The present invention generally relates to actively aligning lens stack arrays with arrays of focal planes.
In response to the constraints placed upon a traditional digital camera based upon the camera obscura, a new class of cameras that can be referred to as array cameras has been proposed. Array cameras are characterized in that they include an imager array that has multiple arrays of pixels, where each pixel array is intended to define a focal plane, and each focal plane has a separate lens stack. Typically, each focal plane includes a plurality of rows of pixels that also forms a plurality of columns of pixels, and each focal plane is contained within a region of the imager that does not contain pixels from another focal plane. An image is typically formed on each focal plane by its respective lens stack. In many instances, the array camera is constructed using an imager array that incorporates multiple focal planes and an optic array of lens stacks.
Systems and methods in accordance with embodiments of the invention actively align a lens stack array with an array of focal planes to construct an array camera module. In one embodiment, a method for actively aligning a lens stack array with a sensor that includes a plurality of focal planes, where each focal plane includes a plurality of rows of pixels that also form a plurality of columns of pixels and each focal plane is contained within a region of the imager array that does not contain pixels from another focal plane, includes: aligning the lens stack array relative to the sensor in an initial position, where the lens stack array includes a plurality of lens stacks and the plurality of lens stacks forms separate optical channels for each focal plane in the sensor; varying the spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor; capturing images of a known target using a plurality of active focal planes at different spatial relationships between the lens stack array and the sensor, where the known target includes at least one region of interest; scoring the images captured by the plurality of active focal planes, where the resulting scores provide a direct comparison of the extent to which at least one region of interest is focused in the images; selecting a spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor based upon a comparison of the scores of images captured by a plurality of the active focal planes; and forming an array camera subassembly in which the lens stack array and the sensor are fixed in the selected spatial relationship.
In another embodiment, scoring the images captured by the plurality of active focal planes includes computing modulation transfer function (MTF) scores for the images.
In yet another embodiment, comparison of the scores of images captured by a plurality of the active focal planes is based upon: a comparison of the scores of the images captured by a plurality of the active focal planes at the selected spatial relationship to the scores of images captured by the same active focal planes at different spatial relationships; and the variation between the scores of the images captured by the active focal planes at the selected spatial relationship.
In still another embodiment, the comparison of scores includes omitting from consideration an image captured by an active focal plane, when the score of the image captured by the active focal plane fails to satisfy at least one predetermined criterion.
In a further embodiment, the at least one predetermined criterion includes the score of the image captured by the active focal plane being within a predetermined range.
In a still further embodiment, the method includes deactivating an active focal plane, when the image captured by the active focal plane is omitted from consideration.
In yet another embodiment, the comparison of scores includes determining a mathematical relationship for each of a plurality of active focal planes that characterizes the relationship between the scores for the images captured by the respective active focal planes and the spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor.
In another embodiment, the comparison of scores further includes computing a best-fit plane using the determined mathematical relationships, where the best-fit plane, defines a desirable spatial relationship in accordance with predetermined criterion.
In yet another embodiment, the predetermined criterion includes maximizing scores while minimizing the variance of the scores.
In still another embodiment: the known target includes a central region of interest and at least one peripheral region of interest; the images are scored such that a score is provided for each region of interest visible in each image, the score being indicative of the extent to which the respective region of interest is focused in the image; the comparison of scores includes determining mathematical relationships for each of a plurality of active focal planes that characterize the relationships between the scores of the extent to which the central region of interest is focused in the images captured by the respective active focal plane and the spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor; and the scores of the extent to which the at least one peripheral region of interest is focused in the images captured by the respective active focal plane and the spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor.
In a further embodiment, the comparison of scores further includes computing, using the determined mathematical relationships: a first best-fit plane that defines a spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor based on each active focal plane's ability to focus on a central region of interest according to predetermined criterion; a second best-fit plane that defines a spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor based on each active focal plane's ability to focus on the at least one peripheral region of interest according to predetermined criterion; and a plurality of planes incrementally spaced that lie between the first and second best-fit planes.
In a still further embodiment, selecting a spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor includes using at least one predetermined criterion to select one of: a spatial relationship defined by the first best-fit plane, a spatial relationship defined by the second best-fit plane, and a spatial relationship defined by one of the plurality of planes.
In a yet still further embodiment, the at least one predetermined criterion is based upon: at each spatial relationship defined by the computed planes, averaging the scores indicative of the extent to which the central region of interest is focused, the scores being averaged across all active focal planes at the respective spatial relationship; at each spatial relationship defined by the computed planes, averaging the scores indicative of the extent to which the at least one peripheral region of interest is focused, the scores being averaged across all active focal planes at the respective spatial relationship; and assessing the variation in the determined average scores between the spatial relationships.
In a further embodiment, aligning the lens stack array relative to the sensor in an initial position further includes: performing an initial sweep of the lens stack array relative to the sensor; capturing an initial set of images of a known target including a central region of interest, at varied spatial relationships along the initial sweep, using a plurality of active focal planes; determining focus scores for the central region of interest in a plurality of the captured images; determining an initial set of mathematical relationships for each of the plurality of active focal planes used to capture the initial set of images, where the mathematical relationships characterize the relationship between the focus scores and the spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor; computing an initial best-fit plane using the initial set of mathematical relationships; and aligning the lens stack array with the computed initial best-fit plane.
In another embodiment, varying the spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor involves sweeping the lens stack array relative to the sensor.
In still another embodiment, the lens stack array is swept in a direction substantially normal to the surface of the sensor.
In a further embodiment, scoring the images captured by the plurality of active focal planes includes: determining preliminary scores for the captured images in accordance with a first criterion; determining scores for a related set of captured images in accordance with a second criterion; and extrapolating the preliminary scores as a function of the spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor based on the scores determined for the related set of captured images.
Turning now to the drawings, systems and methods for actively aligning a lens stack array with an array of focal planes on a monolithic sensor in accordance with embodiments of the invention are illustrated. Processes for constructing array cameras using lens stack arrays are described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/935,504, entitled “Capturing and Processing of Images Using Monolithic Camera Array with Heterogeneous Imagers”, Venkataraman et al. The disclosure of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/935,504 is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. The monolithic camera modules illustrated in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/935,504 can be constructed from a lens stack array and a sensor including a plurality of focal planes corresponding to the optical channels in the lens stack array. The combination of a lens stack and its corresponding focal plane can be understood to be a ‘camera module.’ Ideally, the lens stack array of an array camera is constructed so that each optical channel has the same focal length. However, the large number of tolerances involved in the manufacture of a lens stack array can result in the different optical channels having varying focal lengths. The combination of all the manufacturing process variations typically results in a deviation of the actual (“first order”) lens parameters—such as focal length—from the nominal prescription. As a result, each optical channel can have a different axial optimum image location. And consequently, since the sensor is monolithic, it typically cannot be placed a distance that corresponds with the focal length of each camera within an array camera module. Notably, these manufacturing tolerances may result in different focal lengths even as between lens stack arrays fabricated from the same manufacturing process. Thus, in many embodiments of the invention, a lens stack array is actively aligned with an array of focal planes to form an array camera module that is designed to address the detrimental impact that the variance in focal length within a lens stack array may have.
In the context of the manufacture of camera systems, the term active alignment typically refers to a process for aligning an optical system (e.g. a lens stack array) with an imaging system (e.g. comprising a monolithic sensor) to achieve a final desirable spatial arrangement by evaluating the efficacy of the configuration as a function of the spatial relationship between the optical system and the imaging system. Typically, this process is implemented by using the configuration to capture and record image data (typically of a known target) in real time as the optical system is moving relative to the imaging system. As the optical system is moved relative to the imaging system, the spatial relationship between the two changes, and the characteristics of the recorded image data also change correspondingly. This recorded image data may then be used to align the optical system relative to the imaging system in a desired manner. For example, active alignment can generally be used to determine a spatial relationship that results in a camera module that is capable of recording images that exceed a threshold image quality.
A lens stack array may be actively aligned with an array of focal planes in accordance with embodiments of the invention. Importantly, active alignment in this context can be far more intricate and nuanced than it is in the context of conventional, single-lens, cameras. Foremost, because a lens stack array is typically embodied in a single integral housing, the spatial orientation of an individual lens stack (with respect to its corresponding focal plane) cannot be separately varied from that of the other lens stacks—instead, varying the spatial orientation of one lens stack invariably changes the spatial orientation of the others. Consequently, it may not be possible for multiple cameras to be spatially located at their own respective most desirable positions. As a result, active alignment in the context of array cameras may involve computing a final arrangement that, although does not necessarily place each camera at its own optimal position, sufficiently orients the lens stacks of multiple cameras so that the array camera module as a whole achieves a desirable level of performance.
Additionally, the active alignment of a lens stack array with an array of focal planes typically involves the evaluation of the efficacy of multiple cameras—as opposed to a single camera—at respective varied spatial relationships. In many embodiments, the efficacy of a camera is determined by evaluating the camera's captured and recorded images of a known target at varied spatial relationships. For instance, the Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) score—a numerical score that is indicative of a recorded images sharpness and thus also focus—may be determined for a given recorded image and used to evaluate a respective camera at a respective spatial orientation. Moreover, the recorded images may be evaluated at different Regions of Interest (ROIs), and in particular at different field heights. For example, an MTF score may be assigned to each ROI within a recorded image. Thus, the corresponding cameras may be evaluated as to each ROI, and this evaluation data may be used to conclude a desirable array camera module configuration.
In several embodiments, only a subset of all of the cameras in an array camera module is used during the evaluation process. The cameras that define this subset may be predetermined, or they may be computationally determined by considering an initial set of image data captured by some or all of the focal planes.
Furthermore, unlike in conventional, single-lens, cameras, the active alignment of an array camera module can involve strategically disabling cameras. For example, if the picture quality of a camera when the array camera module is in an estimated final arrangement is below a specified threshold quality, the camera may be disabled. Thus, in many embodiments of the invention, the active alignment process is initially used to estimate a final arrangement for an array camera module, identify cameras that should be disabled on the basis that they do not achieve a threshold quality and disabling them can improve the overall performance of the other cameras in the camera module, and then compute a final arrangement wherein the disabled cameras are excluded from the computation process. Note that this is possible because an array camera includes a plurality of cameras and is still operable if several of the cameras are deactivated. Namely, the array camera may be configured to rely on the remaining active cameras to function, and synthesize an image based on those remaining active cameras. By allowing the array camera software to deactivate certain cameras, higher manufacturing yields can be achieved that can reduce the cost of the completed camera module.
Array cameras and systems and methods for actively aligning lens stack arrays and sensors to form camera modules for use in array cameras in accordance with embodiments of the invention are discussed further below.
Array Camera Architectures
The controller 130 is hardware, software, firmware, or a combination thereof for controlling various operational parameters of the array camera module 110. The controller 130 receives inputs 132 from a user or other external components and sends operation signals to control the array camera module 110. The controller can also send information to the image processing pipeline module 120 to assist processing of the images captured by the focal planes in the array camera module 110.
Although a specific array camera architecture is illustrated in
Array Camera Modules
A lens stack array may employ wafer level optics (WLO) technology. WLO is a technology that encompasses a number of processes, including, for example, molding of lens arrays on glass wafers, stacking of those wafers (including wafers having lenses replicated on either side of the substrate) with appropriate spacers, followed by packaging of the optics directly with the imager into a monolithic integrated module.
The WLO procedure may involve, among other procedures, using a diamond-turned mold to create each plastic lens element on a glass substrate. More specifically, the process chain in WLO generally includes producing a diamond turned lens master (both on an individual and array level), then producing a negative mould for replication of that master (also called a stamp or tool), and then finally forming a polymer replica on a glass substrate, which has been structured with appropriate supporting optical elements, such as, for example, apertures (transparent openings in light blocking material layers), and filters.
Although the construction of lens stack arrays using specific WLO processes is discussed above, any of a variety of techniques can be used to construct lens stack arrays, for instance those involving precision glass molding, polymer injection molding or wafer level polymer monolithic lens processes. Issues related to variation in back focal length of the lens stacks within lens stack arrays are discussed below.
Back Focal Plane Alignment
An array camera module is typically intended to be constructed in such a way that each focal plane (i.e. an array of pixels configured to capture an image formed on the focal plane by a corresponding lens stack) is positioned at the focal distance of each lens stack that forms an optical channel. However, manufacturing variations can result in the lens stack in each optical channel varying from its prescription, and in many instances, these variations can result in each lens stack within a lens stack array having a different focal length. For example, parameters that may vary amongst individual lens stacks in a lens stack array because of manufacturing variations include, but are not limited to: the radius of curvature in individual lenses, the conic, higher order aspheric coefficient, refractive index, thickness of the base layer, and/or overall lens height. As one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate, any number of lens prescriptions may be used to characterize the lens fabrication process, and the respective tolerances may involve departures from these prescriptions in any number of ways, each of which may impact the back focal length. Due to the monolithic nature of the sensor, the spatial relationship of the focal planes (with respect to the lens stacks) cannot be individually customized to accommodate this variability.
Moreover, in many instances, it is the case that a single manufacturing process is used to fabricate a plurality of lens stack arrays. Consequently, in addition to the aforementioned reasons, the back focal lengths may further vary between lens stacks from different lens stack arrays fabricated from the same process. For instance, variability (within tolerance) in the thickness of the lens substrates and spacers employed in the lens stack, especially those toward the sensor cover glass, may further contribute to the variability in the back focal length. Additionally, variability in the (1) thickness of the sensor cover glass, (2) the bond line thickness between the lens spacer and the sensor cover glass, and (3) any air gaps between the sensor and the cover glass, may further exacerbate the variability in the back focal lengths. Thus, even with constant (nominal) process parameters during the lens stack array fabrication and the lens to sensor attachment process, sample to sample variation may result in defocused camera modules.
The variations in focal length that can occur in a conventional lens stack array are conceptually illustrated in
Active Alignment Processes
In many embodiments, processes for actively aligning a lens stack array with a sensor to construct an array camera module involve reading image data captured by multiple focal planes on the sensor as the lens stack array is moved relative to the sensor. The image data can be utilized to evaluate the resulting image quality at different spatial relationships between the sensor and the lens stack array and the spatial relationship that provides a predetermined threshold level of image quality can be utilized to construct the camera module. A process that actively aligns a lens stack array with a sensor by generally aligning the two, varying their spatial relationship, evaluating the resulting configuration during the variation, and configuring the array camera module using the evaluation data in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is illustrated in
A lens stack array is generally aligned (510) with a corresponding sensor that has multiple focal planes. The combination is aligned so that each camera within the configuration is capable of capturing and recording images. The spatial relationship of the lens stack array with respect to the sensor is varied (520). In several embodiments, the variation is achieved by sweeping the lens stack array with respect to the sensor. Sweeping can be understood to mean moving one component (i.e. either the lens stack array or the sensor) in relation to the other over time. Sweeping may be in one degree of freedom or it can be across many degrees of freedom. As can readily be appreciated, the array nature of the camera module means that variations in the x, y, and z-directions, and tip/tilt and rotation of the lens stack array with respect to the sensor can all have significant impact on the imaged data captured by the focal planes on the sensor. Note that in many array cameras, focus and consequently sharpness of the cameras is primarily affected by the z-direction and the tip/tilt of the lens stack array with respect to the sensor, with the tip/tilt principally affecting the performance of the corner cameras. Conversely, in a conventional camera that comprises only a single lens stack, the image quality of the camera is primarily driven by the optical system's ‘z-position’ with respect to the sensor. In many embodiments, the path of the sweep is predetermined.
The quality of the captured image data is evaluated (530) at the varied spatial relationships. For example, in several embodiments of the invention, the configuration is intermittently evaluated during a sweep of the lens stack array with respect to the sensor. In many embodiments, the configuration is evaluated by evaluating multiple cameras' captured and recorded images of a known target at the varied spatial relationships. In several embodiments, only a subset of the configuration's cameras is used for evaluation purposes. An MTF score may be determined for each recorded image and used to evaluate a respective camera at a respective spatial orientation. The recorded images may also be evaluated at its different ROIs. For example, an MTF score may be assigned to each ROI within a recorded image.
The array camera module is configured (540) using the information obtained during evaluation. In some embodiments, the configuration involves concluding a spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor that results in the corresponding array camera module being able to capture and record images that exceed a threshold quality. The configuration may also involve disabling cameras that do not surpass a threshold quality. Again, because array camera modules include a plurality of cameras, they can still function even when several of the cameras are disabled. The advantage of being able to disable a camera is that the average performance of the array including the camera may be much lower than the average performance of the remaining cameras when the disabled camera is excluded from consideration in determining the appropriate alignment of the lens stack array and sensor.
Although a process, and its variants, have been described that actively align a lens stack array with a corresponding array of focal planes, any of a number of different processes may be used to actively align a lens stack array with an array of focal planes in accordance with embodiments of the invention. An initial configuration for an active alignment process in accordance with embodiments of the invention is discussed below.
Initial Configuration for Aligning a Lens Stack Array with an Array of Focal Planes
Active alignment processes may begin from any number of initial configurations in accordance with embodiments of the invention. An initial configuration for an active alignment process where a device that is capable of orienting a lens stack array is connected to a lens stack array of a corresponding array camera module, a processor is connected to the corresponding sensor, and a target is positioned and illuminated so that the array camera module can capture and record it in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is illustrated in
In many embodiments, the initial configuration involves generally aligning the lens stack array 620 and the sensor 630 so as to ensure that the lens stack array 620 and the sensor 630 are in sufficient translational and rotational alignment such that each lens stack is generally aligned with its corresponding focal plane. Translational motion here refers to motion of a system (i.e. the lens stack array 620 or the sensor 630) in a direction parallel to its respective surface. Rotation here refers to rotation of a system about the Z-axis (i.e. the axis defining the distance between the sensor and the lens stack array) relative to the other. General alignment may be achieved by, for example, monitoring a central feature on a test chart, and moving either the lens stack array or the sensor in translation (with respect to the other system) such that the central feature is centrally located within the central camera modules; this would indicate that the systems are in sufficient translational alignment. Either system may then be rotated with respect to the other so that the midpoints of each lens stack array and its corresponding focal plane define a line that runs generally parallel to the Z-axis. During this rotational adjustment, the systems may also be readjusted to preserve (or enhance) adequate translational alignment. In this way, each lens stack array may be generally aligned with its corresponding focal plane.
Although many embodiments of the invention employ the initial configuration illustrated in
Varying the Spatial Relationship of the Lens Stack Array with Respect to the Sensor
The spatial relationship between a lens stack array and a corresponding sensor may be varied in any number of ways. For example, an active alignment process where a lens stack array is swept in a direction substantially normal to the sensor's planar surface in accordance with embodiments of the invention is illustrated in
In several embodiments, the manner in which the spatial relationship varies is computationally determined. For example, the manner in which the spatial relationship varies may be determined computationally based upon an initial evaluation of the array camera module. Additionally, the manner in which the spatial relationship varies may change during an active alignment process. For instance, after the lens stack array has been swept in a direction substantially normal to the sensor's planar surface, a processor may compute a different sweeping path that may facilitate a better configuration of the array camera module.
Although several examples have been described related to how the spatial relationship between the lens stack array and the sensor may be varied, the spatial relationship may also be varied in any number of other ways in accordance with embodiments of the invention. The evaluation of the array camera module at the varied spatial relationships is discussed below.
Evaluating the Array Camera Module
In numerous embodiments, evaluating the array camera module during the active alignment process involves having multiple cameras capture and record images of a known target, and evaluating these images. The images may be evaluated by assessing their focus, for example. The assessment of the focus may be performed in any number of ways in accordance with embodiments of the invention. For example, in many embodiments, an MTF score may be determined for a given recorded image. Generally speaking, an MTF score is an advantageous metric insofar as MTF scores amongst different cameras can be directly compared with one another. In some embodiments, a recorded image may be given a ‘focus score’ which can similarly be used to evaluate the recorded image. For example, a focus score may be determined by convolving a kernel over contrasting features in an image, where the resulting value is related to the camera's ability to focus. Unlike the MTF score, a focus score may not necessarily be directly comparable to such scores from different cameras; instead a focus score may be more useful in evaluating a single camera.
The selection of which scoring metric to use may be determined, in part, by the speed in which the scores can be calculated. For instance, if it takes longer to compute an MTF score than to compute a focus score, the focus score may be used in the evaluation. The selection of which scoring metric to use may also be determined, in part, by the accuracy and precision of the score. For instance, if the MTF score is a more precise means for evaluating image quality, then it may be used to evaluate the camera images. Moreover, the active alignment process may utilize several methods of evaluating a recorded image, and these methods may not necessarily be concurrent. For example, an evaluation based on focus scoring may be initially used, whereas an evaluation based on an MTF score may later be used. Additionally, the active alignment process may involve relating the different scoring metrics. For example, focus scoring may be used to evaluate the set of images recorded by an array camera, and MTF scoring may be used to evaluate a representative subset of those images. The MTF scores for the subset may then be normalized to the respective focus scores. And this determined relationship may be used to determine MTF scores for the remaining images.
Additionally, different regions of recorded images may be evaluated, thereby providing information on a camera's quality as to specific regions. For example, in certain embodiments, images are recorded of a known target that has multiple “Regions of Interest” (ROIs), and the cameras' recorded images of the known target are evaluated with respect to each region of interest.
The target illustrated in
This convolution kernel will yield values that are proportional to a camera's ability to resolve contrast. Note that the value will either be positive or negative depending on whether the region being evaluated is transitioning from light to dark or dark to light. However, whether a region of interest is transitioning from light to dark or vice versa is irrelevant to a camera's ability to focus; therefore the absolute value of these values should be obtained. Then, a focus score for each ROI may be obtained by averaging these absolute values for each ROI.
Although,
Configuring the Array Camera Module
Evaluation data may be used to configure the array camera module in a number of respects. In many embodiments the array camera module is configured to minimize the detrimental impact caused by variance of focal length within a lens stack array. As described above, variance within a lens stack array may be caused by manufacturing process variations including (but not limited to) those that affect the following parameters: the radius of curvature in individual lenses, the conic, higher order aspheric coefficient, refractive index, thickness of the base layer, and/or overall lens height. Additionally, as described above, the following manufacturing variations related to the fabrication of multiple lens stack arrays and camera modules may further exacerbate the variability in back focal lengths: the thickness of the lens substrates and spacers employed in the stack, especially those toward the sensor cover glass, the thickness of the sensor cover glass used, bond line thickness between the lens spacer and the sensor cover glass, and any air gap between the sensor and the sensor cover glass. Thus, many embodiments evaluate the quality of each camera as a function of its spatial relationship to the sensor; thereafter, the information is used to orient the lens stack array with respect to the sensor so that any deterioration in the quality of the array camera due to the variance in focal length within the lens stack array is lessened.
Several embodiments generate mathematical equations that approximately characterize data related to camera quality as a function of spatial relationship, and use the derived equations to compute a desired spatial relationship that lessens the detrimental impact of variance in focal length. For example, some embodiments generate polynomial equations that approximately model the focal scoring data. Note that because of the nature of optics, each lens will typically have a peak focal value, and therefore polynomial equations are well suited to characterize the data. In many embodiments, the polynomial equations are generated by determining coefficients for predetermined generic polynomial equations (i.e. those with undetermined coefficients), such that the resulting equation approximately characterizes the data relating the camera quality to the spatial relationship. Many embodiments then use these derived equations to compute a best fit plane that characterizes a spatial relationship that reduces the detrimental impact of variance in focal length.
Notably, the best-fit planes may be computed in any number of ways. For instance, the best-fit plane may be computed to be a plane that includes an approximation of the peak values of the polynomial equations that characterize focal scoring data as a function of the spatial relationship. But, as described above, focal scoring data may not necessarily be directly comparable across different cameras. Therefore, best-fit planes may also be computed by generating equivalent MTF scores, and determining a plane that maximizes the mean MTF score while minimizing its variance. Specifically, the best-fit planes may be computed to determine a plane wherein the MTF scores amongst the different lens stacks are equalized within some specified tolerance. Moreover, any number of balancing algorithms may be employed to effectuate this computation as appropriate to the requirements of a specific application. The determination of these planes may then be used to facilitate the configuration of the array camera module.
In several embodiments, the configuration process involves orienting the lens stack array with respect to the sensor to form an array camera module that is capable of achieving pictures that have desired characteristics. In some embodiments, the lens stack array is oriented with respect to the sensor so as to achieve an array camera module that is capable of recording images, wherein the quality of the on-axis aspects of the recorded image exceeds a specified threshold criterion. In several embodiments, the lens stack array is actively aligned with respect to the sensor to achieve an array camera module that is capable of recording images, wherein the quality of the off-axis aspects of the recorded image exceeds a specified threshold criterion. Note also that in various embodiments, the configuration process may involve disabling cameras that are above a certain threshold quality so as to avoid biasing the best fit plane determination. In numerous embodiments, the lens stack array is actively aligned with respect to the sensor to achieve an array camera module that is capable of recording images, wherein the quality of both on-axis and off-axis regions of interest exceed respective specified threshold qualities.
In many embodiments, the configuration process involves disabling cameras that perform above or below a certain defined threshold quality. Again, because an array camera module has many cameras, it is possible for it to maintain functionality even when some of its cameras are non-functional. In several embodiments, cameras are disabled when their quality, as determined by their ability to focus sharply when in a given spatial orientation, is above or below a threshold value. For example, some embodiments determine whether a camera should be disabled by evaluating an MTF score of its respective recorded images. In many embodiments, if the number of disabled cameras exceeds a specified value, then the array camera module is designated unacceptable. In several embodiments, different threshold values can be specified for different types of cameras within the array camera module. For example, in a number of embodiments that employ π filter groups, different threshold values can be specified for the green cameras, the red cameras, and the blue cameras.
In various embodiments, information obtained during the evaluation aspect of the active alignment process is used to configure the functionality of the each camera. For example, if it is determined that a particular camera has a focal length that makes it better suited to record images of objects that are at a further distance, the array camera module can be configured to rely more heavily on that camera when synthesizing recorded images of objects at further distances.
The above descriptions regarding configuring an array camera module in accordance with embodiments of the invention is not meant to be exhaustive. Indeed, array camera modules can be configured in any number of ways based on evaluations of the configuration in accordance with embodiments of the invention. Active alignment processes that configure array camera modules so that they are capable of capturing and recording images that have desirable image properties are discussed below.
Active Alignment Processes that Yield Array Camera Modules Capable of Recording Images that have Desirable Characteristics
Active alignment processes in accordance with embodiments of the invention can use a variety of metrics to evaluate the image data that is captured during the active alignment process. In several embodiments, the active alignment process can optimize image quality in specific regions of the captured images, can optimize image quality in multiple regions of interest and/or can utilize a variety of metrics including (but not limited to) focus scoring and MTF scoring. An active alignment process that uses an iterative computation process to yield an array camera module that is capable of capturing and recording images that have sufficient on-axis and off-axis performance in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is illustrated in
The process is initially configured (902) so that a lens stack array and a corresponding sensor are mounted to an active alignment machine in a manner similar to that seen in
The lens stack array is swept (904) in a direction normal to the sensor's planar surface, in a manner similar to that seen in
An “on-axis best fit plane” is derived (912) using the peak values of the polynomial equations. The on-axis best fit plane, is characterized in that it maximizes the peak values corresponding to the active cameras and/or minimizes the variance in the peak values.
The lens stack array is then aligned (914) with the computed best fit on-axis plane. Each active camera captures and records (916) an image of the known target. Each recorded image is then evaluated (918) by determining an MTF score for each ROI. Cameras that do not meet a threshold MTF score are disabled (920). For example, any cameras that do not have an MTF score within 20% of the median on-axis MTF score may be disabled, and subsequently excluded from further alignment position calculations. This threshold may of course be configurable. In other embodiments, other criteria are utilized to determine which cameras should be disabled. Moreover, if a specified number of cameras are disabled, the array camera is deemed unacceptable.
Assuming the camera is not deemed unacceptable, the previously acquired focus scoring data is scaled (922) using the peak focus score and MTF scores. For example, the MTF Score may be scaled in accordance with the following formula:
Scaled Focus Scorez=(Focus Scorez/Peak Focus Score)*MTF Score
where the z subscript reflects the score at a particular z-position.
The focus scoring data (absolute values) are exposure/signal-level dependent. Thus different cameras (e.g. blue, green, red cameras) will have different absolute focus score peak values due to their different signal levels. However, MTF is a metric that is invariant to signal level. Thus, MTF enables the curves for focus score to be normalized such that the curve derived from focus score can also be used to compare each camera's peak performance and not only the position at which peak performance occurs. In other embodiments, any of a variety of metrics appropriate to a specific application can be utilized in determining camera peak performance.
As before, polynomial curves may then be derived (924) that characterize the scaled focus scores. Thus, each active camera will be characterized by polynomial equations that characterize the camera's ability to resolve each respective region of interest. Given these new polynomial equations, a best-fit on axis plane and a best-fit off axis plane are derived (926); in this instance, the best-fit planes are characterized in that they approximately maximize the mean MTF scores while minimizing their variance. A configurable number of planes that are evenly spaced between the two best-fit planes (on-axis and off-axis) are computed (928). Scaled focus scores for each camera at their respective corresponding positions along each of those planes are calculated (930). A best-fit plane determined (932) wherein any deviation toward the best-fit off axis plane causes a gain in the off-axis scaled focus score and a loss in the on-axis scaled score, wherein the ratio of the off-axis score gain to the on-axis score loss falls below a configurable threshold. The lens stack array is then re-aligned (934) with this computed plane.
The efficacy of the process is verified (936). This may be accomplished by, for example, having each active camera record an image of the known target, determining an MTF score for each ROI within that image, and ensuring that each MTF score surpasses some threshold calculation.
The processes described may be iterated (938) until a desired configuration is achieved.
Although a particular process, and its variants, is discussed above, any number of processes may be used to achieve an array camera module that is capable of capturing and recording images that have adequate on-axis and off-axis performance in accordance with embodiments of the invention. Moreover, although the discussed process regards adequately balancing on-axis and off-axis performance of an array camera module, active alignment processes can be tailored to achieve any number of desirable picture characteristics in accordance with embodiments of the invention.
Although the present invention has been described in certain specific aspects, many additional modifications and variations would be apparent to those skilled in the art. It is therefore to be understood that the present invention may be practiced otherwise than specifically described. Thus, embodiments of the present invention should be considered in all respects as illustrative and not restrictive.
The current application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/782,920, filed Mar. 1, 2013, which application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/666,852, filed Jun. 30, 2012, the disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4124798 | Thompson | Nov 1978 | A |
4198646 | Alexander et al. | Apr 1980 | A |
4323925 | Abell et al. | Apr 1982 | A |
4460449 | Montalbano | Jul 1984 | A |
4467365 | Murayama et al. | Aug 1984 | A |
4899060 | Lischke | Feb 1990 | A |
5005083 | Grage | Apr 1991 | A |
5070414 | Tsutsumi | Dec 1991 | A |
5144448 | Hornbaker | Sep 1992 | A |
5325449 | Burt | Jun 1994 | A |
5327125 | Iwase et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5488674 | Burt | Jan 1996 | A |
5629524 | Stettner et al. | May 1997 | A |
5808350 | Jack et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5832312 | Rieger et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5880691 | Fossum et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5933190 | Dierickx et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5973844 | Burger | Oct 1999 | A |
6002743 | Telymonde | Dec 1999 | A |
6005607 | Uomori et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6034690 | Gallery et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6069351 | Mack | May 2000 | A |
6069365 | Chow et al. | May 2000 | A |
6097394 | Levoy et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6124974 | Burger | Sep 2000 | A |
6137100 | Fossum et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6137535 | Meyers | Oct 2000 | A |
6141048 | Meyers | Oct 2000 | A |
6160909 | Melen | Dec 2000 | A |
6163414 | Kikuchi et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6172352 | Liu et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6175379 | Uomori et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6205241 | Melen | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6239909 | Hayashi et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6358862 | Ireland et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6443579 | Myers et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6476805 | Shum et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6477260 | Shimomura | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6502097 | Chan et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6525302 | Dowski, Jr. et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6563537 | Kawamura et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6571466 | Glenn et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6603513 | Berezin | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6611289 | Yu | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6627896 | Hashimoto et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6628330 | Lin | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6635941 | Suda | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6639596 | Shum et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6657218 | Noda | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6671399 | Berestov | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6750904 | Lambert | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6765617 | Tangen et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6771833 | Edgar | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6774941 | Boisvert et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6795253 | Shinohara | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6819358 | Kagle et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6879735 | Portniaguine et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6897454 | Sasaki et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6903770 | Kobayashi et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6909121 | Nishikawa | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6927922 | George et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6958862 | Joseph | Oct 2005 | B1 |
7015954 | Foote et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7085409 | Sawhney et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7161614 | Yamashita et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7199348 | Olsen et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7235785 | Hornback et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7262799 | Suda | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7292735 | Blake et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7295697 | Satoh | Nov 2007 | B1 |
7369165 | Bosco et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7391572 | Jacobowitz et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7408725 | Sato | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7425984 | Chen | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7496293 | Shamir et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7564019 | Olsen | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7606484 | Richards et al. | Oct 2009 | B1 |
7620265 | Wolff | Nov 2009 | B1 |
7633511 | Shum et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7639435 | Chiang et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7646549 | Zalevsky et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7657090 | Omatsu et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7675080 | Boettiger | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7675681 | Tomikawa et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7706634 | Schmitt et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7723662 | Levoy et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7738013 | Galambos et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7741620 | Doering et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7782364 | Smith | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7826153 | Hong | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7840067 | Shen et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7912673 | Hébert et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7973834 | Yang | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7986018 | Rennie | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7990447 | Honda et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8000498 | Shih et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8013904 | Tan et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8027531 | Wilburn et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8044994 | Vetro et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8077245 | Adamo et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8098297 | Crisan et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8098304 | Pinto et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8106949 | Tan et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8126279 | Marcellin et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8130120 | Kawabata et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8131097 | Lelescu et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8164629 | Zhang | Apr 2012 | B1 |
8169486 | Corcoran et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8180145 | Wu et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8189065 | Georgiev et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8189089 | Georgiev | May 2012 | B1 |
8194296 | Compton | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8212914 | Chiu | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8213711 | Tam | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8231814 | Duparre | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8242426 | Ward et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8244027 | Takahashi | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8244058 | Intwala et al. | Aug 2012 | B1 |
8254668 | Mashitani et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8279325 | Pitts et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8280194 | Wong et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8289409 | Chang | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8289440 | Pitts et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8290358 | Georgiev | Oct 2012 | B1 |
8294099 | Blackwell, Jr. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8305456 | McMahon | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8315476 | Georgiev et al. | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8345144 | Georgiev et al. | Jan 2013 | B1 |
8360574 | Ishak et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8400555 | Georgiev | Mar 2013 | B1 |
8406562 | Bassi et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8411146 | Twede | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8446492 | Nakano et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8456517 | Mor et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8493496 | Freedman et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8514491 | Duparre | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8541730 | Inuiya | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8542933 | Venkataraman et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8553093 | Wong et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8559756 | Georgiev et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8565547 | Strandemar | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8577183 | Robinson | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8581995 | Lin et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8619082 | Ciurea et al. | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8648918 | Kauker et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8655052 | Spooner et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8682107 | Yoon et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8687087 | Pertsel et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8692893 | McMahon | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8773536 | Zhang | Jul 2014 | B1 |
8780113 | Ciurea et al. | Jul 2014 | B1 |
8804255 | Duparre | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8830375 | Ludwig | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8831367 | Venkataraman et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8842201 | Tajiri | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8854462 | Herbin et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8861089 | Duparre | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8866912 | Mullis | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8866920 | Venkataraman et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8866951 | Keelan | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8878950 | Lelescu et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8885059 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8896594 | Xiong et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8896719 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8902321 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8928793 | McMahon | Jan 2015 | B2 |
9019426 | Han et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9025894 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9025895 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9030528 | Pesach et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9031335 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9031342 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9031343 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9036928 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9036931 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9041823 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9041824 | Lelescu et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9041829 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9042667 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9055233 | Venkataraman et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9060124 | Venkataraman et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9094661 | Venkataraman et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9123117 | Ciurea et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9123118 | Ciurea et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9124815 | Venkataraman et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9124831 | Mullis | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9124864 | Mullis | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9128228 | Duparre | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9129183 | Venkataraman et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9129377 | Ciurea et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9143711 | McMahon | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9147254 | Ciurea et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9185276 | Roda et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9188765 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9191580 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9210392 | Nisenzon et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9214013 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9235898 | Venkataraman et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9235900 | Ciurea et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9240049 | Ciurea et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9253380 | Venkataraman et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9264592 | Rodda et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
20010005225 | Clark et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010019621 | Hanna et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20010028038 | Hamaguchi et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010038387 | Tomooka et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020012056 | Trevino | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020015536 | Warren | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020027608 | Johnson et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020039438 | Mori et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020057845 | Fossum | May 2002 | A1 |
20020063807 | Margulis | May 2002 | A1 |
20020087403 | Meyers et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020089596 | Suda | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020094027 | Sato et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020101528 | Lee | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020113867 | Takigawa et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020113888 | Sonoda et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020163054 | Suda et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020167537 | Trajkovic | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020177054 | Saitoh et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030025227 | Daniell | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030086079 | Barth et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030124763 | Fan et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030140347 | Varsa | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030179418 | Wengender et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030190072 | Adkins et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030211405 | Venkataraman | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040008271 | Hagimori et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040012689 | Tinnerino | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040027358 | Nakao | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040047274 | Amanai | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040050104 | Ghosh et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040056966 | Schechner et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040061787 | Liu et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040066454 | Otani et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040071367 | Irani et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040096119 | Williams | May 2004 | A1 |
20040100570 | Shizukuishi | May 2004 | A1 |
20040105021 | Hu et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040114807 | Lelescu et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040151401 | Sawhney et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040165090 | Ning | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040169617 | Yelton et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040170340 | Tipping et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040174439 | Upton | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040179834 | Szajewski | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040207836 | Chhibber et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040213449 | Safaee-Rad et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040218809 | Blake et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040234873 | Venkataraman | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040240052 | Minefuji et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040251509 | Choi | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040264806 | Herley | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050006477 | Patel | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050007461 | Chou | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050009313 | Suzuki et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050010621 | Pinto et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050012035 | Miller | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050036778 | DeMonte | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050047678 | Jones et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050048690 | Yamamoto | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050068436 | Fraenkel et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050128595 | Shimizu | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050132098 | Sonoda et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050134698 | Schroeder | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050134712 | Gruhlke et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050147277 | Higaki et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050151759 | Gonzalez-Banos et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050175257 | Kuroki | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050185711 | Pfister et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050205785 | Hornback et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050219363 | Kohler et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050224843 | Boemler | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050225654 | Feldman et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050265633 | Piacentino et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050275946 | Choo et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050286612 | Takanashi | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050286756 | Hong et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060002635 | Nestares et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060007331 | Izumi et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060023197 | Joel | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060023314 | Boettiger et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060028476 | Sobel et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060033005 | Jerdev et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060034003 | Zalevsky | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060038891 | Okutomi et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060039611 | Rother | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060049930 | Zruya et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060054780 | Garrood et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060054782 | Olsen et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060055811 | Frtiz et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060069478 | Iwama | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060072029 | Miyatake et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060087747 | Ohzawa et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060098888 | Morishita | May 2006 | A1 |
20060103754 | Wenstrand et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060125936 | Gruhike et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060138322 | Costello et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060152803 | Provitola | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060157640 | Perlman et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060159369 | Young | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060176566 | Boettiger et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060187338 | May et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060197937 | Bamji et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060203113 | Wada et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060210186 | Berkner | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060214085 | Olsen et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060239549 | Kelly et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060243889 | Farnworth et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060251410 | Trutna | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060274174 | Tewinkle | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060278948 | Yamaguchi et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060279648 | Senba et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070002159 | Olsen | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070008575 | Yu et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070024614 | Tam | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070036427 | Nakamura et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070040828 | Zalevsky et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070040922 | McKee et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070041391 | Lin et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070052825 | Cho | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070083114 | Yang et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070085917 | Kobayashi | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070102622 | Olsen et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070126898 | Feldman | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070127831 | Venkataraman | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070139333 | Sato et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070146511 | Kinoshita et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070153335 | Hosaka | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070158427 | Zhu et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070159541 | Sparks et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070160310 | Tanida et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070165931 | Higaki | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070171290 | Kroger | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070182843 | Shimamura et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070206241 | Smith et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070211164 | Olsen et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070216765 | Wong et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070228256 | Mentzer | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070247517 | Zhang et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070257184 | Olsen et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070258006 | Olsen et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070258706 | Raskar et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070263114 | Gurevich et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070268374 | Robinson | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070296832 | Ota et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070296835 | Olsen | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070296847 | Chang et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070297696 | Hamza | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080006859 | Mionetto et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080019611 | Larkin | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080025649 | Liu et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080030597 | Olsen et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080043095 | Vetro et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080043096 | Vetro et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080054518 | Ra et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080062164 | Bassi et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080079805 | Takagi et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080080028 | Bakin et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080084486 | Enge et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080088793 | Sverdrup et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080095523 | Schilling-Benz et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080099804 | Venezia et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080112635 | Kondo et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080118241 | TeKolste et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080131019 | Ng | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080131107 | Ueno | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080151097 | Chen et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080152215 | Horie et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080152296 | Oh et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080156991 | Hu et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080158259 | Kempf et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080158375 | Kakkori et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080158698 | Chang et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080187305 | Raskar et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080193026 | Horie et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080218610 | Chapman et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080219654 | Border et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080239116 | Smith | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080240598 | Hasegawa | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080247638 | Tanida et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080247653 | Moussavi et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080272416 | Yun | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080273751 | Yuan et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080278591 | Barna et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080284880 | Numata | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080298674 | Baker et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090050946 | Duparre et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090052743 | Techmer | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090060281 | Tanida et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090086074 | Li et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090091806 | Inuiya | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090096050 | Park | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090102956 | Georgiev | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090109306 | Shan | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090128833 | Yahav | May 2009 | A1 |
20090129667 | Ho | May 2009 | A1 |
20090140131 | Utagawa et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090152664 | Klem et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090167922 | Perlman et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090179142 | Duparre et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090180021 | Kikuchi et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090200622 | Tai et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090201371 | Matsuda et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090207235 | Francini et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090219435 | Yuan et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090225203 | Tanida et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090237520 | Kaneko et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090245573 | Saptharishi et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090256947 | Ciurea et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090263017 | Tanbakuchi | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090268192 | Koenck et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090268970 | Babacan et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090268983 | Stone | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090274387 | Jin | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090284651 | Srinivasan | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090297056 | Lelescu et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090302205 | Olsen et al. | Dec 2009 | A9 |
20090323195 | Hembree et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090323206 | Oliver et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090324118 | Maslov et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100002126 | Wenstrand et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100002313 | Duparre et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100002314 | Duparre | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100013927 | Nixon | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100044815 | Chang | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100053342 | Hwang et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100053600 | Tanida et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100060746 | Olsen et al. | Mar 2010 | A9 |
20100073463 | Momonoi et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100074532 | Gordon et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100085425 | Tan | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100086227 | Sun et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100091389 | Henriksen et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100097491 | Farina et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100103259 | Tanida et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100103308 | Butterfield et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100111444 | Coffman | May 2010 | A1 |
20100118127 | Nam | May 2010 | A1 |
20100128145 | Pitts et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100133230 | Henriksen et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100133418 | Sargent et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100141802 | Knight et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100142839 | Lakus-becker | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100157073 | Kondo et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100165152 | Lim | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100166410 | Chang et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100177411 | Hegde et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100194901 | van Hoorebeke et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100195716 | Klein et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100201834 | Maruyama et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100202683 | Robinson | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100208100 | Olsen et al. | Aug 2010 | A9 |
20100220212 | Perlman et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100223237 | Mishra et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100231285 | Boomer et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100244165 | Lake et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100265381 | Yamamoto et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100265385 | Knight | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100281070 | Chan et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100302423 | Adams, Jr. et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100309292 | Ho et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100321595 | Chiu et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110001037 | Tewinkle | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110018973 | Takayama | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110019243 | Constant, Jr. et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110031381 | Tay et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110032370 | Ludwig | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110033129 | Robinson | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110043661 | Podoleanu | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110043665 | Ogasahara | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110043668 | McKinnon et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110044502 | Liu et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110069189 | Venkataraman et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110080487 | Venkataraman et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110108708 | Olsen et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110121421 | Charbon | May 2011 | A1 |
20110122308 | Duparre | May 2011 | A1 |
20110128393 | Tavi et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110128412 | Milnes et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110149408 | Hahgholt et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110149409 | Haugholt et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110153248 | Gu et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110157321 | Nakajima et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110176020 | Chang | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110211824 | Georgiev et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110221599 | Högasten | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110221658 | Haddick et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110221939 | Jerdev | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110221950 | Oostra | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110228144 | Tian et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110234841 | Akeley et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110241234 | Duparre | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110242342 | Goma et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110242355 | Goma et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110242356 | Aleksic | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110255592 | Sung et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110255745 | Hodder et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110261993 | Weiming et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110267348 | Lin et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110273531 | Ito et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110274366 | Tardif | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110279721 | McMahon | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110285866 | Bhrugumalla et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110285910 | Bamji et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110292216 | Fergus et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110298917 | Yanagita | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110300929 | Tardif et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110310980 | Mathew | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110316968 | Taguchi et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110317766 | Lim, II et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120012748 | Pain et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120019700 | Gaber | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120023456 | Sun et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120026297 | Sato | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120026342 | Yu et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120039525 | Tian et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120044249 | Mashitani et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120044372 | Côté et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120062697 | Treado et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120062702 | Jiang et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120069235 | Imai | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120105691 | Waqas et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120113413 | Miahczylowicz-Wolski et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120147139 | Li et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120147205 | Lelescu et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120153153 | Chang et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120154551 | Inoue | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120163672 | McKinnon et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120169433 | Mullins et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120170134 | Bolis et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120176479 | Mayhew et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120188389 | Lin et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120188420 | Black et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120188634 | Kubala et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120198677 | Duparre | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120200734 | Tang | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120219236 | Ali et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120224083 | Jovanovski et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120229628 | Ishiyama et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120249550 | Akeley et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120249750 | Izzat et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120249836 | Ali et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120262601 | Choi | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120262607 | Shimura et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120268574 | Gidon et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120287291 | McMahon et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120293695 | Tanaka | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120307099 | Yahata et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120314033 | Lee et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120327222 | Ng et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130002828 | Ding et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130003184 | Duparre | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130010073 | Do | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130016885 | Tsujimoto et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130022111 | Chen et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130027580 | Olsen et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130033579 | Wajs | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130033585 | Li et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130050504 | Safaee-Rad et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130050526 | Keelan | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130057710 | McMahon | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130070060 | Chatterjee | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130076967 | Brunner et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130077880 | Venkataraman et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130077882 | Venkataraman et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130088489 | Schmeitz et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130088637 | Duparre | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130107061 | Kumar et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130113899 | Morohoshi et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130113939 | Strandemar | May 2013 | A1 |
20130120605 | Georgiev et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130128068 | Georgiev et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130128069 | Georgiev et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130128087 | Georgiev et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130128121 | Agarwala et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130147979 | McMahon et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130215108 | McMahon et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130215231 | Hiramoto et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130222556 | Shimada | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130223759 | Nishiyama et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130229540 | Farina et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130230237 | Schlosser et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130250123 | Zhang et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130259317 | Gaddy | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130265459 | Duparre et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130274923 | By et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130293760 | Nisenzon et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140002674 | Duparre et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140009586 | McNamer et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140037137 | Broaddus et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140037140 | Benhimane et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140043507 | Wang et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140076336 | Clayton et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140079336 | Venkataraman et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140092281 | Nisenzon et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140098267 | Tian et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140104490 | Hsieh et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140118493 | Sali et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140118584 | Lee et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140132810 | McMahon | May 2014 | A1 |
20140146201 | Knight et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140176592 | Wilburn et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140192253 | Laroia | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140198188 | Izawa | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140204183 | Lee et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140218546 | McMahon | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140232822 | Venkataraman et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140240528 | Venkataraman et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140240529 | Venkataraman et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140253738 | Mullis | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140267243 | Venkataraman et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140267286 | Duparre | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140267633 | Venkataraman et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140267762 | Mullis et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140267890 | Lelescu et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140285675 | Mullis | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140313315 | Shoham et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140321712 | Ciurea et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140333731 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140333764 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140333787 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140340539 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140347509 | Venkataraman et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140347748 | Duparre | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140354773 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140354843 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140354844 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140354853 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140354854 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140354855 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140355870 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140368662 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140368683 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140368684 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140368685 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140368686 | Duparre | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140369612 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140369615 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140376825 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140376826 | Venkataraman et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150003752 | Venkataraman et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150003753 | Venkataraman et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150009353 | Venkataraman et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150009354 | Venkataraman et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150009362 | Venkataraman et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150015669 | Venkataraman et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150035992 | Mullis | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150036014 | Lelescu et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150036015 | Lelescu et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150042766 | Ciurea et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150042767 | Ciurea et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150042833 | Lelescu et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150049915 | Ciurea et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150049916 | Ciurea et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150049917 | Ciurea et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150055884 | Venkataraman et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150091900 | Yang et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150122411 | Rodda et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150124113 | Rodda et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150124151 | Rodda et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150243480 | Yamada et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150296137 | Duparre et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150312455 | Venkataraman et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150326852 | Duparre et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20160165212 | Mullis | Jun 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1839394 | Sep 2006 | CN |
101102388 | Jan 2008 | CN |
101147392 | Mar 2008 | CN |
102375199 | Mar 2012 | CN |
840502 | May 1998 | EP |
1201407 | May 2002 | EP |
1734766 | Dec 2006 | EP |
2026563 | Feb 2009 | EP |
2104334 | Sep 2009 | EP |
2336816 | Jun 2011 | EP |
2482022 | Jan 2012 | GB |
59-025483 | Sep 1984 | JP |
64-037177 | Jul 1989 | JP |
02-285772 | Nov 1990 | JP |
11142609 | May 1999 | JP |
11223708 | Aug 1999 | JP |
2000209503 | Jul 2000 | JP |
2002205310 | Jul 2002 | JP |
2002252338 | Sep 2002 | JP |
2003094445 | Apr 2003 | JP |
2003163938 | Jun 2003 | JP |
2004221585 | Aug 2004 | JP |
2005116022 | Apr 2005 | JP |
2005181460 | Jul 2005 | JP |
2005295381 | Oct 2005 | JP |
2006047944 | Feb 2006 | JP |
20060033493 | Feb 2006 | JP |
2006258930 | Sep 2006 | JP |
20070520107 | Jul 2007 | JP |
2008055908 | Mar 2008 | JP |
2008507874 | Mar 2008 | JP |
2008258885 | Oct 2008 | JP |
2009132010 | Jun 2009 | JP |
2011109484 | Jun 2011 | JP |
2013526801 | Jun 2013 | JP |
2014521117 | Aug 2014 | JP |
1020110097647 | Aug 2011 | KR |
200828994 | Jul 2008 | TW |
200939739 | Sep 2009 | TW |
2007083579 | Jul 2007 | WO |
2008108271 | Sep 2008 | WO |
2008108926 | Sep 2008 | WO |
2008150817 | Dec 2008 | WO |
2009151903 | Dec 2009 | WO |
2011008443 | Jan 2011 | WO |
2011055655 | May 2011 | WO |
2011063347 | May 2011 | WO |
2011116203 | Sep 2011 | WO |
2011063347 | Oct 2011 | WO |
2011143501 | Nov 2011 | WO |
2012057619 | May 2012 | WO |
2012057620 | May 2012 | WO |
2012057621 | May 2012 | WO |
2012057622 | May 2012 | WO |
2012057623 | May 2012 | WO |
2012057620 | Jun 2012 | WO |
2012074361 | Jun 2012 | WO |
2012078126 | Jun 2012 | WO |
2012082904 | Jun 2012 | WO |
2012155119 | Nov 2012 | WO |
2013003276 | Jan 2013 | WO |
2013043751 | Mar 2013 | WO |
2013043761 | Mar 2013 | WO |
2013049699 | Apr 2013 | WO |
2013055960 | Apr 2013 | WO |
2013119706 | Aug 2013 | WO |
2013126578 | Aug 2013 | WO |
2014052974 | Apr 2014 | WO |
2014032020 | May 2014 | WO |
2014078443 | May 2014 | WO |
2014130849 | Aug 2014 | WO |
2014133974 | Sep 2014 | WO |
2014138695 | Sep 2014 | WO |
2014138697 | Sep 2014 | WO |
2014144157 | Sep 2014 | WO |
2014145856 | Sep 2014 | WO |
2014149403 | Sep 2014 | WO |
2014150856 | Sep 2014 | WO |
2014159721 | Oct 2014 | WO |
2014159779 | Oct 2014 | WO |
2014160142 | Oct 2014 | WO |
2014164550 | Oct 2014 | WO |
2014164909 | Oct 2014 | WO |
2014165244 | Oct 2014 | WO |
2014133974 | Apr 2015 | WO |
2015048694 | Apr 2015 | WO |
2015070105 AS1 | May 2015 | WO |
Entry |
---|
US 8,957,977, 02/2015, Venkataraman et al. (withdrawn) |
US 8,964,053, 02/2015, Venkataraman et al. (withdrawn) |
US 8,965,058, 02/2015, Venkataraman et al. (withdrawn) |
US 9,014,491, 04/2015, Venkataraman et al. (withdrawn) |
Bruckner et al., “Artificial compound eye applying hyperacuity”, Optics Express, Dec. 11, 2006, vol. 14, No. 25, pp. 12076-12084. |
Bruckner et al., “Driving microoptical imaging systems towards miniature camera applications”, Proc. SPIE, Micro-Optics, 2010, 11 pgs. |
Bruckner et al., “Thin wafer-level camera lenses inspired by insect compound eyes”, Optics Express, Nov. 22, 2010, vol. 18, No. 24, pp. 24379-24394. |
Capel, “Image Mosaicing and Super-resolution”, [online], Retrieved on Nov. 10, 2012 (Nov. 10, 2012). Retrieved from the Internet at URL:<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.226.2643&rep=rep1 &type=pdf>, Title pg., abstract, table of contents, pp. 1-263 (269 total pages). |
Chan et al., “Extending the Depth of Field in a Compound-Eye Imaging System with Super-Resolution Reconstruction”, Proceedings—International Conference on Pattern Recognition, 2006, vol. 3, pp. 623-626. |
Chan et al., “Investigation of Computational Compound-Eye Imaging System with Super-Resolution Reconstruction”, IEEE, ISASSP 2006, pp. 1177-1180. |
Chan et al., “Super-resolution reconstruction in a computational compound-eye imaging system”, Multidim Syst Sign Process, 2007, vol. 18, pp. 83-101. |
Chen et al., “Interactive deformation of light fields”, In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH I3D 2005, pp. 139-146. |
Chen et al., “KNN Matting”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Sep. 2013, vol. 35, No. 9, pp. 2175-2188. |
Drouin et al., “Fast Multiple-Baseline Stereo with Occlusion”, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on 3-D Digital Imaging and Modeling, 2005, 8 pgs. |
Drouin et al., “Geo-Consistency for Wide Multi-Camera Stereo”, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2005, 8 pgs. |
Drouin et al., “Improving Border Localization of Multi-Baseline Stereo Using Border-Cut”, International Journal of Computer Vision, Jul. 2009, vol. 83, Issue 3, 8 pgs. |
Duparre et al., “Artificial apposition compound eye fabricated by micro-optics technology”, Applied Optics, Aug. 1, 2004, vol. 43, No. 22, pp. 4303-4310. |
Duparre et al., “Artificial compound eye zoom camera”, Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 2008, vol. 3, pp. 1-6. |
Duparre et al., “Artificial compound eyes—different concepts and their application to ultra flat image acquisition sensors”, MOEMS and Miniaturized Systems IV, Proc. SPIE 5346, Jan. 2004, pp. 89-100. |
Duparre et al., “Chirped arrays of refractive ellipsoidal microlenses for aberration correction under oblique incidence”, Optics Express, Dec. 26, 2005, vol. 13, No. 26, pp. 10539-10551. |
Duparre et al., “Micro-optical artificial compound eyes”, Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 2006, vol. 1, pp. R1-R16. |
Duparre et al., “Microoptical Artificial Compound Eyes—Two Different Concepts for Compact Imaging Systems”, 11th Microoptics Conference, Oct. 30-Nov. 2, 2005, 2 pgs. |
Duparre et al., “Microoptical telescope compound eye”, Optics Express, Feb. 7, 2005, vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 889-903. |
Duparre et al., “Micro-optically fabricated artificial apposition compound eye”, Electronic Imaging—Science and Technology, Prod. SPIE 5301, Jan. 2004, pp. 25-33. |
Duparre et al., “Novel Optics/Micro-Optics for Miniature Imaging Systems”, Proc. of SPIE, 2006, vol. 6196, pp. 619607-1-619607-15. |
Duparre et al., “Theoretical analysis of an artificial superposition compound eye for application in ultra flat digital image acquisition devices”, Optical Systems Design, Proc. SPIE 5249, Sep. 2003, pp. 408-418. |
Duparre et al., “Thin compound-eye camera”, Applied Optics, May 20, 2005, vol. 44, No. 15, pp. 2949-2956. |
Duparre et al., “Ultra-Thin Camera Based on Artificial Apposistion Compound Eyes”, 10th Microoptics Conference, Sep. 1-3, 2004, 2 pgs. |
Fanaswala, “Regularized Super-Resolution of Multi-View Images”, Retrieved on Nov. 10, 2012 (Nov. 10, 2012). Retrieved from the Internet at URL:<http://www.site.uottawa.ca/-edubois/theses/Fanaswala—thesis.pdf>, 163 pgs. |
Farrell et al., “Resolution and Light Sensitivity Tradeoff with Pixel Size”, Proceedings of the SPIE Electronic Imaging 2006 Conference, 2006, vol. 6069, 8 pgs. |
Farsiu et al., “Advances and Challenges in Super-Resolution”, International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology, 2004, vol. 14, pp. 47-57. |
Farsiu et al., “Fast and Robust Multiframe Super Resolution”, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Oct. 2004, vol. 13, No. 10, pp. 1327-1344. |
Farsiu et al., “Multiframe Demosaicing and Super-Resolution of Color Images”, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Jan. 2006, vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 141-159. |
Feris et al., “Multi-Flash Stereopsis: Depth Edge Preserving Stereo with Small Baseline Illumination”, IEEE Trans on PAMI, 2006, 31 pgs. |
Fife et al., “A 3D Multi-Aperture Image Sensor Architecture”, Custom Integrated Circuits Conference, 2006, CICC '06, IEEE, pp. 281-284. |
Fife et al., “A 3MPixel Multi-Aperture Image Sensor with 0.7Mu Pixels in 0.11Mu CMOS”, ISSCC 2008, Session 2, Image Sensors & Technology, 2008, pp. 48-50. |
Goldman et al., “Video Object Annotation, Navigation, and Composition”, In Proceedings of UIST 2008, pp. 3-12. |
Gortler et al., “The Lumigraph”, In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 1996, pp. 43-54. |
Hacohen et al., “Non-Rigid Dense Correspondence with Applications for Image Enhancement”, ACM Transactions on Graphics, 30, 4, 2011, pp. 70:1-70:10. |
Hamilton, “JPEG File Interchange Format, Version 1.02”, Sep. 1, 1992, 9 pgs. |
Hardie, “A Fast Image Super-Algorithm Using an Adaptive Wiener Filter”, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Dec. 2007, vol. 16, No. 12, pp. 2953-2964. |
Hasinoff et al., “Search-and-Replace Editing for Personal Photo Collections”, Computational Photography (ICCP) 2010, pp. 1-8. |
Horisaki et al., “Irregular Lens Arrangement Design to Improve Imaging Performance of Compound-Eye Imaging Systems”, Applied Physics Express, 2010, vol. 3, pp. 022501-1-022501-3. |
Horisaki et al., “Superposition Imaging for Three-Dimensionally Space-Invariant Point Spread Functions”, Applied Physics Express, 2011, vol. 4, pp. 112501-1-112501-3. |
Horn et al., “LightShop: Interactive Light Field Manipulation and Rendering”, In Proceedings of I3D 2007, pp. 121-128. |
Isaksen et al., “Dynamically Reparameterized Light Fields”, In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2000, pp. 297-306. |
Jarabo et al., “Efficient Propagation of Light Field Edits”, In Proceedings of SIACG 2011, pp. 75-80. |
Joshi, et al., “Synthetic Aperture Tracking: Tracking Through Occlusions”, ICCV IEEE 11th International Conference on Computer Vision; Publication [online]. Oct. 2007 [retrieved Jul. 28, 2014]. Retrieved from the Internet: http:I/ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4409032&isnumber=4408819; pp. 1-8. |
Kang et al., “Handling Occlusions inn Dense Multi-View Stereo”, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2001, vol. 1, pp. I-103-I-110. |
Kitamura et al., “Reconstruction of a high-resolution image on a compound-eye image-capturing system”, Applied Optics, Mar. 10, 2004, vol. 43, No. 8, pp. 1719-1727. |
Krishnamurthy et al., “Compression and Transmission of Depth Maps for Image-Based Rendering”, Image Processing, 2001, pp. 828-831. |
Kutulakos et al., “Occluding Contour Detection Using Affine Invariants and Purposive Viewpoint Control”, Proc., CVPR 94, 8 pgs. |
Lai et al., “A Large-Scale Hierarchical Multi-View RGB-D Object Dataset”, May 2011, 8 pgs. |
Lee et al., “Electroactive Polymer Actuator for Lens-Drive Unit in Auto-Focus Compact Camera Module”, ETRI Journal, vol. 31, No. 6, Dec. 2009, pp. 695-702. |
Lensvector, “How LensVector Autofocus Works”, printed Nov. 2, 2012 from http://www.lensvector.com/overview.html, 1 pg. |
Levin et al., “A Closed Form Solution to Natural Image Matting”, Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Feb. 2008, vol. 30, 8 pgs. |
Levoy, “Light Fields and Computational Imaging”, IEEE Computer Society, Aug. 2006, pp. 46-55. |
Levoy et al., “Light Field Rendering”, Proc. ADM SIGGRAPH '96, pp. 1-12. |
Li et al., “A Hybrid Camera for Motion Deblurring and Depth Map Super-Resolution”, Jun. 23-28, 2008, IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 8 pgs. Retrieved from www.eecis.udel.edu/˜jye/lab—research/08/deblur-feng.pdf on Feb. 5, 2014. |
Liu et al., “Virtual View Reconstruction Using Temporal Information”, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, 2012, pp. 115-120. |
Lo et al., “Stereoscopic 3D Copy & Paste”, ACM Transactions on Graphics, vol. 29, No. 6, Article 147, Dec. 2010, pp. 147:1-147:10. |
Merkle, et al., “Adaptation and optimization of coding algorithms for mobile 3DTV”, Mobile3DTV Project No. 216503, Nov. 2008, 55 pgs. |
Mitra et al., “Light Field Denoising, Light Field Superresolution and Stereo Camera Based Refocussing using a GMM Light Field Patch Prior”, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW), 2012 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Jun. 16-21, 2012, pp. 22-28. |
Moreno-Noguer et al., “Active Refocusing of Images and Videos”, ACM SIGGRAPH, 2007, vol. 26, pp. 1-10, [retrieved on Jul. 8, 2015], Retrieved from the Internet <U RL:http://doi.acm.org/1 0.1145/1276377.1276461>. |
Muehlebach, “Camera Auto Exposure Control for VSLAM Applications”, Studies on Mechatronics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Autumn Term 2010 course, 67 pgs. |
Nayar, “Computational Cameras: Redefining the Image”, IEEE Computer Society, Aug. 2006, pp. 30-38. |
Ng, “Digital Light Field Photography”, Thesis, Jul. 2006, 203 pgs. |
Ng et al., “Super-Resolution Image Restoration from Blurred Low-Resolution Images”, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision, 2005, vol. 23, pp. 367-378. |
Nitta et al., “Image reconstruction for thin observation module by bound optics by using the iterative backprojection method”, Applied Optics, May 1, 2006, vol. 45, No. 13, pp. 2893-2900. |
Nomura et al., “Scene Collages and Flexible Camera Arrays”, Proceedings of Eurographics Symposium on Rendering, 2007, 12 pgs. |
Park et al., “Super-Resolution Image Reconstruction”, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, May 2003, pp. 21-36. |
Perwass et al., “Single Lens 3D-Camera with Extended Depth-of-Field”, printed from www.raytrix.de, Jan. 2012, 15 pgs. |
Pham et al., “Robust Super-Resolution without Regularization”, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 124, 2008, pp. 1-19. |
Philips 3D Solutions, “3D Interface Specifications, White Paper”, Philips 3D Solutions retrieved from www.philips.com/3dsolutions, 29 pgs., Feb. 15, 2008. |
Pouydebasquea et al., “Varifocal liquid lenses with integrated actuator, high focusing power and low operating voltage fabricated on 200 mm wafers”, Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, vol. 172, Issue 1, Dec. 2011, pp. 280-286. |
Protter et al., “Generalizing the Nonlocal-Means to Super-Resolution Reconstruction”, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Jan. 2009, vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 36-51. |
Radtke et al., “Laser lithographic fabrication and characterization of a spherical artificial compound eye”, Optics Express, Mar. 19, 2007, vol. 15, No. 6, pp. 3067-3077. |
Rajan, Deepu et al. , “Simultaneous Estimation of Super Resolved Scene and Depth Map from Low Resolution Defocused Observations”, IEEE Computer Society, vol. 25, No. 9; Sep. 2003; pp. 1-16. |
Rander, et al., “Virtualized Reality: Constructing Time-Varying Virtual Worlds From Real World Events”, Proc. of IEEE Visualization '97, Phoenix, Arizona, Oct. 19-24, 1997, pp. 277-283, 552. |
Rhemann et al, “Fast Cost-Volume Filtering for Visual Correspondence and Beyond”, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell, 2013, vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 504-511. |
Robertson et al., “Dynamic Range Improvement Through Multiple Exposures”, In Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Image Processing, 1999, 5 pgs. |
Robertson et al., “Estimation-theoretic approach to dynamic range enhancement using multiple exposures”, Journal of Electronic Imaging, Apr. 2003, vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 219-228. |
Roy et al., “Non-Uniform Hierarchical Pyramid Stereo for Large Images”, Computer and Robot Vision, 2007, pp. 208-215. |
Sauer et al., “Parallel Computation of Sequential Pixel Updates in Statistical Tomographic Reconstruction”, ICIP 1995, pp. 93-96. |
Shum et al., “Pop-Up Light Field: An Interactive Image-Based Modeling and Rendering System”, Apr. 2004, ACM Transactions on Graphics, vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 143-162. Retrieved from http://131.107.65.14/en-us/um/people/jiansun/papers/PopupLightField—TOG.pdf on Feb. 5, 2014. |
Stollberg et al., “The Gabor superlens as an alternative wafer-level camera approach inspired by superposition compound eyes of nocturnal insects”, Optics Express, Aug. 31, 2009, vol. 17, No. 18, pp. 15747-15759. |
Takeda et al., “Super-resolution Without Explicit Subpixel Motion Estimation”, IEEE Transaction on Image Processing, Sep. 2009, vol. 18, No. 9, pp. 1958-1975. |
Tallon et al., “Upsampling and Denoising of Depth Maps via Joint-Segmentation”, 20th European Signal Processing Conference, Aug. 27-31, 2012, 5 pgs. |
Tanida et al., “Color imaging with an integrated compound imaging system”, Optics Express, Sep. 8, 2003, vol. 11, No. 18, pp. 2109-2117. |
Tanida et al., “Thin observation module by bound optics (TOMBO): concept and experimental verification”, Applied Optics, Apr. 10, 2001, vol. 40, No. 11, pp. 1806-1813. |
Taylor, “Virtual camera movement: The way of the future?”, American Cinematographer vol. 77, No. 9, Sep. 1996, 93-100. |
Vaish et al., “Reconstructing Occluded Surfaces Using Synthetic Apertures: Stereo, Focus and Robust Measures”, Proceeding, CVPR '06 Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition—vol. 2, pp. 2331-2338. |
Vaish et al., “Synthetic Aperture Focusing Using a Shear-Warp Factorization of the Viewing Transform”, IEEE Workshop on A3DISS, CVPR, 2005, 8 pgs. |
Vaish et al., “Using Plane + Parallax for Calibrating Dense Camera Arrays”, IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2004, 8 pgs. |
Veilleux, “CCD Gain Lab: The Theory”, University of Maryland, College Park—Observational Astronomy (ASTR 310), Oct. 19, 2006, pp. 1-5 (online], [retrieved on May 13, 2014]. Retrieved from the Internet <URL: http://www.astro.umd.edu/˜veilleux/ASTR310/fall06/ccd—theory.pdf, 5 pgs. |
Vuong et al., “A New Auto Exposure and Auto White-Balance Algorithm to Detect High Dynamic Range Conditions Using CMOS Technology”, Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science 2008, WCECS 2008, Oct. 22-24, 2008. |
Wetzstein et al., “Computational Plenoptic Imaging”, Computer Graphics Forum, 2011, vol. 30, No. 8, pp. 2397-2426. |
Wheeler et al., “Super-Resolution Image Synthesis Using Projections Onto Convex Sets in the Frequency Domain”, Proc. SPIE, 2005, 5674, 12 pgs. |
Wilburn, “High Performance Imaging Using Arrays of Inexpensive Cameras”, Thesis of Bennett Wilburn, Dec. 2004, 128 pgs. |
Wilburn et al., “High Performance Imaging Using Large Camera Arrays”, ACM Transactions on Graphics, Jul. 2005, vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 1-12. |
Wilburn et al., “High-Speed Videography Using a Dense Camera Array”, Proceeding, CVPR'04 Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 294-301. |
Wilburn et al., “The Light Field Video Camera”, Proceedings of Media Processors 2002, SPIE Electronic Imaging, 2002, 8 pgs. |
Wippermann et al., “Design and fabrication of a chirped array of refractive ellipsoidal micro-lenses for an apposition eye camera objective”, Proceedings of SPIE, Optical Design and Engineering II, Oct. 15, 2005, 59622C-1-59622C-11. |
Yang et al., “A Real-Time Distributed Light Field Camera”, Eurographics Workshop on Rendering (2002), pp. 1-10. |
Zhang et al., “Depth estimation, spatially variant image registration, and super-resolution using a multi-lenslet camera”, Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 7705, Apr. 23, 2010, pp. 770505-770505-8, XP055113797 ISSN: 0277-786X, DOI: 10.1117/12.852171. |
Zhang et al., “A Self-Reconfigurable Camera Array”, Eurographics Symposium on Rendering, 2004, 12 pgs. |
Zomet et al., “Robust Super-Resolution”, IEEE, 2001, pp. 1-6. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/028447, Report issued Sep. 15, 2015, Mailed Sep. 24, 2015, 7 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/064693, Report issued May 10, 2016, Mailed May 19, 2016, 14 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US13/46002, Search completed Nov. 13, 2013, Mailed Nov. 29, 2013, 7 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US13/56065, Search Completed Nov. 25, 2013, Mailed Nov. 26, 2013, 8 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US13/59991, Search Completed Feb. 6, 2014, Mailed Feb. 26, 2014, 8 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2009/044687, date completed Jan. 5, 2010, date mailed Jan. 13, 2010, 9 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2011/64921, Report Completed Feb. 25, 2011, mailed Mar. 6, 2012, 17 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2013/024987, Search Completed Mar. 27, 2013, Mailed Apr. 15, 2013, 14 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2013/027146, completed Apr. 2, 2013, 11 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2013/039155, Search completed Jul. 1, 2013, Mailed Jul. 11, 2013, 11 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2013/048772, Search Completed Oct. 21, 2013, Mailed Nov. 8, 2013, 11 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2013/056502, Search Completed Feb. 18, 2014, Mailed Mar. 19, 2014, 7 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2013/069932, Completed Mar. 14, 2014, Mailed Apr. 14, 2014, 12 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2015/019529, Search completed May 5, 2015, Mailed Jun. 8, 2015, 10 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US11/36349, mailed Aug. 22, 2011, 11 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US13/62720, report completed Mar. 25, 2014, Mailed Apr. 21, 2014, 9 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/024903 report completed Jun. 12, 2014, Mailed, Jun. 27, 2014, 13 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/17766, report completed May 28, 2014, Mailed Jun. 18, 2014, 9 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/18084, report completed May 23, 2014, Mailed Jun. 10, 2014, 12 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/18116, Report completed May 13, 2014, 12 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/22118, report completed Jun. 9, 2014, Mailed, Jun. 25, 2014, 5 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/22774 report completed Jun. 9, 2014, Mailed Jul. 14, 2014, 6 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/24407, report completed Jun. 11, 2014, Mailed Jul. 8, 2014, 9 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/25100, report completed Jul. 7, 2014, Mailed Aug. 7, 2014 5 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US14/25904 report completed Jun. 10, 2014, Mailed Jul. 10, 2014, 6 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2010/057661, completed Mar. 9, 2011, 14 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2012/044014, completed Oct. 12, 2012, 15 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2012/056151, completed Nov. 14, 2012, 10 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2012/059813, Report completed Dec. 17, 2012, 8 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2012/37670, Mailed Jul. 18, 2012, Report Completed Jul. 5, 2012, 9 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2012/58093, Report completed Nov. 15, 2012, 12 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2014/022123, report completed Jun. 9, 2014, Mailed Jun. 25, 2014, 5 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2014/024947, Report Completed Jul. 8, 2014, Mailed Aug. 5, 2014, 8 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2014/028447, report completed Jun. 30, 2014, Mailed Jul. 21, 2014, 8 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2014/030692, report completed Jul. 28, 2014, Mailed Aug. 27, 2014, 7 Pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2014/064693, Report Completed Mar. 7, 2015, Mailed Apr. 2, 2015, 15 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2014/066229, Search Completed Mar. 6, 2015, Mailed Mar. 19, 2015, 9 Pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2014/067740, Report Completed Jan. 29, 2015, Mailed Mar. 3, 2015, 10 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application PCT/US2014/23762, Report Completed May 30, 2014, Mailed Jul. 3, 2014, 6 Pgs. |
Baker et al., “Limits on Super-Resolution and How to Break Them”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Sep. 2002, vol. 24, No. 9, pp. 1167-1183. |
Bennett et al., Eric P. , “Multispectral Bilateral Video Fusion”, 2007 IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 16, No. 5, pp. 1185-1194. |
Bertero et al., “Super-resolution in computational imaging”, Micron, 2003, vol. 34, Issues 6-7, 17 pgs. |
Bishop et al., “The Light Field Camera: Extended Depth of Field, Aliasing, and Superresolution”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, May 2012, vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 972-986. |
Borman, “Topics in Multiframe Superresolution Restoration”, Thesis of Sean Borman, Apr. 2004, 282 pgs. |
Borman et al, “Image Sequence Processing”, Source unknown, Oct. 14, 2002, 81 pgs. |
Borman et al., “Block-Matching Sub-Pixel Motion Estimation from Noisy, Under-Sampled Frames—An Empirical Performance Evaluation”, Proc SPIE, Dec. 1998, 3653, 10 pgs. |
Borman et al., “Image Resampling and Constraint Formulation for Multi-Frame Super-Resolution Restoration”, Proc. SPIE, Jun. 2003, 5016, 12 pgs. |
Borman et al., “Linear models for multi-frame super-resolution restoration under non-affine registration and spatially varying PSF”, Proc. SPIE, May 2004, vol. 5299, 12 pgs. |
Borman et al., “Nonlinear Prediction Methods for Estimation of Clique Weighting Parameters in NonGaussian Image Models”, Proc. SPIE, 1998. 3459, 9 pgs. |
Borman et al., “Simultaneous Multi-Frame MAP Super-Resolution Video Enhancement Using Spatio-Temporal Priors”, Image Processing, 1999, ICIP 99 Proceedings, vol. 3, pp. 469-473. |
Borman et al., “Super-Resolution from Image Sequences—A Review”, Circuits & Systems, 1998, pp. 374-378. |
Extended European Search Report for EP Application No. 13810429.4, Completed date Jan. 7, 2016, Mailed on Jan. 15, 2016, 6 Pgs. |
Extended European Search Report for European Application EP12782935.6, report completed Aug. 28, 2014 Mailed Sep. 4, 2014, 6 Pgs. |
Extended European Search Report for European Application EP12804266.0, Report Completed Jan. 27, 2015, Mailed Feb. 3, 2015, 6 Pgs. |
Extended European Search Report for European Application EP12835041.0, Report Completed Jan. 28, 2015, Mailed Feb. 4, 2015, 6 Pgs. |
Extended European Search Report for European Application EP13810229.8, Report Completed Apr. 14, 2016, Mailed Apr. 21, 2016, 7 pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application No. PCT/US2012/059813, Completed Apr. 15, 2014, 7 pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application No. PCT/US2013/059991, Issued Mar. 17, 2015, Mailed Mar. 26, 2015, 8 pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US13/56065, Report Issued Feb. 24, 2015, Mailed Mar. 5, 2015, 4 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US13/62720, Report Issued Mar. 31, 2015, Mailed Apr. 9, 2015, 8 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2013/024987, Mailed Aug. 21, 2014, 13 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2013/027146, Apr. 2, 2013, Report Issued Aug. 26, 2014, 10 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2013/039155, report completed Nov. 4, 2014, Mailed Nov. 13, 2014, 10 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2013/046002, issued Dec. 31, 2014, Mailed Jan. 8, 2015, 6 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2013/048772, Report issued Dec. 31, 2014, Mailed Jan. 8, 2015, 8 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2013/056502, Report Issued Feb. 24, 2015, Mailed Mar. 5, 2015, 7 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2013/069932, Report issued May 19, 2015, Mailed May 28, 2015, 12 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/018084, Report issued Aug. 25, 2015, Mailed Sep. 3, 2015, 11 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/018116, Report issued Sep. 15, 2015, Mailed Sep. 24, 2015, 12 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/022118, Report issued Sep. 8, 2015, Mailed Sep. 17, 2015, 4 pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/022123, Report issued Sep. 8, 2015, Mailed Sep. 17, 2015, 4 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/022774, Report issued Sep. 22, 2015, Mailed Oct. 1, 2015, 5 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/023762, Report issued Mar. 2, 2015, Mailed Mar. 9, 2015, 10 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/024407, Report issued Sep. 15, 2015, Mailed Sep. 24, 2015, 8 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/025100, Report issued Sep. 15, 2015, Mailed Sep. 24, 2015, 4 Pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US2014/025904, Report issued Sep. 15, 2015, Mailed Sep. 24, 2015, 5 Pgs. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160266284 A1 | Sep 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61666852 | Jun 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13782920 | Mar 2013 | US |
Child | 15004759 | US |