Talk:Point spread function: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:47, 5 October 2012

Physics C‑class Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Here, "3D" is not in the sense of Stereoscopy, which is a (subjective) optical effect. Fluorescence microscopy really registers three dimensional distributions. Default007 08:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diffraction

When will you see diffraction rings in a PSF and when will you not? In photography, bokeh generally doesn't show it but microscopy seems to. Does it appear when you approach the diffraction limit? Is it Fraunhofer diffraction or Fresnel diffraction? 155.212.242.34 (talk) 16:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake?

the image formation process is linear in power and described by linear system theory. This means that when two objects A and B are imaged simultaneously, the result is equal to the sum of the independently imaged objects. In other words: the imaging of A is unaffected by the imaging of B and vice versa, owing to the non-interacting property of photons.

Since photons have been scientifically been proven to interact, the explanatory conclusion is outdated. Thus, my question is: what has been attempted to be explained with the 'other words'?

Kenneyw (talk) 22:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

^ That is wave-form of photons. I think the OP was talking about interference but then summing A and B would not keep OP's last line true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.232.94 (talk) 08:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Motion-blur Correction

I leave it to other editors to decide if this is noteworthy, but Adobe says they implement a PSF to help in correction of motion-blurred images as demonstrated here, although the details are limited. nakomaru (talk) 23:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 ^ That is wave-form of photons. I think the OP was talking about interference but then summing A and B would not keep OP's last line true.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.190.232.94|24.190.232.94]] ([[User talk:24.190.232.94|talk]]) 08:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+== Motion-blur Correction ==
+I leave it to other editors to decide if this is noteworthy, but Adobe says they implement a PSF to help in correction of motion-blurred images [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLLJBfRzXIQ as demonstrated here], although the details are limited. [[User:Nakomaru|nakomaru]] ([[User talk:Nakomaru|talk]]) 23:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)