|
Resolution
Back to Notes on Photography
by Makoto
Honda Updated February 9, 2005
General
The
resolution is defined in terms of "line pairs per millimeter",
or lp/mm for short. We are interested in determining how
many lines are discernable in the distance of 1 mm. One line
pair consists of a black line and the adjacent white line of the
equal thickness. The better the lens resolution, the greater the
number of lines you can resolve. You need a film to capture the
image created by the lens. The better the film resolution, the
more you can capture on the film. The final resolution of the
resultant picture that you see is the accumulative effect of the
lens resolution, the film resolution, and the resolution of
other optical/non-optical systems
involved in the entire photographic
process. The overall resolution,
sometimes referred to as the system resolution, is given
by the following approximation.
1
System Resolution: Rs =
----------------------------
1
1
---- + ----
+ .........
Rl
Rf
where Rl is the lens resolution and Rf is the film
resolution.
For
instance, if your lens resolution is 100 lp/mm and the film
resolution is also 100 lp/mm, the system resolution you get is
50 lp/mm. If you use the lens having 200 lp/mm resolution, with
the same film, your system resolution will improve to 67 lp/mm.
Lens Resolution
We often use the term "aerial
resolution" in reference to the lens resolution to emphasize the
fact that it is a resolution measure of the aerial image formed
by the lens at its focal plane. Typically a microscope is
precisely focused on the aerial image created by the lens being
tested. The lens aerial resolution varies widely depending on
the lens. To give some frame of reference, some high quality
35mm SLR camera lenses, often
associated with the lens manufactured by major camera
manufacturers for their own brand of cameras, yield 600 lp/mm or
more, at optimal conditions. (The resolution is often optimized
for a given lens when the setting a couple of
stops down from the widest aperture is
used for many lenses, though this is not always the case.
Also see theoretical maximum below.) The less pricey
lenses, often from the third-party lens manufacturers, may yield
300 lp/mm. There are, of course, exceptions, on both sides of
the fence. Also, zoom lenses are generally harder to design,
often involving greater number of elements, and
therefore, tend to yield lower resolution relative to their
fixed focal length counterpart. This explains why many
professionals shy away from zoom lenses (though
some latest zoom lenses
offer uncompromising optical quality
matching that of prime lenses).
Theoretical Maximum Resolution
The laws of physics impose maximum resolution
on the image formed by the lens. This is a theoretical limit
due to the diffraction of light. As such, this is the absolute
maximum an ideal lens can achieve. The theoretical resolution is
dependent on the lens aperture used as well as wavelength of the
light, as shown below.
1
Theoretical Maximum Resolution: Rmax
= ----------------------------
1.22 x W x Feff
where W is the
wavelength (in mm) and Feff is the effective f-stop.
(In
high magnification photomacrography, the exposure factor often
pushes the effective f-stop higher than the f-stop marked on the
lens, but in normal shooting situations, it is the same as the
f-stop on the lens.)
The
wavelength of light we human can perceive lies around 0.0004 -
0.0007mm range from blue to red in the spectrum of visible
light. Using the mid point of 0.00055mm (monochromatic green),
the resolution equation is reduced to :
1500
Theoretical Maximum Resolution: Rmax
= -----------
Feff
The resolution
values thus derived are shown in Table I for various f-stops.
Again, this is the maximum resolution any lens can possibly
achieve. Generally, only at larger f-stops (smaller apertures)
does the lens perform anywhere close to these theoretical
limits.

Table
I * f-stops below f45 may be only meaningful in
photomacrography
Film Resolution
The
film resolution is often described for two situations: One is
for the test subject having a contrast of 1000:1, and the
other of 1.6:1. The first 1000:1 contrast represents a
high contrast situation in the testing laboratory, and the 1.6:1
is the average contrast of real-world subjects around us.
Expectedly, the film performs much better for the 1000:1
contrast condition than in the real world. Note that the 1000:1
contrast is only achievable in a back-lit projection setup of
the test pattern. Even a black and white test chart well lit by
a 45 degree illumination only achieves a fraction of this
contrast. Therefore, a resolution value measured at 1000:1
contrast is for comparison purposes only among different films,
and is meaningless when applied to a real world situation. Here
are some examples of film resolution. Generally, a B&W film
yields better resolution than color. A color transparency
(slide) film typically scores much better than a color print
(negative) film. Also, a slower film (lower ISO rating) tends
to be superior than a faster film in resolving power.
Some
numbers
ISO
1000:1 1.6:1 RMS*
Fujichrome Velvia RVP 50
160 80 9
Fujichrome Velvia 100F Professional 100 160
80 8
Fujichrome Sensia 100 100
160 80 8
Fujichrome Provia 100F Professional 100 160
80 8
Kodachrome 25 / 25 Professional 25 100
63 9
Kodachrome 64 / 64 Professional 64 100
63 10
Kodachrome 200 / 200 Professional 200 100
50 16
Kodacolor
B&W
*Diffusive RMS granularity value
(source:
www.fujifilm.co.jp,
http:\\medfmt.8k.com )
Film Is Limiting
Typically, the resolution of the film available in the consumer
market today is much lower than the lens resolution. This often
makes the film the ultimate bottleneck of the photographic
process in the overall resolution
equation. This explains why an expensive lens from the camera
manufacturer does not drastically improve the picture quality of
your family picnic when viewed side-by-side against the picture
taken by a much less expensive lens.
A
chart below shows the overall
resolution (system resolution) for various combinations of lens
and film resolutions. If you use a typical color print film of
50 lp/mm resolution, your final resolution is 43 lp/mm with a
300 lp/mm lens. If you spend a top dollar to invest in a top
quality lens of 600 lp/mm resolution, your
combined resolution improves to 46 lp/mm, a mere 7 %
increase. Using the same 300 lp/mm lens, on the other hand, if
you change your film from 50 lp/mm to 80 lp/mm, your final
resolution jumps to 63 lp/mm - near 50 % improvement!

Good Lenses
High
quality lenses are often found among expensive lenses from major
camera manufacturers. The third-party lenses tend to perform
less, for a lesser price. It is also worth noting that many
major 35mm SLR camera manufacturers offer two lens lines,
high-quality lenses for those who need them, and the lesser ones
for "cost-performance", which are sometimes designated as such (a
la, Nikon's "XXX" series). The differentiation is sometimes
implicit, seen in the price. For instance, a compact-size zoom
lens, conveniently covering a good focal length range, at a very
reasonable price tag - an ideal lens for everyone - is not
likely to create a highest quality image. This is, by no means,
a negative endorsement on my part for such a lens. If it's
suitable for you, go for it. Just remember the limitations.
Other Factors Affecting Image
Sharpness
Now
that you got the best lens the money can buy (or at least your
budget allows for), what should you do to get the most out of
your lens? To put things in perspective, if the largest picture
you ever want is a 3x5 print to put in your family album, all
the discussion we are having has little bearing to you. Even an
inexpensive lens will serve your purpose pretty well. So, let
us focus here on the highest quality image we can possibly
achieve in today's photography.
Things To Do To
Achieve The Best Result
1. Use a tripod.
Although cumbersome to use and time-consuming to set up (have to
carry the darn thing along the way, too) the tripod does make a
difference in the image quality. A tripod comes in different
sizes and weight. The sturdier the better, of course, but
likely the heavier. The tripod is important because the
slightest camera movement might wipe out the image quality
difference between an expensive lens and a cheapy you paid
additional $1000 for. One more thing: If you have taken your
time and effort to use a tripod, you should use a shutter
release as well.
2. Mirror-lock for
SLR cameras. Just like a tripod, this will reduce the camera
movement. The use of mirror-lock is recommended by some people
in connection with improving image resolution. This, of course,
assumes the use of a tripod. In a critical shooting, such as
using a long telephoto lens, the camera vibration due to a
mirror flipping is not negligible. I have personally used
mirror-locking during high magnification photomacrography: With
the bellows extended all the way, the field of view is as narrow
as a telephoto shot, which makes the image sharpness highly
sensitive to camera movement.
3.
Vibration-reduction Lenses. Vibration-reduction technology is
relatively new. I have heard positive comments, though I have
not tried one myself. The lens tends to be bulkier and heavier,
but the technology appears to do the magic. Major
manufacturers, such as Nikon and Cannon, offer several lenses
with vibration-reduction designation.
4. Lend hood. This
is very important especially in outdoor photography. You should
always try to avoid the sun from hitting the lens. Even with
today's advanced lens coating technology, there is often a
visible image quality deterioration if a strong light hits the
lens. A so-called "ghost image" is one manifestation. I often
carry a piece of black cardboard to use as a lens shade in order
to avoid the sun, especially for a wide-angle lens, because the
attached lens hood is often not enough. The only time I allow
the sun to hit my lens is when I am intentionally including the
sun in my photograph.
5. Optimal lens
aperture. As various tens tests show, it is known that many
lenses tend to yield their highest resolution (at the image
center) when used at the aperture a couple of stops down from
wide open (though this could obviously vary depending on the
lens). By stopping down one or two additional stops, you may
increase the overall image resolution of the entire frame area
due to the improvement of the resolution at the image corner,
though the image center resolution may decrease. So, there is
such a thing as the "best" aperture for a given lens. Obviously,
this is the aperture you should use if the resolution is the
only thing you are after. Personally, I decide on which aperture
to use, first and foremost, to control the depth of field; the
resolution consideration is often secondary.
6. Use a good
film. This goes without saying. Even if your lens is forming a
perfect image on the focal plane, if the film is not capable of
capturing it, what's the point? As discussed earlier, the lens
tends to perform much better than regular films commercially
available today. That is, the film is limiting in the overall
resolution equation. Any improvement on the choice of film,
therefore, is likely to have a direct impact on your final
photograph. Generally, a slide film (transparency) scores better
than a print (negative) film. A slower film speed often means
better resolution. (ISO 400 films have far larger grains than
ISO100 films.) The highest resolution film is found in BW.
Other Negative
Causes For Image Sharpness
There are some other
causes to reduce the sharpness of your photographic image, that
may not be under your control.
1. SLR camera
mirror misalignment. If the mirror does not return to the
precise mid-point (at 45 degree angle) between the film and the
focusing screen, however carefully you focus, manual or auto,
the film is not getting the focused image.
2. Film flatness.
This is more of a problem for the film format larger than 35mm.
3. The focus
changes as you stop down the aperture. This is a bad lens. If
the lens exhibits this tendency, the only remedy is to re-focus
at the aperture you intend to use. The only time I consistently
do this is when I do high magnification photomacrography. I use
Zuiko Macro 20mm F3.5 lens (Olympus) and Minolta Macro 12.5mm F2
lens, both specifically designed for use with a bellows
extension. Since the focus tends to move as I stop down, I
always set the aperture to f5.6 - f8 (no auto aperture for these
lenses) and then focus very, very carefully before firing.
What Eyes Can See
The unaided eye cannot resolve more than 4
lp/mm on the print viewed at the distance of one foot. (Ref.
Ronald W. Harris. Understanding Resolution. Darkroom & Creative
Camera Techniques, pp.26-66. Mar-Apr. 1991).
One line pair
comprises one white line and one black line. So, 4 lp/mm is
equivalent to 8 dots/mm. This is what the unaided eye can
discern on the print. The table below shows how many dots are
needed on the photographic print to look sharp to the eye based
on this unaided eye's maximum resolving capability. These dots,
of course, must ultimately come from the image captured on the
film (chemical or digital).
Print Size
(inches) Short-side (mm) Total Pixel Number Needed on
the Film (chemical/digital) *
3 x
5 75 mm x 0.5 M pixels
5 x 7 125 mm x 1.4 M
pixels
8 x 10 200 mm x 3.6 M
pixels
10 x 14 250 mm x 6.0 M
pixels
16 x 20 400 mm x 15 M
pixels
20 x 30 500 mm x 24 M
pixels
30 x 40 750 mm x 54 M
pixels
40 x 60 1000 mm x 96 M
pixels
* Total pixel number
is computed as (S x 8) x (S x 1.5 x 8) where S is the short side
length of the print (expressed in mm). The longer side of the
print is assumed to be 1.5 time the shorter side. If the print's
aspect ratio is closer to square than 1:1.5 as in film format,
it simply means the print is not taking the full advantage of
the film real estate, and some pixels are thrown away. Still,
for the purpose of pixel number calculation on the film, it is
appropriate to use 1.5 aspect ratio.
Table - How many
pixels are minimally needed on the image in order to produce a
print of various DPIs - provided no pixels are lost during the
printing (from the image to print).
Print DPI
(dots-per-inch) 100 200 300 400
500 600 700 800
Print Size (inch)
3 x 5
300x500 600x1000
150K 600K
5 x 7
500x700 1000x1400
350K 1400K
8 x 10
10 x 14
16 x 20
20 x 30
30 x 45
40 x 60
Angular resolution of the eye
Viewing distance, to
see the whole picture - not scanning
Necessary print
resolution
Max print size from
various format film, resolution at the film
Large Format
Cameras
The
photography world seems to be sharply divided into two groups:
35mm photographers and "large-format" followers. Each group
religiously insists on the superiority of their belief. I belong
to the 35mm camp. As we are exploring the issue of resolution,
there is no doubt the large-format films offer far greater
number of dots on the film image, simply because of their
spacious real estate, thus allowing a larger photographic print
of undeniable sharpness.
If I came up with an image I really like, and if I can reproduce
the shot, I would certainly love to re-shoot the subject with a
large-format camera.
One lesson I learned
in photography, which, in my opinion, is the most
important and valuable lesson, more than any thing else, is the
following realization. And I will let you in on it. It may
shock you, or it may not.... Over many years of picture taking,
I came to this realization. That is: Photography is not easy!
Yes, it is difficult. How difficult? I can give some
quantitative measure as to how difficult photography is. It's
difficult to make a "good" photograph. Granted, what constitutes
a good photograph is debatable, and subjective. But, regardless
of your evaluation criterion, making a good photograph is
difficult. So difficult indeed that you have to take "many"
pictures, in order to get one good shot. For quite some time I
had some idea as to how many pictures I have to take to make one
good photograph. I recently got a clear number when I was
reading an article in National Geographic Magazine. The number
sited was one thousand. Yes, in order to make one photograph
used in the National Geographic, the photographer shoots, on
average, 1000 frames of pictures.
I personally do not
have any experience of large format cameras. But I reckon it
would take a fair amount of effort to shoot 5000 frames of 8x10
film. Not only that, there are many subject areas where only the
versatility of 35mm systems can exploit the subjects. This would
explain why the superb images appearing in the National
Geographic are taken by 35mm cameras, 90%, and the rest probably
6x6cm or smaller.
Modulation
Transfer Function (MTF)
Until
now, we have been discussing the subject of resolution as it
relates to the image sharpness. However, the true measure of
sharpness involves image contrast as well as resolution. In
reality, you can have a lens with an excellent resolution but a
poor contrast, and vice versa. In either case, the final picture
sharpness is compromised. Resolution and contrast must go
hand-in-hand.
A graph of contrast transfer (i.e., how well the subject's
contrast is retained in the image) for a given spatial frequency
(in line pairs/mm) is called the Modulation Transfer Function or
MTF. This measures the image/subject contrast transfer in the
normalized range of 0.0 to 1.0, with 1.0 being 100% transfer.
Often, the values of contrast transfer for a given spatial
frequency are plotted for different locations on the film away
from the image center. MTF graphs assume radial symmetry of the
lens. MTF graphs are also created for various lens apertures,
often for lens wide open, and for some stopped-down apertures.
To be useful, the test target chart (comprising parallel lines)
should be rotated at various angles to see the effect of
aberrations. Typically, for simplicity, only two angles are
used. One with the target lines parallel to the outward line
from the image center, called sagittal lines, and the other
tangent to the outward line, called tangential lines. MTF graphs
are generally prepared for white light, but can be measured for
a specific monochromatic light as well.
MTF is useful to
describe the quality of the lens accurately. Unfortunately, not
all manufacturers provide MTF data for their lenses. Unlike
resolution testing, MTF data are not readily derived outside of
testing laboratories. To truly describe a given lens, many MTF
graphs are needed, depending on lens apertures, spatial
frequencies, and the light used. It is even possible to measure
MTF for differing subject distances. Such is the case, MTF data
from different sources cannot be directly compared without
noting the conditions under which MTF data are derived.
How To Read MTF
To help interprete
the MTF data, sample MTF graphs are given below for a fictitious
50mm f2.8 lens for 35mm format camera. The upper graph shows MTF
data at lens wide open at f2.8. The lower graph shows MTF data
for the same lens at f8. Each graph shows MTF curves for three
different spatial frequencies: 10 lp/mm, 20 lp/mm, and 40 lp/mm.
For each spatial frequency, a pair of MTF curves is given, one
for the sagittal target lines (green) and one for the tangential
target lines (red). Contrast always drops off as the spatial
frequency increases. Recall from the discussion of theoretical
maximum resolution that the f-stop limits the maximum
resolution. For a given f-stop, contrast drops to zero at that
spatial frequency. Of three pairs of curves on each graph, the
MTF values for the lower spatial frequency (10 lp/mm in this
example) are indicative of the overall contrast of the lens. The
higher the curve throughout the distance range to the corner of
the image (towards right in the graph), the better contrast the
lens exhibits. The MTF values for the higher spatial frequency
(40 lp/mm here) are more indicative of the resolution of the
lens. Comparing the two MTF graphs below, both contrast and
resolution are seen to move up as the lens aperture was stopped
down to f8. General improvements toward the image corner are
also seen.


Nikon site
provides MTF data for various lenses at the end of each page.
|