tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post2128470347416547443..comments2024-03-27T00:32:29.877-07:00Comments on Photos and Stuff: Ugly Reality, a Simple Testamolitorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-53783513446922707892015-10-20T05:34:38.502-07:002015-10-20T05:34:38.502-07:00Well, my ruler disagrees.
Well, my ruler disagrees.<br />amolitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-22284968174607486652015-10-20T04:16:33.278-07:002015-10-20T04:16:33.278-07:00I see a line width of 3 pixels, implying a cycle w...I see a line width of 3 pixels, implying a cycle width of 6 pixels peak to peak on the finer structures, yes.ivokelehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04021987344409283709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-69973828914629020832015-10-20T03:12:43.387-07:002015-10-20T03:12:43.387-07:00You consistently seen to think I am an idiot, whic...You consistently seen to think I am an idiot, which I find tedious. You begin by repeating in different words the statement about 5 micron dot pitch which I made, which suggests to me you haven't bothered to read what I wrote. This isn't the first time you've said such things.<br /><br />Then you have the temerity to accuse me of muddling up cycles and dots and a moment later talk about line widths versus line spacings.<br /><br />Do you mean that in one of the four pictures at three different magnifications, you saw some lines spaced at three pixel intervals? Or is the line width 3 pixels, implying a line spacing of 6 pixels? Or what?<br /><br />Line widths are meaningless in this context. You have to measure peak to peak, ideally across a group of lines.<br /><br />I'm certainly not going to write a lecture on his to read a test chart here, but if you don't know how, I can going that you ought to go find out.<br /><br /><br /><br />amolitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-15180695876924669672015-10-20T01:00:33.397-07:002015-10-20T01:00:33.397-07:00Arithmetics again and then I am gone, because this...Arithmetics again and then I am gone, because this is indeed enough about the subject.<br /><br />The D3100 has a 23.1 x 15.4 mm sensor and a resolution of 4608 x 3072. 4608 divided by 23.1 gives about 200 pixels per mm, which translates to 100 cycles per mm (2 pixels per cycle, extinction resolution).<br /><br />Looking at your pictures, the finer black lines are about 3 pixels wide, so you are testing 100/3, or about 30 cycles/mm. ivokelehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04021987344409283709noreply@blogger.com