the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / An aliasing metric

An aliasing metric

May 31, 2014 JimK Leave a Comment

For the last couple of weeks we’ve been concentrating on maximizing resolution, as measured by MTF50 or MTF30, and occasionally MTF10. In this post, I’d like to consider what could be a similar metric for aliasing.

We already have one that’s commonly used: the MTF at Nyquist frequency, which I’ll call MTFN. Imatest uses this. From my perspective, it has a few problems. One is that the shape of the MTF curve between the Nyquist frequency of half a cycle per pixel and one cycle per pixel is not determined by MTFN, and all energy in that range can cause aliasing. In particular, some anti-aliasing (AA) filters have zeros near the Nyquist frequency, which can make MTFN look optimistic as a predictor of aliasing artifacts.

I thought that a useful measure might be something I’m calling MTFA, which is the average MTF in the region between 0.5 cy/px and 1 cy/px.

I programmed the camera simulator to calculate MTFN and MTFA for a diffraction-limited lens on a 4.77 um pitch, Bayer CFA camera:

alaisvsfdiff

The average aliasing is lower than the MTF at Nyquist.

With a simulated AA filter, the position of the two curves is reversed:

alaisvsfdiffAA

For our simulated Otus 55mm f/1.4 with no AA filter:

alaisvsfotus

We see quite different curves with an AA filter:

alaisvsfotusAA

It’s clear that the MTFN curves don’t tell the whole story, especially in the case of an AA filter with a zero near the Nyquist frequency. MTFA looks like a better metric for aliasing, if you can only have one.

Does anyone want to propose a different aliasing metric?

The Last Word

← MTF10 results for a simulated Otus Smile! →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

January 2023
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
« Dec    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Picking a macro lens
  • Glenn Whorrall on Picking a macro lens
  • JimK on What pitch do you need to scan 6×6 TMax 100?
  • Hatzipavlis Peter on What pitch do you need to scan 6×6 TMax 100?
  • JeyB on Internal focusing 100ish macro lenses
  • JimK on How focus-bracketing systems work
  • Garry George on How focus-bracketing systems work
  • Rhonald on Format size and image quality
  • JimK on Internal focusing 100ish macro lenses
  • Darrel Crilley on Fuji 100-200/5.6 on GFX, Nikon 70-200/@2.8E, Apo-Sonnar 135 on Z7, revisited

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.