In my lecture notes about the sampling of an image I've written that:

  • Since pixels have a finite dimension the spatial frequency response is attenuated before the "ideal" Nyquist frequency
  • In order to have a better freq. response, the sensor resolution should increase
  • Also the sensor dimension should increase otherwise the pixel simply gets smaller and the problem remains

I really can't understand the last sentence. Why should a small pixel size be negative for the spatial frequency response? I'm probably misunderstanding (or I've misunderstood while listening to the lecture) the whole thing because in my mind it should be the opposite.

  • $\begingroup$ Probably I just wrote down the wrong thing. It seems that the last point is actually the opposite (as I expected). researchgate.net/publication/… $\endgroup$
    – wilove
    Feb 4 at 17:48

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.