Sampling theory isn't likely to change. What may change is the
assumptions about what is fed into the sensor. If you know enough about
the real picture image you could make educated guesses that might let
you distinguish between a frequency above 1/2 sampling rate and the
aliased frequency. I suspect it will be cheaper to filter than do the
required signal processing for a long time even if someone finds a way
to predict what was sampled and reconstruct even when there are aliased
components.
-jeff
(basically if you sample at 10kHz, you can't tell the difference between
4 kHz and 6 KHz inputs but if there is something else that lets you know
there should be 6 kHz you reconstruct the image using 6 rather than 4)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> >This is essential because once an image is captured with aliasing,
there is
> >NO POSSIBILITY of removing it, since it is indistinguishable from the
wanted
> >signal,
> >
> I didn't make such a strong statement both because I don't know the
math
> and because I've been around long enough and know enough about the
> history of science to know how often the claim "NO POSSIBILITY" has
> turned out to be wrong. Certainly true today, I'm sure, simply because
> nobody would be doing it with expensive hardware if a software
solution
> were known.
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|