PURPOSE. To describe a standardized flood-illuminated adaptive optics (AO) imaging protocol suitable for the clinical setting and to assess sampling methods for measuring cone density.METHODS. Cone density was calculated following three measurement protocols: 50 3 50-lm sampling window values every 0.58 along the horizontal and vertical meridians (fixed-interval method), the mean density of expanding 0.58-wide arcuate areas in the nasal, temporal, superior, and inferior quadrants (arcuate mean method), and the peak cone density of a 50 3 50-lm sampling window within expanding arcuate areas near the meridian (peak density method). Repeated imaging was performed in nine subjects to determine intersession repeatability of cone density. RESULTS.Cone density montages could be created for 67 of the 74 subjects. Image quality was determined to be adequate for automated cone counting for 35 (52%) of the 67 subjects. We found that cone density varied with different sampling methods and regions tested. In the nasal and temporal quadrants, peak density most closely resembled histological data, whereas the arcuate mean and fixed-interval methods tended to underestimate the density compared with histological data. However, in the inferior and superior quadrants, arcuate mean and fixed-interval methods most closely matched histological data, whereas the peak density method overestimated cone density compared with histological data. Intersession repeatability testing showed that repeatability was greatest when sampling by arcuate mean and lowest when sampling by fixed interval. CONCLUSIONS.We show that different methods of sampling can significantly affect cone density measurements. Therefore, care must be taken when interpreting cone density results, even in a normal population.

The Flexible Image Transport System (FITS) standard has been a great boon to astronomy, allowing observatories, scientists and the public to exchange astronomical information easily. The FITS standard, however, is showing its age. Developed in the late 1970s, the FITS authors made a number of implementation choices that, while common at the time, are now seen to limit its utility with modern data. The authors of the FITS standard could not anticipate the challenges which we are facing today in astronomical computing. Difficulties we now face include, but are not limited to, addressing the need to handle an expanded range of specialized data product types (data models), being more conducive to the networked exchange and storage of data, handling very large datasets, and capturing significantly more complex metadata and data relationships.There are members of the community today who find some or all of these limitations unworkable, and have decided to move ahead with storing data in other formats. If this fragmentation continues, we risk abandoning the advantages of broad interoperability, and ready archivability, that the FITS format provides for astronomy. In this paper we detail some selected important problems which exist within the FITS standard today. These problems may provide insight into deeper underlying issues which reside in the format and we provide a discussion of some lessons learned. It is not our intention here to prescribe specific remedies to these issues; rather, it is to call attention of the FITS and greater astronomical computing communities to these problems in the hope that it will spur action to address them.

Literature and experience provide insight on the efficacy and safety of the many options for post-photorefractive keratectomy pain control. Generally, refractive surgeons are using a combination approach to achieve pain control with excellent results.

The American Astronomical Society's WorldWide Telescope (WWT) project enables terabytes of astronomical images, data, and stories to be viewed and shared among researchers, exhibited in science museums, projected into full-dome immersive planetariums and virtual reality headsets, and taught in classrooms from middle school to college levels. We review the WWT ecosystem, how WWT has been used in the astronomical community, and comment on future directions.