magnified hologram

Post a reply

Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: magnified hologram

Re: magnified hologram

by BobH » Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:32 am

One can make a hologram of an object seen through a magnifying glass. There is also the popular images of microscopes and telescopes where one can look through the holographic eyepiece and see a magnified image of some object. One can also make a hologram of a lens and it will work to magnify objects. Or, one can magnify holographic images with holographic optical elements.

Re: magnified hologram

by tonyr » Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:58 pm

Thanks to both of you for the references.
lobaz wrote: Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:59 pm changing wavelength was the Gabor's original idea behing the holography.
Looked up Gabor's original paper. Sure enough, he mentions these concepts there. Maybe that's where I should have started huh? :)

Here is the end of the paper:
If the principle is applied to electron microscopy, the
dimensions in the optical synthetizer ought to be
scaled up in the ratio of light waves to electron waves,
that is, about 100,000 times. One must provide an
illuminating system which is an exact optical imita-
tion of the electronic condenser lens, including its
spherical aberration. To avoid scaling-up the diagram,
one has to introduce a further lens, with a focal
length equal to the distance of the object from the
photographic plate in the electronic device, in such
a position that the plate appears at infinity when
viewed from the optical space of the point focus.
Work on the new instrument, which may be called
the 'electron interference microscope', will now be
taken in hand.
Sounds like the idea is to use a lens in situ to magnify the pattern for use at optical
wavelength.

By the way, world's first hologram from the paper, Fig 2d, only ~70 years ago:
gaborhologram.png
gaborhologram.png (470.42 KiB) Viewed 5435 times

Re: magnified hologram

by lobaz » Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:21 pm

tonyr wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:16 pm So it will be magnified (not shrunk) if the reference beam diverges from a location on same side as object but farther away. If that location is twice as far from the plate as the object for instance, we will get 2x transverse magnification and 4x longitudinal.
Maybe :)
I always have to draw a few rays to get the idea what is going on. Once I know the result qualitatively, I can believe the results from the formulas.

Re: magnified hologram

by lobaz » Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:59 pm

tonyr wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:56 pm Thanks lobaz that is extremely helpful, not just the result but how you derived it.
You are very welcome. However, note that I wanted to keep the formulas as simple as possible. As Dinesh correctly pointed, magnification should be calculated by taking d(xO)/d(xI) rather than my simplistic xO/xI. Anyway, if you understand the principle, you can derive it yourself or check the articles Dinesh mentioned:

Magnification and Third-Order Aberrations in Holography
Reinhard W. Meier
Journal of the Optical Society of America Vol. 55, Issue 8, pp. 987-992 (1965) doi: 10.1364/JOSA.55.000987

Nonparaxial Imaging, Magnification, and Aberration Properties in Holography
Edwin B. Champagne
Journal of the Optical Society of America Vol. 57, Issue 1, pp. 51-55 (1967) doi: 10.1364/JOSA.57.000051

(PM me if you don't have access)

Also note that the formulas (also posted by Dinesh) use different symbols than I used.
tonyr wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:56 pm So the bottom line is you can only get perfect magnification by stretching the holographic pattern, and even then you need to use either a higher diffractive order or different reconstruction wavelength.
Something like that. Note that in display holography, perfect magnification is not necessary; the formulas just give you insight what is actually happening.
tonyr wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:56 pm Separate wavelengths aren't that practical, at most ~2x magnification if you record with blue and playback with red.
Exactly. On the other hand, changing wavelength was the Gabor's original idea behing the holography.
tonyr wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:56 pm Not sure higher orders are practical either considering weakness like you said. 10x magnification sounds out of the question.
Agree.
tonyr wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:56 pm Not to mention, how would you even implement the stretch? Use a lens to magnify and reimage the holographic pattern onto a new plate? Has that been done?
I am not sure, but I think it something was done using "exotic" waves, like microwaves or sound waves. Maybe Dinesh knows more. Anyway, magnifying/reimaging fringes for display application sounds hard.

Re: magnified hologram

by tonyr » Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:16 pm

Din wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:06 am MT= dXi/dxo= 1/(1 +/-zo/mu*zc–zo/zr)(Meyer; paraxial)
MT= (cos(alpha)o/cos(alpha)i){1/(1 +/-zo/muzc–zo/zr)} (Champagne; non-paraxial)

The longitudinal magnification is:
ML= dZi/dzo= -(1/mu){1/(1-zo[(1/muzc) + (1/zr)}2 = -(1/mu)M
If I'm fixing typos correctly we have:
MT = dxi/dxo = 1/(1 ± (1/mu)*zo/zc - zo/zr)
ML = dzi/dzo = -(1/mu)*1/(1 - (1/mu)*zo/zc - zo/zr)^2 = -(1/mu)*MT^2

If we have collimated playback (zc=infinity) at same wavelength (mu=1) then
MT = 1/(1 - zo/zr)
ML = -1/(1 - zo/zr)^2

So it will be magnified (not shrunk) if the reference beam diverges from a location on same side as object but farther away. If that location is twice as far from the plate as the object for instance, we will get 2x transverse magnification and 4x longitudinal.

Re: magnified hologram

by tonyr » Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:57 pm

lobaz wrote: Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:23 pm You can make a holographic stereogram.
This hadn't even occured to me. Seems like by far the best way.

Re: magnified hologram

by tonyr » Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:56 pm

Thanks lobaz that is extremely helpful, not just the result but how you derived it.
lobaz wrote: Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:18 pm reconstruction wavelength is equal to mu/m * recording wavelength,
So the bottom line is you can only get perfect magnification by stretching the holographic pattern, and even then you need to use either a higher diffractive order or different reconstruction wavelength.

Separate wavelengths aren't that practical, at most ~2x magnification if you record with blue and playback with red.

Not sure higher orders are practical either considering weakness like you said. 10x magnification sounds out of the question.

Not to mention, how would you even implement the stretch? Use a lens to magnify and reimage the holographic pattern onto a new plate? Has that been done?

Tony

Re: magnified hologram

by Din » Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:06 am

The transverse magnification of a hologram recorded with reference at x(r), y(r), z(r) with an object at x((o), y(o), z(o), and reconstructed from x9c), y(c), z(c) is*:

MT= dXi/dxo= 1/(1 +/-zo/mu*zc–zo/zr)(Meyer; paraxial)
MT= (cos(alpha)o/cos(alpha)i){1/(1 +/-zo/muzc–zo/zr)} (Champagne; non-paraxial)

The longitudinal magnification is:
ML= dZi/dzo= -(1/mu){1/(1-zo[(1/muzc) + (1/zr)}2 = -(1/mu)M

So while in conventional optics, we have:
MT = -ML²
In holographic optics, it's possible to increase the transverse magnification without altering the longitudinal magnification, provided you changed the reconstruction wavelength, as Petr has noted.

*Details, if you want, is at http://www.triple-take.com/publications ... graphy.pdf

Re: magnified hologram

by lobaz » Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:23 pm

Indeed, unconventional methods give you whatever you want. Two ways are straightforward:
You can make a holographic stereogram.
You can make digital model of a real scene and calculate its computer generated hologram of arbitrary scale.

Re: magnified hologram

by lobaz » Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:18 pm

Simple analysis using conventional methods

Suppose the x-z coordinate system.
The hologram is located in z = 0.
The object is a point located at [xP, zP], where zP < 0.
The reference wave comes from the point [xR, zR], where zR < 0.
Wavelength lambda is used in the hologram recording.

Let's examine the hologram at a point [xH, 0].
The angle of the object wave is omega = atan((xP - xH) / zP).
The angle of the reference wave is rho = atan((xR - xH) / zR).
The frequency of the interference pattern at [xH, 0] is given as
f(xH) = (sin(omega) - sin(rho)) / lambda
For the small angle approximation, sin(angle) = tan(angle) = angle, thus
f(xH) = ((xP - xH)/zP - (xR - xH)/zR) / lambda
For reconctruction, we can select the wavelength of the illumination wave Lambda, and its location [xI, zI].
Thus, the angle of the illumination wave is at [xH, 0] is
iota = atan((xI - xH) / zI).
Moreover, we can "stretch" the hologram, i.e., magnify it by factor mu.
Thus, point xH on the hologram becomes mu*xH, and the frequency of the pattern becomes f(xH)/mu.

We will use the grating equation that determines the angle delta_m of the m-th order diffracted wave as
sin(delta_m) = m * Lambda * f + sin(iota)
In the small angle approximation and stretched hologram, we get
delta_m(mu*xH) = m * Lambda * f(xH)/mu + (xI - mu*xH)/zI
i.e.
delta_m(xH) = m * Lambda * f(xH/mu)/mu + (xI - xH)/zI
To get the position of the reconstructed point, we must examine two outgoing rays from the illuminated hologram and calculate their intersection.
We will use points [xH, 0] and [0, 0] on the hologram. For the latter one, we get by substitution
delta_m(0) = m * Lambda * f(0)/mu - xI/zI
= m/mu * Lambda/lambda * (xP/zP - xR/zR) + xI/zI
We are close to the result.
A ray is given by x = slope * z + intercept. Our two rays are given by equations
x = delta_m(0) * z
x = delta_m(mu*xH) * z + mu*xH
Coordinates of their their intersection are given by the solution of this system of linear equation.
It is not short:
x = xP * (Lambda*m*mu*zI*zR) /
(mu^2*zP*zR*lambda + Lambda*m*zI*zR - Lambda*m*zI*zP)
+ (mu^2*xI*zP*zR*lambda - Lambda*m*mu*xR*zI*zP) /
(mu^2*zP*zR*lambda + Lambda*m*zI*zR - Lambda*m*zI*zP)
z = (mu^2*zI*zP*zR*lambda) /
(mu^2*zP*zR*lambda + Lambda*m*zI*zR - Lambda*m*zI*zP)
Just to see if it goes well, let us substitute
  • lambda = Lambda (reconstruction and recording wavelengths match),
  • m = 1 (first diffraction order)
  • xR = xI, zR = zI (locations of the reconstruction and reference source),
  • mu = 1 (original size of the hologram, i.e., no stretching).
The result after substitution is
x = xP
z = zP
i.e., the hologram perfectly reconstructed the original point position [xP, zp].

If we want scaled reconstruction, the result should become
x = constant * xP
y = constant * zP
where the constant should not depend on [xP, zP].

In the full equation for x, we see it is in the form
x = xP * const. + term


Obviously, the term should be 0, which is true for
mu^2*xI*zP*zR*lambda-Lambda*m*mu*xR*zI*zP = 0
i.e., the reconstruction wavelength Lambda should be
Lambda = (mu*xI*zR*lambda) / (m*xR*zI)
Substitution to the equation for x reveals that
x = xP * (mu*xI*zR) / (xI*zR + (mu*xR-xI)*zP)
Obviously, xP should be multiplied by a constant that does not depend on zP.
This is true when xI = mu*xR. After substitution, we get a simple result
x = mu*xP
We can substitute the same conditions to the equation for the coordinate z.
We get
z = zP * (zI/zR)

For uniform scaling, the multiplicative constants for z and x should be the same.
Thus, it must hold
zI = mu*zR.

We should substitute these conditions to the reconstruction wavelength Lambda.
We get
Lambda = (mu*lambda)/m

Conclusion

We have obtained this result: magnified image can be obtained, if following conditions hold:
Lambda = (mu*lambda) / m
i.e., the reconstruction wavelength is equal to mu/m * recording wavelength,
where m (the diffraction order) must be integer.
It also must hold
zI = mu*zR
xI = mu*xR
Then,
x = mu*xP
z = mu*zP
i.e., the reconstruction is scaled by the same factor as the "stretch" of the hologram.
Of course, there is a glitch. If we want to use the same wavelength for recording and illumination (lambda = Lambda), then the magnified reconstruction appears in the m-th diffraction order, which is usually weak.

Top