In our latest round of 3D imaging tests, we conducted a detailed evaluation of the spatial resolution performance of two 3D cameras: the ADI ToF AD-96TOF1-EBZ (a time-of-flight camera) and a stereo-vision camera used as a reference. By leveraging our specialized 3D Depth Chart in combination with our Analyzer measurement software, we assessed the cameras’ ability to consistently detect and differentiate varying patch sizes.

Test Findings:

ADI ToF AD-96TOF1-EBZ

✅ Pros:

• ToF technology eliminates occlusion issues, ensuring no invalid pixels in the captured images.

❌ Cons:

• The effective resolution varied between captures, leading to some inconsistency, though results always remained within acceptable limits.
• Performance was impacted on metallic surfaces, occasionally producing erroneous readings.

Stereo-Vision Camera

✅ Pros:

• Demonstrated less spatial and temporal noise compared to the ToF camera.
• Achieved, at times, a higher effective resolution than the ToF system.

❌ Cons:

• Noise levels increased toward the edges of the image, particularly further from the center

To check the full comparison report