Deb my experience with both types is that tape is fine for daily work for
the vast majority of slides - those that will be looked at once and filed
away forever. Tape does have some waviness that affects critical microscopy
- high power and photography to some extent. I've gotten excellent pictures
with tape-coverslipped slides, but glass-coverslipped slides are much more
consistent for photography. The newer glass coverslippers are more reliable
and faster than the old ones so speed is not such an issue. 

Tim Morken

-----Original Message-----
From: WWmn916@aol.com [mailto:WWmn916@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 8:05 PM
To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] Glass vs. Tape Coverslippers


Hello again,
 
I'm looking for opinions on the subject of glass coverslippers versus tape  
coverslipping.  I have the opportunity to decide on a system.  My only  
experience has been with tape coverslipping.  I understand machines  that
glass 
coverslip are slower than tape systems. Is the refractive index  better with
glass 
coverslips under the microscope?  Opinions pros/cons are  appreciated.
 
Deb King, HT(ASCP)
Sacramento, CA
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet

_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet