4.6 Article

Improved depth resolution and depth-of-field in temporal integral imaging systems through non-uniform and curved time-lens array

期刊

OPTICS EXPRESS
卷 28, 期 5, 页码 6261-6276

出版社

OPTICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1364/OE.382439

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Sharif University of Technology
  2. Iran National Science Foundation [98018266]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Observing and studying the evolution of rare non-repetitive natural phenomena such as optical rogue waves or dynamic chemical processes in living cells is a crucial necessity for developing science and technologies relating to them. One indispensable technique for investigating these fast evolutions is temporal imaging systems. However, just as conventional spatial imaging systems are incapable of capturing depth information of a three-dimensional scene, typical temporal imaging systems also lack this ability to retrieve depth information-different dispersions in a complex pulse. Therefore, enabling temporal imaging systems to provide these information with great detail would add a new facet to the analysis of ultra-fast pulses. In this paper, after discussing how spatial three-dimensional integral imaging could be generalized to the time domain, two distinct methods have been proposed in order to compensate for its shortcomings such as relatively low depth resolution and limited depth-of-field. The first method utilizes a curved time-lens array instead of a flat one, which leads to an improved viewing zone and depth resolution, simultaneously. The second one which widens the depth-of-field is based on the non-uniformity of focal lengths of time-lenses in the time-lens array. It has been shown that compared with conventional setup for temporal integral imaging, depth resolution, i.e. dispersion resolvability, and depth-of-field, i.e. the range of resolvable dispersions, have been improved by a factor of 2.5 and 1.87, respectively. (C) 2020 Optical Society of America under the terms of the OSA Open Access Publishing Agreement

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据