1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to apparatus and methods for improving contrast imaging of objects which are transparent or reflective, and also vary in thickness or index of refraction, using wavefront coding.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Most imaging systems generate image contrast through variations in reflectance or absorption of the object being viewed. Objects that are transparent or reflective but have variations in thickness can be very difficult to image because the majority of the image contrast typically is derived from variations in the reflectance or absorption of the object. These types of objects can be considered “Phase Objects”. Various techniques have been developed over the years to produce high-contrast images from phase objects. These techniques allow high contrast images from essentially transparent objects that have only variations in thickness or index of refraction. These techniques generally modify both the illumination optics and the imaging optics and are different modes of what can be called “Contrast Imaging”.
There are a number of different Contrast Imaging techniques that have been developed over the years to image phase objects. These techniques can be grouped into three classes that are dependent on the type of modification made near the back focal plane of the imaging objective and the type of illumination method used. The simplest contrast imaging techniques modify the back focal plane of the imaging objective with an intensity or amplitude mask. Other techniques modify the back focal plane of the objective with phase masks. Still more techniques require the use of polarized illumination and polarization-sensitive beam splitters and shearing devices. In all of these contrast-imaging techniques modifications to the illumination system are matched to the modifications of the imaging optics.
Contrast Imaging techniques that require amplitude modification of the back focal plane of the imaging objectives we call “Amplitude Contrast” techniques. These techniques include Hoffman modulation contrast imaging (described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,062,619), edge enhancement of phase phenomena (described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,255,014), and the VAREL imaging techniques by Carl Zeiss.
Illumination source 102 and illumination optics 104 act to produce focussed light upon Phase Object 108. A Phase Object is defined here as an object that is transparent or reflective but has variations in thickness or index of refraction, and thus can be difficult to image because the majority of the image contrast typically is derived from variations in the reflectance or absorption of the object. Obviously almost any real life object is strictly speaking a Phase Object, but only objects having enough thickness or index of refraction variation to be difficult to image will require special imaging techniques.
Objective lens 110 and tube lens 114 act to produce an image 118 upon detector 120. Detector 120 can be film, a CCD detector array, a CMOS detector, etc. The various amplitude contrast techniques differ in the form of illumination mask 106 and objective mask 112. Traditional imaging, such as bright field imaging, would result if neither an illumination mask nor an objective mask were used.
Objective mask 112a is essentially the conjugate of illumination mask 106a. Objective mask 112a consists of small regions 206, 208 of absorptive power with the remainder 210 of the mask having 100% transmittance. In operation, the light that travels through illumination slits 202, 204 that is not significantly diffracted from object 108 (as for example when a phase gradient is not present) is severely attenuated by objective mask blocks 206, 208. The light that is diffracted by object 108 passes mainly through the transparent region 210 of the objective mask. In this way Hoffman modulation contrast imaging converts phase differences in the object into intensity differences in the formed images.
Although Amplitude Contrast Imaging techniques effectively produce high contrast images of Phase Objects, these techniques do not allow a large depth of field or control of general focus-related aberrations. A large depth of field is important when imaging objects that have a depth that is large in relation to the depth of field of the system or when making a very low cost imaging system.
There is a need to improve Contrast Imaging of Phase Objects by increasing depth of field and controlling focus-related aberrations.
An object of the present invention is to improve Contrast Imaging of phase objects by increasing depth of field and controlling focus-related aberrations. This is accomplished by combining Contrast Imaging apparatus and methods with Wavefront Coding and post processing to increase depth of field and reduce misfocus effects.
Wavefront Coding can be used in conjunction with amplitude contrast imaging techniques to produce systems that have both a large depth of field and high contrast imaging of phase objects. The general amplitude contrast imaging system is modified with a special purpose generalized aspheric optical element and image processing of the detected image to form the final image. Unlike the traditional imaging system, the final image using Wavefront Coding is not directly available at the image plane. Post processing of the detected image is required. The Wavefront Coding optical element can be fabricated as a separate component, can be combined with the objective mask, or can be constructed as an integral component of the imaging objective or tube lens.
A Wavefront Coding optical element can also be used on the illumination side of the system in order to extended the depth of field of the projected illumination due to the duality of projection and imaging. This projected illumination would be broader than without Wavefront Coding, but the optical density as a function of distance from the object would be less sensitive with Wavefront Coding than without. Without Wavefront Coding on the illumination side of the system at some point and object can technically be imaged clearly but is not illuminated sufficiently. See “Principal of Equivalence between Scanning and Conventional Optical Imaging Systems”, Dorian Kermisch, J. Opt. Soc. Am., Vol. 67, no. 10, pp.,1357-1360(1977).
The component of importance for the Wavefront Coding imaging optics and digital processing in amplitude contrast systems is the objective mask, as opposed to the illumination mask. Without the objective mask the imaging side of the system (as opposed to the illumination side) is a traditional imaging system. The illumination mask can be considered as only required to alter the transmitted (or reflected) light of the given object being imaged. Since many combinations of illumination configuration and object can produce the same transmitted (or reflected) wavefront, we can consider the use of specialized illumination as a means of altering the object's imaging characteristics when the object itself cannot be altered. The illuminated object that is being imaged is imaged through optics that have been modified to enhance the type of wavefront that the specialized illumination system is providing. Only changes in the objective mask necessitate changes in the optics or processing with Wavefront Coding.
Apparatus for increasing depth of field in a conventional Amplitude Contrast Imaging system having an illumination source, illumination optics, and an illumination mask placed before a Phase Object to be imaged, and an objective mask and objective optics after the Phase Object to form an image at a detector, comprises an optical Wavefront Coding mask placed between the Phase Object and the detector, the mask being constructed and arranged to alter the optical transfer function of the Amplitude Contrast Imaging system in such a way that the altered optical transfer function is substantially insensitive to the distance between the Phase Object and the objective optics over a greater range of object distances than was provided by the unaltered optical transfer function, wherein the mask affects the alteration to the optical transfer function substantially by affecting the phase of light transmitted by the mask, and a post processing element for processing the image captured by the detector by reversing the alteration of the optical transfer function accomplished by the mask.
For example, the illumination mask and the objective mask could be constructed and arranged for Hoffman modulation Contrast Imaging, or for Carl Zeiss VAREL Contrast Imaging.
Wavefront Coding can be combined with traditional objectives and objective masks in Amplitude Contrast systems, as shown in
Wavefront Coding optical element 422 can also be used on the illumination side of system in order to extend the depth of field of the projected illumination due to the duality of projection and imaging. This projected illumination would be broader than without Wavefront Coding, but the optical density as a function of distance from the object would be less sensitive with Wavefront Coding than without. In other words, the illumination would not focus on a single plane as with conventional illumination, but the density of photons is less sensitive to position than without wavefront coding.
The component of importance in combined Wavefront Coding/Amplitude Contrast systems 400 is objective mask 412, as opposed to illumination mask 406. Illumination mask 406 can be considered as only required to alter the transmitted (or reflected) light off object 408. Only changes in objective mask 412 necessitate changes in Wavefront Coding element 422 or Image Processing 424. For example, consider illumination masks 106a of
Similar reference numbers are used in
Returning to
Over the normalized aperture (in normalized coordinates extending from −1 to +1) the ideal system has a transmittance of 1, i.e. 100%. The phase variation (not shown) is equal to zero over this range. The corresponding ambiguity function has concentrations of optical power (shown as dark shades) very close to the horizontal v=0 axis. From the relationship between the ambiguity function and misfocused MTFs we see that the diffraction limited imaging system has a small depth of field because slight changes in misfocus lead to MTFs that are represented by radial lines with non-zero slope in the ambiguity function. These lines intersect regions of small power. In other words, ambiguity functions that are concentrated about the horizontal axis indicate systems having small depths of field.
Increasing the peak-to-valley phase height (as can be done by increasing the constant 15 above) results in increasing depth of field. The transmittance of this system (not shown) is unity (i.e. 100%) over the entire aperture, as in the top plot of FIG. 5.
Other more general rectangularly separable forms of the Wavefront Coding complex phase is given by:
phase(x,y)=exp(j*[Σaisign(x)|x|bi+ci sign(y)|y|di])
where the sum is over the index i. Sign(x)=−1 for x<0, +1 for x≧0.
Rectangularly separable Wavefront Coding forms allow fast processing. Other forms of Wavefront Coding complex phases are non-separable, and the sum of rectangularly separable forms. One non-separable form is defined as:
phase(r,θ)=exp(j*[Σrai cos(biθ+φi)])
where the sum is again over the subscript i.
The ambiguity function shown in
The corresponding ambiguity function for this amplitude contrast system in the lower plot is seen to differ from the diffraction-limited system plotted in FIG. 5. The extent of the optical power in the present example along the v=0 axis is reduced compared to that of the diffraction limited system plotted in
A misfocus bias equal to ψ=−10 was removed from the combined system (incorporating Wavefront Coding and Amplitude Contrast Imaging). The combined system ambiguity function is seen to have more optical power spread about the horizontal axis when compared to either the Amplitude Contrast system plotted in
MTFs for combined Wavefront Coding and Amplitude Contrast Imaging systems will change much less as a function of misfocus than will the MTF's of Amplitude Contrast systems alone. Thus, the combined systems have extended depth of field.
The top plot shows the MTFs of the Amplitude Contrast Imaging system. The bottom plot shows the MTFs of the combined Wavefront Coding and Amplitude Contrast Imaging system. These plots are the particular MTFs given in the respective ambiguity functions for the normalized misfocus values ψ={0, 2.5, 5}. Notice that the MTFs for the Amplitude Contrast system (top plot) vary appreciably with even this slight amount of misfocus. The image will thus change drastically due to misfocus effects in the Amplitude Contrast system for only small, normalized misfocus values. This is expected from the ambiguity function associated with this system (shown in FIG. 7).
By comparison, the MTFs from the combined Wavefront Coded and Amplitude Contrast Imaging system (bottom plot) show very little change with misfocus as predicted by the ambiguity function associated with this system (shown in FIG. 8). If the MTFs of the system do not change, the resulting MTFs (and hence also point spread functions) can be corrected over a large range of misfocus with a single image post processing step 424. This is not possible with systems that do not have a large depth of field since the MTFs and PSFs representing the images change with misfocus to values that are unknown and often impossible in practice to calculate.
Notice that the MTFs from the combined Wavefront Coding Amplitude Contrast system of
There are many linear and non-linear prior art techniques for removing specialized blur in images. Computationally effective techniques include rectangularly separable or multi-rank linear filtering. Rectangularly separable linear filtering involves a two step process where the set of one-dimensional columns are filtered with a one dimensional column filter and an intermediate image is formed. Filtering the set of one-dimensional rows of this intermediate image with a one-dimensional row filter produces the final image. Multi-rank filtering is essentially the parallel combination of more than one rectangularly separable filtering operation. A rank N, digital filter kernel can be implemented with rectangularly separable filtering by using N rectangularly separable filters in parallel.
The form of the processing (rectangularly separable, multi-rank, 2D kernel, etc.) is matched to that of the Wavefront Coding element. Rectangularly separable filtering requires a rectangularly separable Wavefront Coding element. The element described in
Comparing the images from left to right, object distance was varied by six microns further from the objective for each image compared to the image on its left. The bottom row combined Wavefront Coding/40X Hoffman Modulation Contrast images are the final images produced after image processing of the detected image. Rectangularly separable digital filtering was used in the post processing step.
Notice the differential shading visible on the top row (40X Hoffman Modulation Contrast) images. This is a characteristic of Hoffman imaging. Notice also that many parts of the Hoffman images are blurred due to misfocus effects. The characteristic Hoffman shading and extended depth of field are both seen in the Wavefront Coding images.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,748,371, issued May 5, 1998 and entitled “Extended Depth of Field Optical Systems,” is incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2959105 | Sayanagi | Nov 1960 | A |
3054898 | Westover et al. | Sep 1962 | A |
3305294 | Alvarez | Feb 1967 | A |
3583790 | Baker | Jun 1971 | A |
3614310 | Korpel | Oct 1971 | A |
3856400 | Hartmann et al. | Dec 1974 | A |
3873958 | Whitehouse | Mar 1975 | A |
4062619 | Hoffman | Dec 1977 | A |
4082431 | Ward, III | Apr 1978 | A |
4174885 | Joseph et al. | Nov 1979 | A |
4178090 | Marks et al. | Dec 1979 | A |
4255014 | Ellis | Mar 1981 | A |
4275454 | Klooster, Jr. | Jun 1981 | A |
4276620 | Kahn et al. | Jun 1981 | A |
4308521 | Casasent et al. | Dec 1981 | A |
4349277 | Mundy et al. | Sep 1982 | A |
4466067 | Fontana | Aug 1984 | A |
4480896 | Kubo et al. | Nov 1984 | A |
4573191 | Kidode et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
4575193 | Greivenkamp, Jr. | Mar 1986 | A |
4580882 | Nuchman et al. | Apr 1986 | A |
4589770 | Jones et al. | May 1986 | A |
4642112 | Freeman | Feb 1987 | A |
4650292 | Baker et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4655565 | Freeman | Apr 1987 | A |
4725881 | Buchwald | Feb 1988 | A |
4734702 | Kaplan | Mar 1988 | A |
4794550 | Greivenkamp, Jr. | Dec 1988 | A |
4804249 | Reynolds et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4825263 | Desjardins et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4827125 | Goldstein | May 1989 | A |
4843631 | Steinpichler et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4936661 | Betensky et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4964707 | Hayashi | Oct 1990 | A |
4989959 | Plummer | Feb 1991 | A |
5003166 | Girod | Mar 1991 | A |
5076687 | Adelson | Dec 1991 | A |
5102223 | Uesugi et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5128874 | Bhanu et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5142413 | Kelly | Aug 1992 | A |
5165063 | Strater et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5166818 | Chase et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5193124 | Subbarao | Mar 1993 | A |
5218471 | Swanson et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5243351 | Rafanelli et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5248876 | Kerstens et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5260727 | Oksman et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5270825 | Takasugi et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5270861 | Estelle | Dec 1993 | A |
5270867 | Estelle | Dec 1993 | A |
5280388 | Okayama | Jan 1994 | A |
5299275 | Jackson et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5301241 | Kirk | Apr 1994 | A |
5307175 | Seachman | Apr 1994 | A |
5317394 | Hale et al. | May 1994 | A |
5337181 | Kelly | Aug 1994 | A |
5426521 | Chen et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5438366 | Jackson et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5442394 | Lee | Aug 1995 | A |
5444574 | Ono et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5465147 | Swanson | Nov 1995 | A |
5473473 | Estelle et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5476515 | Kelman et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5521695 | Cathey, Jr. et al. | May 1996 | A |
5532742 | Kusaka et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5555129 | Konno et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5565668 | Reddersen et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5568197 | Hamano | Oct 1996 | A |
5572359 | Otaki et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5610684 | Shiraishi | Mar 1997 | A |
5640206 | Kinoshita et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5706139 | Kelly | Jan 1998 | A |
5748371 | Cathey et al. | May 1998 | A |
5751475 | Ishiwata et al. | May 1998 | A |
5756981 | Roustaei et al. | May 1998 | A |
5969853 | Takaoka | Oct 1999 | A |
5969855 | Ishiwata et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6011874 | Gluckstad | Jan 2000 | A |
6025873 | Nishioka et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6034814 | Otaki | Mar 2000 | A |
6037579 | Chan et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6091548 | Chen | Jul 2000 | A |
6097856 | Hammond, Jr. | Aug 2000 | A |
6121603 | Hang et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6128127 | Kusaka | Oct 2000 | A |
6144493 | Okuyama et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6172723 | Inoue et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6172799 | Raj | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6262818 | Cuche et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0531926 | Mar 1993 | EP |
0584769 | Mar 1994 | EP |
0618473 | Oct 1994 | EP |
0742466 | Nov 1996 | EP |
0759573 | Feb 1997 | EP |
0791846 | Aug 1997 | EP |
0981245 | Feb 2000 | EP |
2278750 | Dec 1994 | GB |
2000-98301 | Apr 2000 | JP |
WO 9957599 | Nov 1999 | WO |
WO 0052516 | Sep 2000 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20020196980 A1 | Dec 2002 | US |