Talk:Spatial frequency

This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment.

I think a picture would be helpful to describe what spatial frequency means in relation to images.

Conflicting nomenclature: 'wave number'

This article uses the term 'spatial frequency' to designate the quantity 1/λ and the term 'wave number' to designate 2π/λ. According to the article on wavenumber it should be 'wave number' for the former quantity and 'angular wave number' for the latter. If different sources use different naming, the article should point out this fact. It is also worth considering merging this article with the 'wavenumber' article as they both discuss the same physical quantities. 86.142.26.201 19:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

APS Editing

I am an undergraduate psychology student at Clemson University and will be working with my instructor Dr. June Pilcher and the APS Wikipedia Initiative to improve this article over the next couple of weeks. Any suggestions or input along the way would be greatly appreciated. Craigjclemson (talk)

I ended up adding some information to the spatial frequency theory of visual perception section. Let me know if you have any recommendations on changes. Craigjclemson (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The section says that "empirical support has yet to be developed" for the spatial frequency theory of visual perception. If that is the case, does it deserve a lengthy section here? Shouldn't it instead be referred to as a hypothesis? 135.180.172.169 (talk) 01:26, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Wavenumber and spatial frequency are the same thing: Google Books 2 Google Books --92.204.95.137 (talk) 07:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. Wavenumbers are spatial frequencies, but usually connected to a wave phenomenon. Spatial frequency is the more general term for anything that is periodic in space or can be divided into periodic components. The wavenumber article makes this distinction although the spatial frequency article is more fuzzy on the matter (and deserves to be cleaned up). I couldn't access your first reference. Your second reference uses wavenumber for a spatial frequency not connected to a wave which I don't think is standard. Ulflund (talk) 09:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with the merger either. This is an encyclopaedia which should be a document that explains terms to people who are unfamiliar with them. I, as a retired engineer who should have no difficulty with such simple technical terms, find both articles confusing. Merging them would almost certainly make an even more confusing article. A B McDonald (talk) 21:29, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree with the merger. Wave number ('k') implies a propagating (ideally plane) wave! Spatial frequency does not imply anything about wave propagation. Spatial frequency can be as something as simple as threads per inch or number of sand dunes per km. Wave numbers are different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.86.148 (talk) 03:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am also in favor of keeping the distinction. Given the opinions above, I consider there to be sufficient consensus and will thus remove the merge tag. --Waldir ^talk 01:10, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spatial frequency in MRI

My best guess is that this section tries to communicate some of what is in K-space (magnetic resonance imaging) and explain how MR k-space is truly a time-domain NMR signal that encodes spatial information. As it is now, though, the section is somewhat confusing, and readers might be better served by a reference to the aforementioned page. Jdaniels8 (talk) 19:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]