Comparison of results with three types of typical images obtained in FISH experiments. Shown are the raw (.dv) images, FISH Finder's unedited results of segmentation and signal identification, and Nemo's results of segmentation and signal identification. Image 1 demonstrates FISH Finder's accurate boundary segmentation and signal identification compared with Nemo's underestimation of the nuclear boundary with nonetheless accurate signal identification. Results of analysis for Image 2 demonstrate failure of nuclei segmentation and signal identification for both programs; showing over- and underestimation of a nuclear boundary and failure to identify one of four signals by FISH Finder and underestimation of nuclear boundaries and failure to identify all signals by Nemo. Image 3 shows FISH Finder's accurate nuclei segmentation and signal identification compared with Nemo's results of inaccurate segmentation and false-positive FISH signal identification.