3 ms·
Interesting idea, but it seems like diffraction will be a serious problem for this. Any time you have tiny little holes (apertures) you are going to get a lot
by Ono-Sendai 11y ago
Interesting idea, but it seems like diffraction will be a serious problem for this. Any time you have tiny little holes (apertures) you are going to get a lot of diffraction that will result in very blurry images.
- chrisBob 11y agoTheir mask is next to the sensor. Diffraction isn't as much of an issue if there is no propagation.
- Ono-Sendai 11y agoYou can't have it both ways. Either the mask hole is right by the sensor, in which case there is no angular resolution. Or the mask hole is further away, in which case you get lots of diffraction.
- sbierwagen 11y agoRead the paper. Edit: Man, I guess I should have read the paper!
- Ono-Sendai 11y ago"B. Limitations of FlatCam ... Achievable image/angular resolution. Our current prototypes have low spatial resolution which is attributed to two factors. First, it is well known that angular resolution of pinhole cameras and coded aperture cameras decreases when the mask is moved closer to the sensor [6]. This results in an implicit tradeoff between the achievable thickness and the achievable resolution. " Also the images speak for themselves - all very blurry.
- sbierwagen 11y agoOh.