The Frontiers, Perils, and Potential of Digital Microscopy

The Rising Value of Digital Microscopy

Over the last two decades, digital microscopy has become an integral pillar of the technological advancements brought on by the digital era, as the rising ubiquity of microtechnology, as well as advances in medicine and chemistry, have driven greater demand for the tools to analyze microscopic objects and structures with greater precision. Improvements in computational power and efficiency have enabled us to process larger and denser parcels of visual data, and new analytical tools have emerged to assist us in deriving far more meaning from that data than would be possible with the naked eye and the imprecise interpretations of the human brain.

Microscopes have played an essential role in many human strides over the past few centuries. They have contributed to our ever-expanding knowledge of biology, chemistry, and physics, and been instrumental to the creation and advancement of dozens of specialized disciplines therein. As the studies made possible by microscopy grow increasingly sophisticated and ambitious, tools for digital image analysis provide invaluable support. Until very recently, however, visual data needed to be interpreted by human eyes, and while human oversight should never be excised completely, well-devised algorithms have paved the way for much faster, more accurate, and more efficient testing and quality control.

With the rise of AI, analytical algorithms, and machine vision, the field of digital microscopy has the potential to expand the frontiers of semi-automation through its ability to rapidly identify, scan, count, and measure small objects. In research and development settings, meanwhile, digital microscopy is valued for its benefit of efficiently generating high resolution displays that can easily be evaluated, shared, and transmitted, and of converting those images to data points for further study. The ability to rapidly gather data from numerous samples can accelerate the development of new products and technologies across dozens of sectors up to and including life-saving medical advancements. It becomes all the more crucial, then, that we take steps to ensure the integrity of the data that these microscopes provide.

Interpolation, Pixel Count, and Digital Hype

For all the hitherto unthinkable innovations made possible by computers and the increasingly advanced algorithms they are able to process, we must be vigilant against hype leading us to overestimate their ability to work miracles. Microscopy and programming are two separate fields with their own distinct paradigms, perspectives, and foundational disciplines, and while effective interdisciplinary communication and collaboration are certainly possible, there may at times be a disconnect between the limitations of the former and the solutions proposed by the latter. Furthermore, because microscopes are widely used by individuals whose primary discipline is not microscopy itself, these miscommunications are especially susceptible to going unrecognized.

This disconnect is best represented by interpolation, the process of creating new data points via predictive algorithm. These newly created data points are often fairly accurate estimates of the physical reality, and a variety of methods and formulas can be used in different contexts, but as they are not obtained through real world measurements, they do not represent an increase in the total amount of raw data. While not intentionally deceptive, this can make the pixel count touted by interpolative digital microscope manufacturers misleading. Even visually, the image created through interpolation may appear more detailed at a glance, but owing to their tendency to generate smooth gradients, interpolative algorithms are often ill equipped to depict a reality that is just as likely to be rough and jagged.

Interpolation is not without its uses, as well-designed predictive algorithms can be used to accentuate points of interest. In many circumstances, however, their superficial benefits mask their practical limitations. Their images dazzle with apparent clarity and high megapixel counts, and this has the potential to excite customers, executives, and investors who may not have the context or background to recognize why only a fraction of the visual data on display is truly useful as data. While this may not be an act of intentional deception on the part of the developers, manufacturers, and salespeople pushing this technology, the inevitable outcome of these circumstances will be at best underwhelming when a subpar microscope is put to use in the field.

Even if every pixel is a legitimate data point, more pixels will not necessarily produce a better image. At higher magnifications, there are limits to the light a sample can safely and effectively reflect, the density of the photoreceptors that interpret that light to generate and convey a magnified image, and the speed with which the resulting pixels can be rendered. Crowding too many pixels together has a tendency to reduce the sensitivity and electron capacity of each pixel due to the physical properties of light at the low end of the micro-scale, delivering marginal benefits if any while taking up inordinate amounts of processing bandwidth and memory space.

All the while, as the race for a higher pixel count rushes on, it far outstrips the ability of the human eye to meaningfully perceive the difference. There is virtually no perceptible difference between a 3-megapixel image and a 60-megapixel image to the person looking at it. And while a large amount of meaningful data can be drawn from analysis of the images taken with these microscopes, ultimately, a picture is meant to be seen. A program can be written to search the image for a specific set of qualities and parameters, but human intuition remains and probably always will remain necessary for our ability to visually identify irregularities that code fails to recognize because no one anticipated or knew how to code for them.

Theoretically a microscope with denser pixels could provide a larger image that can be expanded for closer examination, but that could also be achieved by examining multiple areas with a microscope with a lower megapixel count, especially since such microscopes are capable of greater magnification without compromising pixel sensitivity. There are applications for which a larger image comprised of a greater number of pixels would be warranted, but the benefits of such an investment are situational, and in many cases the versatility of a microscope with a lower pixel count will be equally if not more effective.

Responsible Implementation of Digital Tools

While excessive focus on digital enhancements and megapixel counts in digital microscopy may lead to products backed by impressive statistics that offer little material improvement, when thoughtfully implemented, more powerful analytical software can enhance the usefulness of the base microscopy technology. We are better equipped than ever to quickly and effectively interpret more complex, detailed renderings of the microscopic world, as long as every microscope, digital or otherwise, begins with a physical lens that magnifies visual information about a physical object. When both developers and users properly understand this fundamental hierarchy, that paves the way for mindful implementation of digital tools that enhance the underlying microscopy in practical, meaningful ways.

Interpolation is not inherently a deceptive tool to pad the pixel count, it can be useful as long as the people using it are cognizant of its limitations. This tool can be used to draw attention to certain trends and features in need of closer inspection, and the predictions it generates can be tested upon closer inspection. Additionally, while the points added through interpolation should not be treated as raw data, interpolation can lend certain images a cleaner appearance that may be considered more professional-looking for the purpose of presentations and other contexts in which detailed data is not essential. Superficial benefits are not inherently useless.

Higher megapixel counts have their place as well; when higher magnification is not the chief priority, there are certain applications that benefit from having a complete, detailed picture of a larger whole, such as inspecting complex parts for irregularities over a wide area. As with any tool, emphasis on one property often necessitates a tradeoff in an adjacent one, and while the benefits of denser pixels are often understated, that does not mean they are nonexistent.

Bridging Digital Innovation with Optical Excellence for Meaningful Progress

Higher computational power and more complex algorithms are often placed in a position of prestige in the culture of the modern tech industry, but digital microscopy cannot progress in a way that impactfully affects the fields that utilize it solely on the back of developments in the “digital” component. Without accompanying innovations on the “microscopy” side, newer digital microscope models will have little to sell themselves on beyond empty numbers, and as a consequence the technology will effectively stagnate. In the worst-case scenario, if the people using these devices do not understand their limitations, it could lead to faulty conclusions, resulting in the loss of time, product, money, or even life.

The most dependable and promising digital microscopy manufacturers, then, are the ones that do not neglect the physical component of a product designed to directly observe and interact with the physical world. By investing in well-crafted lenses and high-quality magnification and photoreceptors in tandem with complementary software, the field of digital microscopy can continue to improve upon itself and deliver far-reaching benefits in numerous fields. The number of pixels on the screen is less important than the accuracy, depth and legibility of information those pixels derive from their environment and convey to their human observer. A faulty observation from a poorly tuned instrument at the input stage cannot be computed away; garbage in is garbage out.

The current market and narrative surrounding the technology are fraught with a rush to invest in more powerful digital tools coupled with poor understanding of the nuances image resolution, but these obstacles can be overcome with effective communication. The narrative of the potential digital tools and algorithms bring to the physical instruments they augment can be made real and bring the field of digital microscopy to its full potential, as long as the “digital” is not prioritized at the expense of the “microscopy”. Thoughtful interdisciplinary integration will require a radical paradigm shift that cannot be achieved overnight, but it is the only viable path to true, materially impactful innovation.

For questions, email us at resources@n-denkeiamericas.com.