OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America

Journal of the Optical Society of America

  • Vol. 58, Iss. 5 — May. 1, 1968
  • pp: 609–614

Comparative Noise Performance of Photographic Emulsions in Holographic and Conventional Imagery

J. W. GOODMAN, R. B. MILES, and R. B. KIMBALL  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA, Vol. 58, Issue 5, pp. 609-614 (1968)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSA.58.000609


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (690 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

An analysis of an idealized film-grain model suggests that any photographic emulsion may be significantly more sensitive in holographic imagery than in conventional imagery. Experiments with Kodak Plus-X emulsion show that such an improvement of sensitivity can indeed be realized.

Citation
J. W. GOODMAN, R. B. MILES, and R. B. KIMBALL, "Comparative Noise Performance of Photographic Emulsions in Holographic and Conventional Imagery," J. Opt. Soc. Am. 58, 609-614 (1968)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josa/abstract.cfm?URI=josa-58-5-609


Sort:  Author  |  Journal  |  Reset

References

  1. H. J. Zweig, G. C. Higgins, and D. L. MacAdam, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 48, 926 (1958).
  2. D. Gabor and W. P. Goss, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 56, 849 (1966).
  3. D. Gabor, in Progress in Optics, Vol. I, E. Wolf, Ed. (North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1961), p. 122.
  4. In some cases it may also be desired to measure the phase of the light transmitted by a coherently illuminated object, but we do not consider this problem here.
  5. E. N. Leith and J. Upatnieks, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 52, 1123 (1962).
  6. G. W. Stroke, An Introduction to Coherent Optics and Holography (Academic Press Inc., New York, 1966).
  7. L. Silberstein, Phil. Mag. 44, 257 (1922).
  8. L. Silberstein, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 31, 343 (1941).
  9. E. L. O'Neill, Introduction to Statistical Optics (Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass., 1963).
  10. 10 The presence of light in the original aerial image is indicated by a drop in the transmittance of the resulting negative transparency. Thus the signal amplitude is taken to be 1-, while the noise amplitude is σt.
  11. J. W. Goodman, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 57, 493 (1967).
  12. The possibility was considered that aberrations might be present in the holographic case, thus yielding more photons per resolution-cell than would be calculated under the assumption of diffraction-limited operation. However, comparison of the granularities caused by the so-called speckle effect demonstrated that the conventional and holographic images were of roughly the same resolution.

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited