating system to protect the operators. I could never discover who started this, but much research uncovered two interesting facts.

1) PATIENTS undergoing eye surgery in some american clinics had suffered retinal damage due to the operating microscope lamps, and yellow filters were used to avoid this.

2) A famous opthalmologist was known to use a yellow viewing filter to check focus before taking photomicrographs with his microscope lamp running at full voltage to get correct colour temperature. These two pieces of information caused confusion to some person unknown, leading to the yellow filter instruction. I suspect that if this was implemented it may have caused some of the problems in the cervical smear reading field if the filters had been fitted and the operators not re-trained.

Don.

[This is very goodi news Don. There are many people in the Club - and outside - who are interested in this type of light source, not least your Editor! ]

From Ronald K Smeltzer PhD. rksmeltzer@att.net

Does the Club have a complete set of membership records that could be searched for a name? For some research under wayI would very much like to learn if Willliam Henry Olly was a member. I do not know his dates, but he was active in microscopy from about a decade before the founding of the Quekett. Olley was, I was told, a wine merchant in the City. It would be helpful to learn if the Club Library has Olley's publication ' The Wonders of the Microscope Photographically Revealed..' London 1861, but apparently issued in parts from c.1867.

Sincerely
Ronald K Smeltzer Ph.D
162 Cedar Lane
Princton NJ 08540

[Can anyone help here? It might be useful if you contacted our agents Savona Books - see under Resources]

From cyrusrobinson@value.net.nzCould you please forward this email to Vaughan Dodge. Thanks.

Mon Feb 10 20:01:45 2003Mr Dodge, I was looking at a lovely dry mount slide that you had prepared on the journals website of a small purple flower. I was just wondering how it was done and what materials you used in the slides construction. Is it a card slide, or does it need to be airtight? Also I would appreciate any suggestions on what to use as a support for the coverslip, I have no handy supply house to supply me with plastic or aluminum spacers.

Your sincerely

Cyrus

[Will do]

From cruz.j@btinternet.com

Hi Tony,

I just thought that I would write to you about this experience, which I have had, It highlights a safety issue. My wife and I brought a new Microwave oven, we consigned the old one to the loft room. I decided to experiment with this old Microwave oven to see if it would be possible to melt wax, for the purpose of imbedding specimens to be cut on my microtome. When I first tried this I proceeded with caution and only used the microwaves in short bursts. I noticed that it took several minutes for the wax to melt. I thought that this was strange because this was only a small glass container of wax.

Recently I decided to let the wax microwave for a few minutes, again it took quiet a long time for the wax to melt. I also noticed that the glass dish on which the wax was standing ( this is the dish which is normally found within the Microwave, and rotates) had become very hot. I had some more wax to melt, so again put it in the Microwave oven and set the timer for about 4 minutes. This time I placed the glass container of wax on a small Pyrex dish so that if it boiled over it would not spill onto the Microwave dish, if you follow me. After about 2 minutes I decided to see how things were progressing. The wax had not completely melted, I was about to close the door and start micro waving again when I noticed what I took to be a reflection in the Pyrex dish on which the wax container was standing.

I wondered where this RED glow was coming from. As I watched it faded, and I realised that this was no reflection, the glass dish was actually red hot. I carefully removed the wax and closed the door. I then decided that it may aid cooling if I opened the door. The cold air entering at this point caused the Pyrex to shatter, and glass was expelled into the room. It seems that the microwave radiation is absorbed by the glass rather than the wax. I was lucky in that I escaped injury, but the whole experience has put me off any experimenting in this way. From now on I will use conventional methods to melt my wax.

Best Regards,

John Gregory.

[That sounds a somewhat frightening experience!}

From lmb@macunlimited.net 02/03/03

Hallo Tony

With reference to the Union Microscope item on the Internet ,could I refer you to items of mine in the Manchester Microscopical Societies newsletters 51 and 52 that is Jan and May 2002 editions in which I wrote papers referring to my Union Inverted MiC. Edition 51 giving details and 52 showing the Mic as used in DEP research. It is a very good machine and I have had mine for a considerable number of years, I find it equal to Wild and Nikon inverted microscopes that I used in medical reseach at a University Department in which I worked. I could not find any address for Mr Pratt to contact him direct.

Best wishes

Lawrence M Bowler

[Some interesting comments there, Lawrence. Many thanks for the feedback]

davidson@magnet.fsu.edu 11/01/02

Tony,

I am searching for portraits of John Cuff and Edmund Culpeper for our "Pioneers in Optics" section of the Molecular Expressions website. Do you know where I might find these or who I could contact to get a scan or digital image?

Regards---Mike Michael W. Davidson
National High Magnetic Field Laboratory
1800 East Paul Dirac Drive
The Florida State University Tallahassee,
Florida 32310 email: davidson@magnet.fsu.edu
phone: 850-644-0542 fax: 850-644-8920 web: Molecular Expressions (http://microscopy.fsu.edu)

[Can anyone help with this?]

donjthomson@supanet.com 15/11/02

I have just got round to looking at the Girodet pictures on the website, they are very good. He has done a great job in the construction of the vertical illuminator, I once did this myself, but not so elegantly. The pictures of the electronic devices are in fact integrated circuits, not circuit boards, as stated on the site. We need to get this right for those who don't know about these things.

Cheers Don Thomson.

[Quite right Don, we must always try to be accurate!]

From tithonia@zianet.com 11/10/02

Dear Sir:

I am a professional biologist (actually an arachnologist) working at a state university who is also interested in fresh water microscopy as a hobby. I intend to retire in about six years and am thinking about getting more involved in such activities. I have, in fact, contributed several articles to Micscape, including one on beetle and ant-mimicking spiders, one on classification of micoorganisms, one on colored plates from an old book on "Infusoria" and most recently one on biodiversity.

In searching the net I find only a few societies that would seem to be involved in such activities, including the American Microscopical Society and your club. I thought I would write to you and see what your club did in regard to fresh water microorganisms. What could a foreigner like myself gain from subscribing (it might be a while before I can anyway)? My current equipment includes a Meiji binocular dissecting microscope and a Parco (built by Meiji) trinocular phase contrast compound microscope with five objectives (50, 100, 200, 400, 1000 oil-imersion). I live in the northern Chihuahuan Desert of southern New Mexico, not far from the Rio Grande and have access to runoff streams from the Organ Mountains (when we get decent rain or snow- not something that has happened in recent years).

Sincerely, David B. Richman

[There is a fair amount of freshwater work reported in the Club Journal and Bulletin]

A.Henderson@nhm.ac.uk

Dear Tony,

I wonder if you can help us. Richard Hodgkinson, a colleague here in the Micropalaeontology division has been conducting some research into Fortescue William Millett. In particular his research as a foraminifera worker. He is lacking some biographical information especially anything about his profession when he lived in London. We know he was a founder member of the Quekett. Would you have any archives of minutes or meeting notes? In fact anything which may help "round-out" the biography of Millett. Thanks in advance. John Whittaker send his regards.

Cheers, Andy

[ Can anyone help? I can't find any information on this]

Lawsen Lew aves_goose@yahoo.com 02/09/02

Tony Saunders Davies:

Yes, I could not focus it. Is it important that the sub stage condenser focuses. It is a very, very nice brass painted gray binocular compound microscope. Was not for the money needed for the newer plastic body Zeiss DR 1663, I would have bought it for just keeps. It is well made, not often today with plastics and ICS optics. What do you think? I have found an used Zeiss Standard 20 with focusable condenser, but cost more, much more, $1,300.00. The Zeiss KF is for $866.00. I have compounds, mainly Nikon line, Eclipse 200 for my studies of slides, Swift M3200, and old 1970s Nikon SBR. All are binoculars and focusable condenser. I made it as a requirement to have a focusable condenser. The brand matters little, more the feature, but none of my microscopes have a solid feel like the older 1980s Zeiss microscopes. The time when I am ready to buy, these were very expensive and rare, so I bought mostly Nikon and Meiji Techno, because lower price and available. Zeiss restructured their company in North America, they make plastic body stereo magnifiers up to the Stemi 2000. The traditional brass and aluminium pot metal are the Zeiss SV line. All the lower end line are plastic.

Lawsen Lew

[It is indeed important that the substage condenser focuses. If money is tight - and it mostly is these days! - have you had a look at the Russian (Lomo) objectives? The apos are remarkably good value]

From Kurt Savoie (savoiekm@hotmail.com) 02/09/02

What a great site to stumble across! I have just purchased a used Nikon SMZ-1 stereo microscope for use with fossils. Remembered my college Invertebrate Zoology class and the camera lucida attachment. I just cannot find anything substantial about what might fit the Nikon or where to get it. Not interested in paying thousands. Any thoughts or advice?

[Difficult! Have you thought about something homemade? Beale (in 1890!) used a half tinted piece of glass set at 45 degrees over the eyepiece, you'd need to set a board to hold the paper at a suitable angle. I've tried this, and it sort of works! But anyone here got any better ideas?]

From Lawsen Lew 18/07/02

Tony Saunders-Davies,

The recession came quick in the Santa Clara county where unemployment is high as 7.6%. Intel layoff so 4,000 workers. Prices for nice stereo zoom and dual magnifications fallen to around $1,000.00 to $1,200.00. Getting a microscope is not very hard. Learning how to use it and attaching a camera is hard. I do not have any trinocular microscopes. My Nikon E200 is just a binocular. My stereo microscope is a binocular. I have a Nikon FM2 manual camera. I could mount the camera on a tripod or stand. I will need a tube coupler to connect a light proof tube between the eyepiece and microscope. Learning to prepare samples and where to find them are another subject. Getting a good microscope or stereo magnifier is not difficult, learning how to use it, preparing samples, and attaching a camera are the most difficult. What do you think about the larger Nikon SMZ-645 stereo zoom microscope or the Zeiss Stemi DR-1040? The Nikon is more modular because you could remove the eyepieces and it is zoom. The Zeiss is a great optics, but the eyepieces are non removeable and it is a dual magnification 10X and 40X version of the Zeiss Stemi DV stereo zoom. Both stereos are a bit large to be a portable instrument. The Nikon SMZ-645 is about $1,200.00 The Zeiss DR-1040 is about $1,000.00. I think the Nikon is more flexible than the Zeiss. The Zeiss has a special attach to allow a digital camera connection to one of its eyepieces. The Nikon is a more traditional stereo zoom microscope, no cost cutting design like the Zeiss. Both are from great microscope makers. I am very lucky to have a choice. I am very lucky to have my existing Nikon E200 compound as a BA in biology student in an apartment.

Lawsen Lew

[Personally I would go for the Nikon because of the removable eyepieces. This will make it much more flexible]

From Don Thompson - a well-know Quekett member. 30/07/02

While sitting in the garden, enjoying a cold beer, and looking at the flowers, I thought I might look at some pollen grains. Just for amusement. It is my habit to do this using reflected light dark ground illumination, dead simple,no preparation, just lay the grains on a slide and look. Just the thing for lazy people like me. Sure enough, there were the pollen grains,glowing away against a black background. I then changed the eyepiece, and the grains dissappeared. They were found on a remote part of the slide, strange. The next change of eyepiece caused them to vanish completely. It was only after repeating the eperiment several times that I found that the eyepiece was acting as a piston, driving air from the microscope body, out through the annular gap between the objective and the illuminating reflector. The problem was solved by inserting eyepieces extremely slowly. At least I now know how to apply a stream of cooling air to a specimen if this is ever required, all one needs is an air inlet into the microscope tube from a small blower, Of course the eyepiece would have to be fixed in place to avoid it being shot out, to the danger of anyone in range.

Microscopy is such fun.

Cheers Don.

[That bought a smile to my face - I think we've all done something similar!]

From CGarza5162@aol.com 13/06/02

Hi Tony,

My name is Jesus Garza, I live in Houston, Texas U. S. A. I am originally from Mexico and moved to the United States several years ago. I have been an amateur microscopist for several years.

Came across the Quekett club website a year or so ago and have been enjoying it, browsing through your site and learning ever since. Very exciting to look through the Quekett club website and find plenty of useful information and tips on microscopy. I would like to know how can I contribute to your web site. I been taking pictures through my microscope for a while and have enjoyed observing pond life.

I would like to know if can share my photos and/or comments with the Quekett club. I have been into microscopy since I was very young. (May be I'll share my story about my first microscope and how I got into microscopy one of these days.) Best regards to everyone, and thank you for allowing me the opportunity to share my thoughts. I will be joining your club soon.

Sincerely, Jesus Garza

[Yes, indeed, Jesus. We would be very pleases to hear about your early experiences. It's always interesting to hear how other people got started, and what they use their equipment for. By all means send pictures, but try to keep them to about 40 - 50k to avoid long download time. Look forward to hearing from you further.]

From Peter Webber in Greece (pmwebber@otenet.gr) 9/06/02
[Peter is a commercial helicopter pilot (and we have exchanged a lot of aviation 'chat' over the passed few weeks!), but he is also an experienced and accomplished microscopist. Not satisfied with the results from his Nikon 995 he has designed and had made a 'transfer' optic. This he has fully described in a previous email, which I have passed on to the Bulletin Editor who tells me he proposes to publish it shortly. In the meantime I'm sure many readers will be interested in his general comments and experiences, in view of the fine equipment he has acquired over the years with careful buying on the Internet and Ebay]

Dear Tony,

Re the gear I have amassed... yes it will certainly last a lifetime! I can see no point whatever in a chap like me going to infinity when one is thus bound to one maker. I did have the chance to get an Axiomat a few years ago but where do you find the accessories? It's hard to see how I can improve or usefully add to what I have now. I don't think confocal will do me much good. Thank you internet and ebay!

DIC was a sort of forbidden dream for me.. like many pure amateurs I had never even seen DIC in operation, after all where does one go to do so? Of course I had seen pics and have the RMS books... but out of the blue came simultaneous opportunities to acquire from the USA the Zeiss DIC condenser and from Germany the Leitz ICT objectives... expensive phone calls to Leitz and to Zeiss almost had me believing that the two makes of equipment could not work together but of course a little optical theory will affirm that they should do so, borne out in practice. DIC is truly a wonderful invention... of course it was our very own Francis Smith who thought of it but could not at the time persuade anyone that it was worth pursuing. For visual effect I use it sometimes in a slightly unorthodox way by the insertion of a Berek compensator and a quarter wave plate... this combo takes one well beyond first-order straw and into the really bright second-order spectrum. Purely for visibility however I just keep it either side of zero-order. It is one of the very few techniques which can't really be mickey-moused..

.I have made up phase annuli, smoked cover slips for Hoffman, made DG stops, offset diaphragms for oblique etc but DIC just won't let you near it. I have read about the use of Savart plates in place of polars for a sort of pseudo-DIC, looked into it but found that Savart plates would cost me around £500 each... well forget it! I have read QMC member Loro's article on cheapo DIC with stretched mylar film... passed it on to a pal in New Zealand who gave up after many attempts! Perhaps less useful than DIC, but more fun, is Jamin-Lebedeff, and I bet even your academic facility doesn't have that, simply because the last production ceased around 22 years ago... have you ever used it? I have in my collection, apart from the nice Zeiss setup, two early Smith-Baker interference microscopes of the 1950s of which one is double focus and one is shearing... they both work but the Zeiss is far far better. For protozoa (protista?) it is a most interesting technique.

Indeed there are plenty of forams here on the North coast. Mainly however I look at pond life which is likely much the same here as where you live. I have my own little frog-infested stagnant rainwater pond, which has an awful lot of stuff in it! I like crystals as well, do plenty of my own mounts of crystals, insects (with help from Eric's great book) and such like. I have also done many thin rock sections (lots of work) from the deposits in the local mountains... granite, soapstone and so on. Have also attacked thin sections of cuttlefish bone, sea urchin spine, shells etc. Now I have a decent microtome I will have a go at some plant sections. I also acquired some of J.T.Norman's unmounted material, which however is still unmounted.. And of course a constant source of delight, my fairly large and eclectic collection of 19thC and 20thC slides, put together many years ago, and over many years, mostly in London, before the world woke up to slides' rarity value and collectability. On a personal note, if you are looking for any additions to your Russian Lomo and other equipment, let me know as I follow the German ebay and this kind of thing comes up from time to time, and sometimes goes very cheap. E.g. a new set of 4 short-mount Lomo apos including 10, 20, 60 oil iris and 90 oil just sold this afternoon for about £55, and there are often oil DG condensers and the like. I will see what nice pics I can come up with for your gallery. Size and compression depth? I usually email photos at 800 x 600 at JPEG=10, this takes around 30kB. I believe most ordinary people still have dialup connections so download time is important. I think it might be worth while sending you a 995 relay lens for you to try out... you have all the other gear. At least it would then not be a complete unknown. You could keep it for a while and then return it at my expense or if one of your pals wanted it well you could sell it and forward the money... I am trying as you see not to appear to be offering a bribe! I have plenty here and can certainly spare one.

Best regards

Peter

[I would be interested in trying one of your relay lenses, Peter. I'm also pleased to hear of your experiences with DIC equipment from different manufacturers, something I've always assumed to be incompatible. I must admit I have never heard of Jamin-Lebedeff! And yes, 30k is absolutely ideal for upload.]

From Brian Darnton (brian@darnton.freeserve.co.uk) 09/06/02

Hello Tony.

No I am not planning on Northants but will see you at the QWMC annual at least. The Canon a20 seems to be superb and seems to work in a similar manner to your camera. I can move the optical zoom to fill the frame and can stick it on the end of a microscope. I can also do a close up by holding a lens over the front end.Although the max res is over 2megpix there are 2 lesser sizes and 3 modes of compression. Will be in touch.

Thank for all the linked input.

Brian Darnton.

[Brian and I have had a deal of correspondence over using digital cameras for photomicography and it's interesting to hear of another 'digicam' that can be linked easily to a microscope. Canon have an excellent reputation for quality. Brian is, of course, a well known expert on forams]

From John Gregory (Cruz.j@internet.com) 6/04/02

Hi Tony,

This letter may be of interest to members/readers, who have an interest in Millipedes. Most evenings come rain or shine, light or dark, I walk my dog. It was one evening in the dark that I was walking along a footpath. I had my torch switched off. I noticed on the ground a blue luminous substance. I knew that there had been a firework display on the field adjacent to the footpath a couple of months previous, so thought that this substance may be phosphorous from the fireworks. I did not have a container so was unable to collect a sample. On two further occasions I observed this phenomenon, but did not have a container. I made a point of carrying a container after this, and eventually managed to get a sample. When I got the sample home and examined it, I was surprised the find the source of the luminescence was a brown Millipede about three to four centimeters long. I have heard that some species of the genes Mytyxia, do have this ability, but these are found in California. The luminescence is definitely pale blue. I tried to examine this animal live under the non-inverting microscope, but the luminescence quality had switched off ?. Not knowing what the animal is, or if it is rare, I decided to return it to the wild. Does anyone know what I had found. Is it rare ?.
Best regards,
John Gregory.

I must say this is the first time I've heard of this in the UK. 'Fireflies' are fairly common in parts of the country, but I've not heard of luminescence in millipedes, although I believe some centipedes show this phenomenon. But your address doesn't tell us whereabouts you live?

From Kevin Sunley 18/03/02 ( umsunle0@cc.UManitoba.CA)

Hello, I am not sure if you are the correct person to ask, but I have a question and I was wondering if you had an idea of where I could look to find the answer. I have a Carl Zeiss Jena L stand microscope which I believe dates from shortly after the end of WWII. It's serial number is 418403, and the CZJ text is written in the Lens doublet logo. I'm attempting to date this microscope a bit more precisely but so far the only direction I've found is a book published by The Quekett Microscopical Club entitled "Notes on Modern Microscope Manufacturers", written by Brice Bracegirdle. I have been told this book has the dates of various Zeiss serial numbers, but unfortunately I have been unable to locate this book. Are you aware if this book has the information concerning Zeiss L stands? Any help you may be able to offer would be greatly appreciated as I've just recently began collecting older Zeiss microscopes and finding some of these smaller pieces of information has turned out to be a fun but difficult task.
Thank you very much for your time,
Kevin Sunley
University of Manitoba Canada

Unfortunately I don't have this book either, but I suspect many of our readers will and can help you. Alternatively you could email Brian Bracegirdle direct: bracegirdle@tesco.net

From: Lori Matsumoto 11/03/02

Dear Mr. Saunders-Davies,
My name is Lori Matsumoto and I am a director at the Museum of Jurassic Technology in Los Angeles, California. I am putting together an exhibit of the slides of Harold Dalton, the 19th century scientist who crafted exquisite microscopic artworks (still lifes and such) out of such materials as diatoms and butterfly wings. I understand the Quekett Club published an article about Dalton and his work in a recent journal and I was wondering if I might be able to purchase a copy..? Additionally, if you know where I might obtain more information about the elusive Dalton, I would be most appreciative.
Thank you,
Lori Matsumoto
Museum of Jurassic Technology (www.mjt.org) lorimjt@yahoo.com

Yes - Harold Dalton is described in Brian Bracegirdle's invaluable 'Microscopical Mounts and Mounters' 1998, Seacourt Press. P27/28. ISBN0-9514441-3-1. I presume your Museum has facilities for obtaining copies of this material? If not I will see if I can copy the relevant section and send you a copy.

From: "Kit Brownlee 08/03/02

Dear Tony,
I'm supposed to be exhibiting something at the Reading Convention on March 16th but I'm not sure what yet. Passing the University lake on my way to work this morning & looking at the nice hairy roots in the waters edge, I was inspired to try & emulate your talk on Roots at the QMC. If I sample on the Friday & aerate gently do you think any livestock will survive till Saturday? Being a basement, the hovel tends to be a constant 18C. See you at the Quekett AGM maybe?

KIT k.h.brownlee@reading.ac.uk

Hallo Kit - I would think that most material would survive at least 24hrs at 18 degrees. I was pleasantly surprised to re-examine a plankton sweep material I had taken a week ago, kept at room temperature, and still find active rotifers.

From: Mark Ferguson 06/03/02 opals@domafer.com

I found your website via a search for microscopes and here is my story. I am a undergrad at Western Washington University in Washington State, USA. I am majoring in geology and so am attempting to set up a petrological microscope for studies at home and have gotten as far as just needing a turret nosepiece. The reason I picked your group is because my scope is a Vickers model M720610. I have all the parts required except the nosepiece and am wondering if one of your members might have one laying around in a spare parts bin or drawer. I can't afford much (going to school at middle age with no fallback leaves me fairly broke most of the year,but do have some I can spend on worthwhile endevors). If someone there can help me, please have them contact me via this address with cost and shipping if possible. Thanks so much for your time and I've bookmarked your site so that I can read and explore in any spare time I find.
Mark Ferguson, not yet titled

As a mature (very!) PhD I sympathise with your problem. You might take a look at our 'Resources' page which lists some suppliers. Or perhaps one of our readers may be able to help? Good luck anyway!

From David Spears 08/02/02

Dear Tony,

I'm not a member, but should be! I have loaned a nice old inverted Reichert microscope plus incubator and time-lapse camera to a group of scientists at the Blond MacIndoe Institute at East Grinstead so they can do time-lapse tissue culture work. The problem is that the only phase condenser I have available is a Watson of normal (short) working distance. I would like to find a suitable LWD phase condenser and possibly x10 and x20 phase objectives to match. The condensor holder is a standard 40mm. so it wouldn't have to be a Reichert. Second question; can I use a digital stills camera to do time-lapse sequences on the microscope? I need to be able to switch the lamp off between exposures and save the images onto a computer hard disk.

Regards,
David Spears. david@cloudshillimaging.co.co

Have you considered an old Abbe with the top element removed and a home-made annulus? There is a description of home-made annuli on our Web pages. I have a complete set of relatively modern Olympus phase objectives, but all the annuli are home-made. In view of the relatively low NA of X10 and X20 phase objectives I think it might work!

Colleagues,

Just received information about Rotifer Symposium 10. From Alois Herzig (via Claudia Ricci): ROTIFERA 10 will happen between June 7th and 13 th 2003

Bob Wallace 06/02/02

This is really a symposium at professional level. But those with a serious interest in rotifers should take note. More later.

From Derek Stevens 24/01/02

Hi Tony,

Hope all is well. Just to let you know that the next meeting of the Southern Group QMS and PMS will be on Saturday 18 May 2002 in the Langton Village Hall as usual. I will be sending the invites out early in Febuary. Not much doing at the moment - I,m trying to write up 11 years of algae observations in the Little Sea. Its a case of how do I shorten it to a length that won,t be indigestible! I have got a graph of rotifer concentration vs algae conc. at monthly intervals. The peaks correspond - not unexpected ! but nice to see. Hope to see you at the meet Regards Derek

Yes, as you know I always enjoy the Langton meet - look forward to seeing your data too!

*From:* Eric Brightwell 03/01/02

I have a problem which I did not see mentioned in your site. When viewing live aquatic micro-organisms (via a 40x objective) the heat from the built in sub-stage incandescent illumination overheats the slide, even with a dark ground stop. One possible solution might be to convert to an understage mirror with separate illumination such as a 35mm slide projector directed through a heat absorbing cell, such as aqueous copper sulphate. However, before I embark on such a project does anyone have experience of this problem and its solutions, and do they have any comments or suggestions?

Kind regards, Eric Brightwell

Yes, this is very much a problem. Personally I recommend that people do not buy microscopes where the light bulb is directly below the condenser. Far better a mirror and a separate lamp.

*From:* Bas Kooijman 18/12/01

Dear Tony,

Jan Parmentier told me that you have experience with photography through miscroscopes in the field. I do that for years myself with an old olympus study-microscope, that I used during my study (long ago) and a minolta reflex camera linked to it via an adapter. I am, however, not really happy with it. It is heavy; I use light from the sun, and a flash (TTL). I am looking for some compact model (preferly with the standard optics; I photograph a lot with micro-lenses, which can also be used on a microscope). I have a very small plastic McArthur microscope, but the quality is poor, and I can't use it for photography. I do like its upside-down-construction (lenses below the object). My question is: Do you have suggestions for me to improve my field-kit? Jan told me that you use the Coolpix. On what are you using this? What is your experience? Many thanks for your efforts to answer this email

Best wishes Bas Kooijman

Unfortunately I don't have any experience of photomicography in the field. I do have a portable Meopta that I take to meetings around the country, to which I can fit the Coolpix, but it's far too fiddly to set up in the field. I would dearly love a small field microscope to examine material found in the field. The Swift seems a possible candidate, but I don't think they are currently in production.

*From:* Lynton Cox 9/12/01

Dear Tony

I am not a member yet but will be as soon as I have finished moving. I have a comment or two after reading the potted biographies. Firstly is there anyone who doesn't know Morris Moss? I have had the pleasure of working with him a few times and know that touch on the arm too. Secondly how similar the path of each one of us is into microscopy. This instrument has probably been responsible in part for the scientific careers of every scientist in the 20th century. Nobody can forget that first revelation of another world in a circle of light adding even more to the wonder and mystery of Christmas. Thirdly why does everyone have that awkward approach to admitting that their first microscope was a 'toy'? You know, like admitting you watch Coronation Street or East-Enders a sort of embarrassed admission at a session of 'Microscopists Anonymous'. The toy microscopes of yesteryear were, in my opinion, actually quite superior little instruments compared to those of today. My first microscope was a Britex 'Naturalist' with polaroid and daylight filters and a light bulb so you didn't have to put it away in the evening like the ones with a mirror. I think it cost about 10s 6d. I certainly didn't worry too much about a little bit of colour where it shouldn't be. Garnett in his 1953 book on Pond Life recommended a Britex for low power work. Maybe they didn't have the great magnification they promised, maybe some didn't give high class images, but, the fact that I am writing this to you and a group of like minded people does show that those little microscopes did do their job in a most superior way.

Regards Lynton Cox
Maisons Laffitte France

Yes, I entirely agree with what you say. My first microscope was a 'toy' although at the age of 10 I didn't realise it. It had a fixed magnification of about X60, as far as I can remember, and worked perfectly well within its limitations. Far better have a 'toy' microscope than no microscope at all!

From John Garratt 22/11/01

Hi Tony, Thanks for mentioning the new white LEDs. I have just been searching for some bits on the RS web site and I had a look at their white LEDs, where I found a product that has 5600 mcd output with 20 degree viewing angle for £4.41 + delivery and VAT. Order code is 310-6707. I have not actually ordered any yet as I still have not used all the lower power ones that I have but I know where to go next time I need some. Might be more convenient than getting them direct from the USA?

Cheers for now, John

From:Brian Singleton (Brian_Singleton@compuserve.com)

Dear Tony,
Just a short note of appreciation for the latest electronic issue on the
Quekett website. It is all so good, both the new and the eminently
browse-worthy archive material, and I am grateful that you have made it
possible for me to keep in touch with the Quekett this way. As a fairly new
member the biographical notes feature you have initiated is a particularly
useful and welcome addition.

I'm spending the summer in deepest France at a little place Madame S. and I
bought (then barely habitable) nearly 19 years ago. As well as my notebook
computer I've got my dinky little Nikon Model H field microscope with me
and am enjoying microscopy with a local accent. Funny thing, I can't find
any French microscopy websites, apart from a few sales agencies. Does
anyone out there know if there is a "French Quekett"?

Your note on the QuikQuek development was most interesting. I've brought
the CD-ROMS to France with me but would love to have them on my hard disk -
I'll make room somehow! Looking forward to hearing more.

Thanks again Tony,

Brian Singleton

Deepest France sounds an interesting area. I don't know of any French websites, although there are some very active Dutch and German amateur microscopists with sits - we have links from this site. I am hopeful that Carel Sartory will be contributing a review of the excellent QuikQuek suite of programs to run the CDROM shortly.

From: TJAUNGST@aol.com
To:tonysd@cix.compulink.co.uk

Hello again, Tony.

Would you permit me to address an open letter to the Q M C?
If acceptable, here it is:

For nearly fifty years I have spent a great many hours hunched over
microscopes, both at home and in any biology class rooms I could talk my way
into. There is no complaint in the above statement for I have loved every
second of that time.
I have memories and sights that I will cherish as long as I live.
Have any of you watched a ballet of Euglenas?
Have any of you ever watched Amoeba Protius wind its way among weed stems
unencumbered by the confines of a slide and cover slips?
Have any of you spent years looking for a particular species of Protozoa or
Desmid or Diatom to finally know the wonderment of finding it?
Have any of you spent uncountable hours trying to identify a species that you
only saw the one time and you still have not found an identification for it?
I have ladies and gentlemen and if you have spent any amount of time pursuing
this hobby I know that you have too.
There in lies a commitment which each of us, today, must accept.
Are we being careful to record everything that we see under our microscopes;
making drawings or photos of the subjects; noting where we collected the
specimens and under what conditions, (time of day, water temperature, time of
year, the date)?
Do we check to determine what kind of runoff the environment is subject to?
Do we record what the area around the environment is like?
Is it pasture land, crop land?
Is it alongside of A dirt road, gravel road, asphalt or concrete roadway?
Did we collect in the country, edge of the city or deep inside of the city?
Even if you consider the university laboratories and those other professional
workers in the field of biology, the amateur microscopist is in the unique
position of recording, for posterity, many species that are becoming extinct
or changing in appearance do to natural conditions or to man made pollution.
There are, also those species that have not yet been counted and identified;
some have gone and we never knew of them.
Yes, we are amateurs. The bulk of us are not endowed with fortunes. We get
along with what ever equipment we can scare up or make up out of odds and
ends, bits and pieces.
Yet we do look and we do see the wonders that God has wrought.
We must not let this vast store of knowledge disappear.
What we see under our microscopes must be recorded and preserved.
I know that there are things that I have seen in the past that I may not ever
see again; my own children and grandchildren will never see accept in a book,
if then.
That's the rub. No one will see these things in the future if they are never
recorded.
If you have drawings or photos or descriptions use your clubs to record this
priceless information.
Make sure that your club supports the collecting and recording of all such
material.
I had almost forty years of such diaries; thousands of illustrations, and
several hundred pages of text. All neatly kept in the boxes with my lab
equipment when we moved to our present location. All of that was lost when
thieves broke in and stole all the boxes in the garage marked LAB EQUIPMENT.
They hoped for a quick buck at a pawn shop; they did not know what they had
in reality.
I had hoped to compile it all into a book in my old age.
That is why I am now publishing what little remains in Micscape.
What it all comes down to is that the work is its own reward.

Thank you for your time,

Thomas (When I look I wonder)

Thomas - desperately sorry to hear about the loss of all your notes and drawings. Equipment can always be replaced, but that sort of thing is irreplaceable. Many thanks for sharing your thoughts with us. I hope you'll contribute to our Web pages as well as Micscape!

From: "John Kings" <kings@ccrtc.com>
To: <tonysd@cix.co.uk>
Subject: led lamp

To whom it may concern:

I must use the somewhat stylized address as I have no idea of the name of the person who will read this. Please forgive.

I recently raised contact with the QUEKETT web site and was quite interested in the report on using high intensity LED's for microscopic substage illumination. However the particular lamp was not identified and I have so far been unable to find such a unit here in the states. I live in a rather remote area and must search for technical material mostly by mail or 'phone.

Perhaps by e-mail you could help me by numerical and manufacturer identification.

My e-mail address is: kings@ccrtc.com and my server tells me that no more is needed from the UK. (We will see!)

I enjoyed your entire website presentation very much--all color illustrations came through with good color and definition.

W. J. Kings
RR 5, Box 288
Spencer, IN 47460
U. S. A.

Well, John, in the informal manner that's normally adopted on the WWW I'm Tony (SD) and I'm the Quekett Webmaster. I hope you got my email about the LEDs. Thank you for your kind comments on the site. Both Maplins and Farnell have Web sites that are worth a look if you're an experimenter with an interest in electronics. www.maplins.co.uk and www.farnell.com respectively. For UK residents Farnell will send you two very large catalogues free if you email them from their web site - full of useful information.

From: Casey Burns <cburns@kendaco.telebyte.com>
Reply-To: cburns@kendaco.telebyte.com
Organization: Casey Burns, Wind Instrument Maker

I want to thank the people who responded to my inquiry considering the
design of the modern Camera Lucida attachment. I actually found a number
of makers (Olympus, etc) still making these. Some of the basic
principles (beam splitting prism) are used extensively in modern
trinocular microscopes.

Also invaluable was the wonderful book on the Camera Lucida by Hammond
and Austin!

I am now setting out to make my own, monocular Camera Lucida microscope
using off the shelf optics, and parts from my Meiji binocular scope (I
have a number of spare objectives and eyepieces). The optical train will
be quite simple - between the microscope objective and the eyepiece,
there will also be a simple beam splitter - for now, I am using a cover
glass mounted at 45 degrees. Then there is another objective in the
drawing tube. On mine, both objectives will be 1X (eyepiece is only 15X
- this is a fairly low power system). Then there will be a double
concave "reducing" lens of fairly high concavity to reduce the secondary
image. Finally the 45 degree mirror, pointing downward. There may be
some distortion in the secondary image, and the fact that some of my
lenses are surplus, not to mention the cover glass beam splitter - but
this is a fairly low power system - so I should be able to live with
these defects.

In my primary career, I turn wooden flutes out of Grenadilla - so I am
well equipped with lathes and a mill. I plan to make a pretty scope out
of this black wood, with chased silver mountings, and a spot of
artificial ivory here or there. Making this should be fun! Using it will
be more fun - as I have 2 new species of echinoids, a couple of new
species of gastropods, and a number of other fossils to draw!

Best Regards,
Casey Burns

Sounds an interesting design, Casey.

From: Clive Faulks <CFaulks@compuserve.com>
Subject: Henry Crouch microscope
Sender: Clive Faulks <CFaulks@compuserve.com>

Hi,
I have somehow accumulated various microscopes over the years( two made by
Beck, four boxed childrens instruments and one by Henry Crouch) and since I
am about to take an unexpected semi- retirement I thought I would pay them
some attention. Its not just microscopes by the way I have spent the last
30 years working in one area of science or another and one tends to
naturally accumulate equipment which would otherwise be scrapped.

The nicest microscope I have is a stereo one made by Henry Crouch, stands
about 151/2" high and is made of laquered brass, it has the number 1940 on
it and I am unsure whether this is the date of manufacture or not(it looks
much older). It also has one of the three objectives missing. Do you know
where I might purchase one, I would really appreciate any leads.

Second question, how can I join your club?

Appreciate your advice.

Regards Clive Faulks.

The second question is easy, Clive - email me your snailmail address and I'll send you the appropriate forms! The first one - I'm sure Crouch was a Victorian manufacturer, and the number is certainly not the date. Crouch objectives are rather harder to source. Did Henry Crouch actually sign his objectives? I'm sure they were what we'd call OEM these days.

From Brian Singleton:

Dear Mr Saunders-Davies,

I have just joined the Quekett and saw your lucid article on personal
computing matters in the Journal. There is so much rubbish and hype
published about computing and the Internet today that it was good to read
your sane and gentle approach to the initiation of technophobes.

The Quekett website was one of the first microscopy sites visited when I
started to develop an interest in the subject. That and
Microscopy-UK,/Micscape have been of great value in stirring my growing
interest. In fact it is a rather revived interest - I used a "student's"
microscope about 50 years ago and have long had the urge to rediscover the
magic of the hidden world. Now retired, I have taken the first steps by
joining the Quekett and buying a second-hand microscope. The Quekett web
site provides the inspiration. Thank you for that.

Brian

Quite a lot of hard work goes into these pages, so it is very nice to find appreciative readers - thank you Brian!

From Brock Nelson:

Would anyone out there have a triocular head for a Swift series SRL they'd be
willing to sell to a Yank?

I'm fond of my old 'scope but would like to start making some photographs.

Many thanks!

Brock

D. Brock Nelson
5300 Via Andalusia
Yorba Linda, Calif. 92886-5005
714-693-1893
NelsonNemo@aol.com

This could be quite difficult to source, Brock. Have you tried our recommended supplier Tony Lindsey?

From Gary Baird

So happy to find your web site! I have been an amateur microscopist for
nearly 40 years, and a professional for the past 17. I am new to this
Internet thing and am delighted to find others with vocations and
avocations similar to mine!
Would love to contribute to your publication, if that is OK.
My income comes from analyzing materials for asbestos content,
microscopically, of course. Over the past 10 years I have increasingly
subcontracted work from other laboratories, analyzing by microscopy their
more perplexing samples. I did not really think that I could actually get
PAID for playing with my microscopes!
Keep up the good work. You have a new, regular reader.

Gary Baird, Baird Scientific, Carthage Missouri USA
bairdsci@ipa.net

Delighted to hear from you, Gary. Yes, please - any contribution would be very welcome. The 'Church of Microscopy' is a broad one, and articles on a wide variety of subjects are very acceptable

From John Garrett:

Really pleased to find the Quekett pages today. Not really done any
microscopy since the days when I used to break into the biology lab
at school at weekends and take photos using the projection
microscope. I inherited a Watson "Praxis" a few years ago. Cost a bit
over £10 when new in about 1905. The lenses have suffered from being kept
in a damp place and both objectives have suffered some impact damage.

Hoping to have a stereo microscope soon and also really hoping to
have a course on specimen mounting with Eric Marson, who is only a
few miles away - what an amazingly experienced fellow he is! That might
tempt me to look for another compound microscope.

I live on a small farm with two ponds so there's plenty of things to look
at. My aim would be to hook the microscope and camera up to the PC, so as
to be able to see big images on a decent monitor and to avoid the cost of
developing and printing (and batteries!!).

One step at a time, maybe!

Cheers and thanks for the Quekett pages.

John

John tells me he has a helicopter pilots licence - what a wonderful way to spot some interesting ponds!

From the Newsletter Editor of the New York Microscopical Society

 

Dear Tony,

The tardigrade/rotifer "thread" we are spinning online is producing exciting news. May I have your permission to quote from your posts to me in ournewsletter, NYMS NEWS? (Should you wish to quote from mine, go ahead!)

It's disappointing to know too late about the Rotifer Symposium in Minnesota. But if you give me a contact name and address for one of its organizers, I can still pass the information along usefully to fellow members of NYMS.

You asked for information about our group. The New York Microscopical Society was founded in 1877. We are about 300 members, though many are more loyal than active. (Some live far from New York City.) NYMS holds lecture meetings about 8 times a year, a winter holiday party, and a spring banquet (with speaker). Our newsletter, NYMS NEWS, is timed to announce our meetings.

Among our most popular offerings are the workshops: a single day or a series of days spent teaching some aspect of light microscopy, with each student working at a microscope. Our next workshop is on polarized light microscopy and will be held on four Saturdays, April 18 to May 9, 1998.

  Many of the lecture meetings take place at the American Museum of Natural History, in New York City. For the present, the workshops are held in West Paterson, New Jersey.   On May 10, 1997, NYMS sponsored its first "Water Bear Hunt." This event was geared towards children but also open to adults. We stocked in some tardigrade tuns from a biological supply company, and set up a video camera on a microscope so everyone could watch a creature revive. And of course we hunted for them in the wild (that is - in puddles and mosses out back of the West Paterson building). It was a great success and we expect this to become an annual event. I was surfing the Internet looking for relevant information when I found the Quekett Club's delightful tardigrade-enhanced Web site.

Regards

Jean Portel

From Ian Portman:

(His email : smig@bio.warwick.ac.uk)

Hi,

I'm working at the University of Warwick, I was trying - unsuccessfully to find somewhere that supplies polaroid filter at a reasonable price when I came across a reference to the Quekett web page.

Apparently you may have some stocks of polaroid, is this true? if so could you sell me some by post - I need to get some polarised images of my virus crystals and the going rate for a polariser for the olympus we use is a few hundred pounds, a lot of money for a handfull of photos.

If you don't have any, have you got any ideas as to where I might find some,

Thanks

Ian Portman
Dept. Biological Sciences
University of Warwick
Gibbet Hill
Coventry

I've sent Ian some polaroid material I bought many years ago, when Proops was in Tottenham Court Road (anyone remember those days!?). But it's not of any great quality so Ian might be pleased to hear of better material.

Any one like to offer advice to this reader?

I am a 15 year old high school student from Brazil. I love microbiology, and i want to buy a microscope. My parents are travelling in Norway and Finland, and i believe this is a great chance for me to get cheaper and better microscopes than in Brazil. Could you please give me some advice on how to buy microscopes?

Thanks,

Andre Moraes Nicola (joaoraf@rudah.com.br)

From Mike Dingley in Australia (who contributed the piece on Pediastrum):

Tony,

Many thanks for your replies. I have checked out your favourite microscope in the Quekett and it looks really nice. I have never seen one of these before. Ishall add the info to my Portable file system. I can see that you really like it and would not part with it. I am always adding information to my portable filing system so yes I am researching them at the moment, in fact all the time. I am, giving a slide/talk presentation to the Microscopical Society of Australia at Macquarie University on May 7th. The talk will be illustrated with 60 transparencies. It is sort of a historical look.

I hope your camera lives up to expectations and I would like to see some results as I am interested in buyinmg one later on.

Regards

Mike

HI TONY, I have a cts microscope, which is the large trinocular
instrument they seem to be a rare instrument, I am new to the internet
and would like to send a picture of it to the web site I haven't learnt
to do this yet. Also I would like to mention that I would like to start a
small group for meetings at my house on one Sunday a month, (Central
Camden Town) as many members find the Tuesday evenings awkward,
especially during the winter nights, and car parking a problem. I can
provide for say abour fifteen or so members, with room for about 1O
microscopes if members bring their own ilumination. I would provide
light refreshments. I have some time ago mentioned this to the Quekett
but did not get much encouragement. Perhaps if you mentioned this on the
web site it might produce some enthusiasm. I have had microscopes since
I was 14 many moons ago and I find cilliate movement fascinating and
have made quite a few videos of this under high power phase - perhaps
their are other microscopists interested in cilliate movement who might
be biochemists, and would have more knowledge of the biochemical
construction of cilliates.I could also let members who do not have this
equipment bring their own specimens to video. Excuse rather long
letter, Edward Cowen Email shiva.l@virgin. net

Hi Edward!

Nice to hear from you.

If your picture is a 'digital' one - either Windows Bit Map (.bmp) or .jpg or .gif you should be able to send it as an 'attachment' to a mail message. Or you could send me a photo or two, and an article or couple of paragraphs and we'd publish that as well.

I'm all for local meets - and the Quekett is too! After all we have many such in Dorset, Cornwall, the Midlands and so on, so why not Camden? I'll publish your letter on the Web page and it may encourage others to get in touch with you.

Best wishes with the meet - do let us know how you get on.

Back to home page