Influence of aperture diameter on image contrast and resolution in scanning near-field optical microscopy

Journal of Applied Physics

Volumn 81, Issue 9, 1997, Pages 5871-5877

  Schofer J ^a   Gregor, M J ^a   Blome, P G ^a   Ulbrich, R G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; IMAGE QUALITY; LIGHT; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NUMERICAL METHODS; OPTICAL PROPERTIES; OPTICAL RESOLVING POWER; OPTICAL TRANSFER FUNCTION; OPTICAL WAVEGUIDES; SCANNING; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO; VECTORS;

APERTURE DIAMETER; EVANESCENT STANDING WAVE FIELDS; IMAGE CONTRAST; IMAGE INTENSITY; LIGHT INTENSITY; SCANNING NEAR FIELD OPTICAL MICROSCOPY;

OPTICAL MICROSCOPY;

EID: 0031144625     PISSN: 00218979     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.364373     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. D. W. Pohl, W. Denk, and M. Lanz, Appl. Phys. Lett. 44, 651 (1984).
2. A. Lewis, M. Isaacson, A. Harootunian, and A. Muray, Ultramicroscopy 13, 227 (1984).
3. E. Betzig, J. K. Trautmann, T. D. Harris, J. S. Weiner, and R. L. Kostelak, Science 251, 1468 (1991).
4. L. Novotny and D. W. Pohl, in Photons and Local Probes, edited by O. Marti, NATO ASI Series (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1995).
5. D. Van Labeke and D. Barchiesi, in Near Field Optics, edited by D. W. Pohl and D. Courjon, NATO ASI Series (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1994).
6. G. A. Valaskovic, M. Holton, and G. H. Morrison, J. Microsc. 179, 29 (1995).
7. It is clear that this assumption in an oversimplification, since the resolution limit in conventional microscopy highly depends on the coherence degree of illumination; but contrary to SNOM, these difficulties are relatively easy to overcome.
8. M. Pluta, Advanced Light Microscopy (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1988), Vol. 1.
9. E. L. Buckland, P. J. Moyer, and M. A. Paesler, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 1018 (1993).
10. J. A. Cline and M. Isaacson, Appl. Opt. 34, 4869 (1996).
11. D. P. Tsai, Z. Wang, and M. Moskovits. Proc. SPIE 1855, 93 (1993).
12. A. J. Meixner, M. A. Bopp, and G. Tarrach, Appl. Opt. 33, 7995 (1994).
13. L. Novotny and C. Hafner, Phys. Rev. E 50, 4094 (1994).
14. J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, 2nd ed. (Wiley, New York, 1975).
15. E. Betzig, P. L. Finn, and J. S. Weiner, Appl. Phys. Lett. 60, 2484 (1992).
16. R. Toledo-Crow, P. C. Yang, Y. Chen, and M. Vaez-Iravani, Appl. Phys. Lett. 60, 2957 (1992).
17. M. J. Gregor, P. G. Blome, J. Schöfer, and R. G. Ulbrich, Appl. Phys. Lett. 68, 307 (1996).
18. D. Courjon and C. Bainier, Rep. Prog. Phys. 57, 989 (1994).
19. L. Novotny (private communication).
20. A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman & Hall, London, 1991).
21. Actually, it is the optical transfer function (OTF) that has to be determined, being the product of MTF and a phase factor described by the phase transfer function (PTF). The PTF is responsible for the relative shift of the images of different spatial frequencies and can be neglected in our case.
22. R. X. Bian, R. C. Dunn, and X. S. Xie, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4772 (1995).
23. Handbook of Optics, edited by M. Bass (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1995), Vol. II.