-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Anti-aliased apertures needed to increase numerical accuracy #129
Comments
I started work on antialiasing in a private branch a while ago (> 6 months), but ran into some bugs and didn't yet have a chance to get back to debugging it. I don't recall the details now. I probably ought to go ahead and push that branch here, and perhaps we can collectively dig into it again. I'm tied up in meetings for all this week so this probably won't happen right away. |
Two possible routes to implementation: I've just noticed the The other path would be finishing up the implementations using the pure-python subpixel algorithms in my own code. I've just pushed the |
Still want to get this done - but it's not happening this week. |
See comments on #180 for an example of the improvements from sub-pixel sampled optics. Yes, we should still come up with some more general solution for this. For the |
As discussed in #106, 'gray' aperture edges, would decrease high-order aliasing and allow one-to-one comparison of POPPY Fresnel systems (#103, #108) with their PROPER equivalents.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: