Wish List for PFE Features

[Karsten Goemann]

Thanks John, that's awesome. I've just tried it and it works great. After the separate image acquisition I can just use the handy "Match Image Names" feature in the Run | Display/Export Images window to assign the images to the correct measurements (they have the same names as they were both run through Automate) and then do my single click export of all images (with and without analysis locations) as usual!

[John Donovan]

Thanks John, that's awesome. I've just tried it and it works great. After the separate image acquisition I can just use the handy "Match Image Names" feature in the Run | Display/Export Images window to assign the images to the correct measurements (they have the same names as they were both run through Automate) and then do my single click export of all images (with and without analysis locations) as usual!

Hi Karsten,
Glad that worked for you.

If anyone else doesn't know about the Match Image Names button that Karsten mentions above, it can be seen here in this post by Andrew Locock:

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=898.msg8581#msg8581

This button is near the bottom of the Display Probe Image Data dialog, which is accessed from the Run | Display, Annotate and Export Analog Signal Images menu in Probe for EPMA.

[Anette von der Handt]

Here comes the ultimate request to be lazy. So, Andrew Locock has this nifty spreadsheet to recalculate garnet analyses into a gazillion endmembers and other useful things. I also like it because it gives an assessment on the data quality and I always get good grades

The spreadsheet is set-up slightly different from the available PFE output options and also contains various elements (Sc, Zr, Sn etc) that are not always part of routine analyses. I always spend time rearranging or adding columns to the PFE output to make it fit and usually have to do it multiple times over when data processing.

It would be great if there could be another custom output (like the H.W. and J.J.D. options) that would just create an output with similar element order (and with empty columns if the element was not analyzed) so that I can copy the output straight into his spreadsheet.

The spreadsheet is attached and the paper can be found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0098300408001064

In case this is not too much work, this would be a great addition to the list of output options.

[glennpoirier]

I agree this would be really useful. Maybe we could do another custom output for Andrew's excellent amphibole spreadsheet too?

[John Donovan]

Here comes the ultimate request to be lazy. So, Andrew Locock has this nifty spreadsheet to recalculate garnet analyses into a gazillion endmembers and other useful things. I also like it because it gives an assessment on the data quality and I always get good grades

The spreadsheet is set-up slightly different from the available PFE output options and also contains various elements (Sc, Zr, Sn etc) that are not always part of routine analyses. I always spend time rearranging or adding columns to the PFE output to make it fit and usually have to do it multiple times over when data processing.

It would be great if there could be another custom output (like the H.W. and J.J.D. options) that would just create an output with similar element order (and with empty columns if the element was not analyzed) so that I can copy the output straight into his spreadsheet.

The spreadsheet is attached and the paper can be found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0098300408001064

In case this is not too much work, this would be a great addition to the list of output options.

Hi Anette,
It's a bit of work, but doable.

Can you send me an example of the .DAT file that is what you need for output from PFE?

[John Donovan]

I agree this would be really useful. Maybe we could do another custom output for Andrew's excellent amphibole spreadsheet too?

Hi Glenn,
I assume the amphibole spreadsheet requires a different element order than the garnet spreadsheet?  Can you attach Locock's Excel spreadsheet for amphiboles?

Can you also send me an example .DAT file with the correct formatting for the amphibole spreadsheet?

[Brian Joy]

I agree this would be really useful. Maybe we could do another custom output for Andrew's excellent amphibole spreadsheet too?

Hi Glenn,
I assume the amphibole spreadsheet requires a different element order than the garnet spreadsheet?  Can you attach Locock's Excel spreadsheet for amphiboles?

Can you also send me an example .DAT file with the correct formatting for the amphibole spreadsheet?

Keep in mind that many people do not accept the new amphibole classification of Hawthorne et al. (2012, Am Min 97:2031-2048) and continue to use the older Leake et al. classification.  Further, in order to classify an amphibole, it's necessary to recalculate for Fe₂O₃, and the recalculated value is strongly dependent on the normalization scheme used.  For instance, one may obtain radically different wt% Fe₂O₃ depending on whether Na⁺ is assumed to reside on M4 or A -- and this is assuming that no O^2- substitutes for OH^-.  I would proceed with extreme caution.

[BenjaminWade]

Hi John

Only a minor thing, but it would be great if there was an increase (or removal?) of the character limit to the "Description" box in the Standard program? I find myself using it to document progressive changes/updates to concentrations, or addition of important notes, but at the moment it seems to be character amount limited and I have reached that limit for some standards. If its not simple to increase thats fine, I will have to start some other database record locally to record when I make changes.

cheers

[John Donovan]

Hi Ben,
Yeah the maximum limit for a "text" database field in MS Access is 255 characters.  I could change it to a "memo" field but then it would break everyone's current standard databases.  It used to be 64 characters, so when I changed it to 255 years ago I thought that would be good enough...     

Sorry.
john

[BenjaminWade]

Hi John
No worries. When I modify the Standard.mdb I make a dated archive copy so will just wipe the box clean of edits in the new copy each so I have enough room, and just refer back to the older archived mdb files if I want to see historical changes I have made.

Cheers

[Mike Matthews]

Could you add a memo field? If it doesn’t break the database it could be a useful place to keep a version log etc...

[John Donovan]

Hi Mike,
Do you mean a single memo field for a single standard database?  Or do you mean a single memo field for each PFE MDB database?

[Mike Matthews]

Hi John,

I was just wondering if that would be an option to address Ben’s request.

Mike

[John Donovan]

Hi John,

I was just wondering if that would be an option to address Ben’s request.

Mike

Hi Mike,
It's a reasonable idea, so that's why I asked if he needs a single memo field for the standard (or PFE) database, or a memo field for each standard composition.
john

[John Donovan]

Hi John

Only a minor thing, but it would be great if there was an increase (or removal?) of the character limit to the "Description" box in the Standard program? I find myself using it to document progressive changes/updates to concentrations, or addition of important notes, but at the moment it seems to be character amount limited and I have reached that limit for some standards. If its not simple to increase thats fine, I will have to start some other database record locally to record when I make changes.

cheers

Hi Ben,
Along the lines that Mike Matthews suggested I think we've implemented something you can use. Update using the Help menu to PFE v. 12.8.9 and open your standard database. There's now a new button in the Standard | Modify menu dialog called Memo Text as seen here:



This gives you a 64K character memo field for additional documentation (in addition to the existing 255 character description field).

Let me know if this works for you.