<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" >

<channel>
	<title>ISO 16505 &#8211; Imatest</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.imatest.com/tag/iso-16505/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.imatest.com</link>
	<description>Image Quality Testing Software &#38; Test Charts</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:00:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Measuring MTF with wedges: pitfalls and best practices</title>
		<link>https://www.imatest.com/2017/01/measuring-mtf-with-wedges-pitfalls-and-best-practices/</link>
					<comments>https://www.imatest.com/2017/01/measuring-mtf-with-wedges-pitfalls-and-best-practices/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Henry Koren]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2017 03:22:49 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Imaging Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISO 16505]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resolution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wedge]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.imatest.com/?p=17789</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>This paper was given as part of the Electronic Imaging 2017 Autonomous Vehicles and Machine session. When: Monday, January 30, [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.imatest.com/2017/01/measuring-mtf-with-wedges-pitfalls-and-best-practices/">Measuring MTF with wedges: pitfalls and best practices</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.imatest.com">Imatest</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This paper was given as part of the <a href="https://www.imatest.com/2016/12/electronic-imaging-2017/">Electronic Imaging 2017</a> Autonomous Vehicles and Machine session.</p>
<p><strong>When</strong>: <span class="aBn" tabindex="0" data-term="goog_533264942"><span class="aQJ">Monday, January 30, 2017</span></span>, at <span class="aBn" tabindex="0" data-term="goog_533264943"><span class="aQJ">10:10 am</span></span></p>
<p><strong>By: Norman Koren with support from Henry Koren, Robert Sumner</strong><span id="more-17789"></span></p>
<p class="-IST7Abstract" style="tab-stops: 3.25in;"><strong>Abstract:  </strong>The <a href="https://www.imatest.com/solutions/iso-16505/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ISO 16505 standard for automotive Camera Monitor Systems</a> uses high contrast hyperbolic wedges instead of slanted-edges to measure system resolution, defined as <em>MTF10</em> (the spatial frequency where MTF = 10% of its low frequency value). Wedges were chosen based on the claim that slanted-edges are sensitive to signal processing. While this is indeed the case, we have found that wedges are also highly sensitive and present a number of meas­ure­ment challenges: Sub-pixel location variations cause unavoidable inconsistencies; wedge saturation makes results more stable at the expense of accuracy; <em>MTF10</em> can be boosted by sharpening, noise, and other artifacts, and may never be reached. Poor quality images can exhibit high <em>MTF10</em>. We show that the onset of aliasing is a more stable performance indicator, and we discuss methods of getting the most accurate results from wedges as well as misun­derstandings about low contrast slanted-edges, which cor­relate better with system performance and are more repre­sentative of objects of interest in automotive and security imaging.</p>
<p><strong>Full Text: </strong><a href="https://www.imatest.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Koren_MTF_wedge_edge_paper_EI2017-1.pdf">Measuring MTF with Wedges: Pitfalls and best practices</a></p>
<p><strong>Slides:</strong> <strong><a href="https://www.imatest.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Wedge_measurements_N_Koren_2017.pdf">Wedge_measurements_N_Koren_2017</a></strong></p>
<h4><strong>Imatest upgrades based on the paper</strong></h4>
<p>The recommended metric to replace MTF10 (min [MTF10, onset of aliasing, Nyquist frequency]) is displayed in the Wedge MTF plot as well as the (new in <em><strong>Imatest 5.0</strong></em>) Multi-Wedge plot, shown below.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong><a href="https://www.imatest.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/esfriso_wedge_multi_plot.jpg"><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" alt="eSFR ISO multi-wedge summary in Rescharts showing MTF and aliasing results for an iPhone 6P" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-18154" style="margin-bottom: 2px; margin-top: 2px;" src="https://www.imatest.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/esfriso_wedge_multi_plot.jpg" width="640" height="488" srcset="https://www.imatest.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/esfriso_wedge_multi_plot.jpg 840w, https://www.imatest.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/esfriso_wedge_multi_plot-300x229.jpg 300w, https://www.imatest.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/esfriso_wedge_multi_plot-600x457.jpg 600w" sizes="(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" /></a>Multi-Wedge plot for eSFR ISO, including recommended metric.</strong></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.imatest.com/2017/01/measuring-mtf-with-wedges-pitfalls-and-best-practices/">Measuring MTF with wedges: pitfalls and best practices</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.imatest.com">Imatest</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.imatest.com/2017/01/measuring-mtf-with-wedges-pitfalls-and-best-practices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
