data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c6917/c6917cd7db530a1fef512d4b86c09668be541201" alt="Image studio lite"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/303f3/303f3ead5c1b42e7547e4ad09583191ea9c6f50b" alt="image studio lite image studio lite"
Overall it's fairly intuitive to use but I would just add that the UI could be improved and some of the extra features don't work particularly well (such as annotations, charts, normalization and overall navigation). It is also possible to look at the histogram density plots like you would in ImageJ. The point and click tool for drawing boxes is very fast but I'm not sure I fully trust it to accurately trace my bands so I prefer to draw the boxes myself. Image Studio is very good for efficiently analyzing your blots but still allowing you to adjust your calculation parameters (if you're interested). ImageJ is very powerful because of the many tools available for it, but for simply doing Western blot quantitation, I prefer Image Studio Lite. Good question, I have used both for Western blots a fair bit, especially since our lab started using the Li-cor Odyssey Fc.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c6917/c6917cd7db530a1fef512d4b86c09668be541201" alt="Image studio lite"