Keysight Technologies

Why Magnification is Irrelevant in

Modern Scanning Electron Microscopes

Application Note
Introduction

From its earliest inception, the Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) has been widely used
as an imaging tool. It produces images by raster scanning an electron beam over a region of
interest on a sample. The SEM allows for the visualization of features too small to resolve by
the unaided human eye. Early SEM images were analog images which were preserved on 4 x
5 Polaroid or Kodak film. The proliferation of high speed digital electronics has revolutionized
SEM, whereby everything from digital scan control to digital acquisition, to archival of digital
images is not only common but expected by default on modern SEMs. Since this digital rev-
olution, digital images are displayed on everything from desktop computer monitors to large
projection screens and printed at various pixel densities on a wide variety of paper sizes.

Once the image is projected or reproduced, the size of the image, and therefore the magnifi-
cation depends on the scale at which the image is viewed. Hence, the original magnification
value when the image was collected is irrelevant at best and very misleading at worst. By
comparison, another raster scanning microscope which produces digital images, the Atomic
Force Microscope (AFM), addresses the issues of magnification by referencing the scan size
opposed to magnification. For any digital image, the scale of the image, i.e. nanometers per
pixel for microscopes or kilometers per pixel for satellite images, is a fundamental property
not the magnification. In addition to the image scale other contributing factors to what can be
visualized and measured are empty magnification and pixel resolution.

With AFM which has been a digital microscope since its introduction, magnification is a
non-issue because the images are always referenced to the scan size (the actual area on the
sample that was scanned). Scan size is a very useful, display-independent way to view and
analyze digital images. Given the many advantages digital images and their widespread use in
microscopy, there is a compelling need to standardize on scan size when discussing the scale
of features observed in digital images.
03 | Keysight | Why Magnification is Irrelevant in Modern Scanning Electron Microscopes - Application Note

Figure 1. Analog scan generation to create a 1024 x 1024 image. Figure 2. Digital scan generation to create a 1024 x 1024 image.

SEM Imaging the Analog Way

With analog SEMs, imaging usually entailed Polaroid film or several hours in the darkroom
developing Kodak film. It also connoted analog electronics that generated scan waveforms
and synchronization of the user display with an internal CRT (Cathode Ray Tube monitor)
from which the photograph was exposed (Figure 1). The synchronization involved sending
the same analog scan generation signal to both the electron beam and the CRT. The inten-
sity signal from the detector was sent to the CRT as the brightness control signal.

The magnification was well controlled because the ratio of film size to internal CRT screen
size was fixed. Therefore the original magnification value was directly linked to the photo-
graph. With the advent of digital imaging and the variety of display formats, this link has
been broken.

SEM Imaging the Digital Way

With digital SEMs, like the Keysight Technologies, Inc. 8500 FE-SEM, most of the signals
are handled digitally with analog to digital converters (ADC), digital to analog converters
(DAC), and field programmable gate arrays (FPGA) in conjunction with electrostatic optics.
With this arrangement the scan waveform is generated digitally, i.e. pixel by pixel in incre-
mental steps, and the image is collected and displayed digitally in the same pixel by pixel
fashion (Figure 2).
04 | Keysight | Why Magnification is Irrelevant in Modern Scanning Electron Microscopes - Application Note

Figure 3. Particle size distribution calculation on threshold Figure 4. Image analysis showing darker phase comprises
image. 60% of the sample.

An advantage with digital image data is the intensity data can easily be normalized for
example, with the typical 8 bit gray scale SEM image, the darkest pixel is set to 0 and
the brightest is set to 255. Normalization is sometimes referred to as ABC (auto bright-
ness and contrast) and it allows for convenient storage and display of the data on the
computer monitor without the need to worry about film speed as in analog SEM images.
However, with normalized digital images it is not appropriate to compare absolute image
brightness between images, as was done with controlled exposure photographs.

With the scan size, and therefore the scale of the image known, digital image analysis or
processing affords increasing sophistication in what can be analyzed in the collected im-
age data. There are many sophisticated software programs for manipulating and analyz-
ing digital images. With digital images, analyses like particle size distribution (Figure 3),
average fiber length, or area ratio of one phase to another in a multicomponent system
can be done easily (Figure 4).
05 | Keysight | Why Magnification is Irrelevant in Modern Scanning Electron Microscopes - Application Note

Figure 6. Computer simulation of a 100nm electron beam scanning various geometric shapes
and their resulting image profiles.

Figure 5. Computer simulation of a 100 nm electron Figure 7. Computer simulation of a 10nm electron beam scanning various geometric shapes
beam. and their resulting image profiles.

Magnification vs. Resolution

SEM manufacturers each have their own samples and methods for determining instru-
ment resolution. There is no internationally accepted standard for determining instru-
ment resolution. Independent of how instrument resolution is determined in practice,
the electron beam shape and nominal diameter ultimately define the instrument’s true
resolution. Measuring the electron beam shape in practice is very difficult and tedious,
thus the many different manufacturers’ methods for estimating instrument resolution.

Although electron beam diameter is the determining factor of resolution in the ideal
case, in practice there are the following subordinate factors, sample preparation and
surface roughness, atomic mass and chemical composition of the sample, beam inten-
sity, accelerating voltage, scanning speed, working distance, aberrations and hysteresis
in the electron optics, and interaction volume of the electron beam with the sample.
Because the electron beam diameter is the dominant factor, for the examples below the
contribution of the subordinate factors were assumed to be negligible.

Illustration of how electron beam shape influences resolution can be facilitated by

computer simulation. Figure 5 illustrates an ideal Gaussian beam profile, while Figure 6,
Figure 7 show how the electron beam size influence resolution. In reality the electron
beam generated in an SEM is rarely Gaussian, however to facilitate the demonstration of
the effects of spot size a Gaussian approximation is used.

In Figure 6 we see how a 100nm electron beam interacts with a triangle, parallelogram,
pentagon, and a hexagon and the representation of how the shapes would nominally be
represented on the computer monitor. With a much smaller, 10nm electron beam inter-
acting with the same geometric shapes we see in Figure 7 that the resulting images give
a much more accurate representation of the original shape.
06 | Keysight | Why Magnification is Irrelevant in Modern Scanning Electron Microscopes - Application Note

Pixel Resolution
For the analog SEM the images were recorded on film, so the exposure and grain size of the film
determined the smallest features which could be imaged. For the digital SEM pixel resolution
determines the smallest features which could be imaged. Each pixel in a digital image contains
just one element of information, i.e. a gray level from 0 (black) to 255 (white). The smallest feature
which can be resolved is therefore linked to the pixel size, as seen in Figures 8–13.

Figure 8. SEM image defined by 28 x 28 pixels. Figure 9. SEM image defined by 56 x 56 pixels.

Figure 10. SEM image defined by 84 x 84 pixels. Figure 11. SEM image defined by 112 x 112 pixels.

Figure 12. SEM image defined by 140 x 140 pixels. Figure 13. SEM image defined by 2048 x 2048 pixels.
07 | Keysight | Why Magnification is Irrelevant in Modern Scanning Electron Microscopes - Application Note

Figure 14. Sketch of Empty Magnification. If an object is “magnified” beyond the resolution based on the electron
beam shape it results in the equivalent to digital zoom, i.e. 1 pixel of significant data is divided into 4 identical pixels.

In Figure 8 it is difficult to discern any sample features. As the pixel resolution, pixel density
per area scanned on the sample, is increased to even a modest number, 84 x 84 pixels in
Figure 10, the gold islands on carbon test sample can now be recognized, but not suffi-
ciently for making accurate measurements. Ultimately the best image, especially for mak-
ing dimensional measurements, is seen in Figure 13 where the pixel density is 2048 x 2048.

Empty Magnification
The artifact of empty magnification is present in both analog and digital SEMs. The rea-
soning behind the term empty magnification is that the magnification can be increased
such that it exceeds the resolution based on the electron beam size; therefore the image
is empty of significant information. With the digital SEM, although the increase in pixel
resolution improves the image, it should be noted that the ultimate resolution is defined
by the shape of the electron beam, not the number of pixels. If we add a meaningful
size scale to the geometric shapes in Figure 6, Figure 7, we see that no matter what
instrument magnification or pixel density we use, the images generated with the 100nm
electron beam will not accurately reproduce the original shapes.

Another way of demonstrating empty magnification is shown in Figure 14, where the
simulated object on the left is the smallest feature that can be resolved and then either the
instrument magnification is increased or the pixel density is increased. The result on the
right side of Figure 14, no new information is generated 1 unit of significant data is divided
into 4 identical units. The result is the information content is the same, there are just more
pixels. The same principal is true for increasing the instrument magnification such that the
electron beam becomes large compared to the pixel or feature size.

Therefore just because a SEM can be set to 1,000,000x magnification does not mean the
resulting image scale of 0.2nm per pixel translates into usable magnification. As seen in
Figure 6, with a 100nm electron beam size it does not matter how many pixels are used
or how small a scan size is used the resulting image does not accurately represent the
original sample. However, if the electron beam is small, as seen in Figure 7, increasing
the pixel resolution can be helpful in visualizing small features, i.e. the corners of the
triangle shape. This is similar to digital zoom on a digital camera.

What is Relevant: Scan Size and Probe Size

With another common microscope, the AFM, magnification is a non-issue because the
images are always referenced to the scan size. Because the AFM is a physical contact, or
intermittent contact, the probe size or more specifically the probe tip radius of curva-
ture determines the practical resolution and therefore the smallest relevant scan size.
This analogy of scan size and probe size is well suited to SEM inasmuch as the electron
beam’s size and scan size, or image scale, determine the smallest relevant scan size. The
link to the original instrument magnification is now severed because it has no practical
meaning for digital images. Using the image scan size is the most relevant way to com-
pare digital images from these microscopes.
08 | Keysight | Why Magnification is Irrelevant in Modern Scanning Electron Microscopes - Application Note

Figure 15. AC mode AFM image of Celgard polymer 3 µm x 3 µm scan size. Figure 16. SEM image of Celgard polymer 2.5 µm x 2.5 µm scan size.
Imaged on Keysight 5500 AFM. Imaged on Keysight 8500 FE-SEM.

Keysight 8500 FE-SEM

For the Keysight 8500 FE-SEM the electron beam is nominally 10nm and the pixel size on
a standard computer monitor is 200µm with 1920 x 1080 pixels yielding a 3µm scan size
for a 1024 x 1024 image. The resolution limit for the unaided human eye is approximately
200µm. However the instrument can collect images at pixel densities up to 2048 x 2048.
So in terms of magnification a 512 x 512 pixel image of a 3µm scan size would be 32,500x
instrument magnification, the corresponding magnification for a 1024 x 1024 pixel image
would be 65,000x, and the corresponding magnification for a 2048 x 2048 pixel image
would be 130,000x. If the 3µm scan size is used to describe the digital image it does
not matter how the image is viewed or printed dimensionally; it represents the 3µm x
3µm area of the sample surface that was scanned by the electron beam. By using scan
size in Figure 15 and Figure 16 the image collected on the AFM can be compared to the
image collected on the SEM as well as any other digital image of Celgard of similar scan
size. However, if instrument magnification was used it would be difficult to make direct
comparisons.

Conclusions
In modern SEMs most of the signals are handled digitally and for digital images, the
scale of the image is the fundamental property not the magnification. Therefore, the
original “magnification” value when the image was collected is irrelevant at best and
very misleading at worst. With commercial SEM instruments, if scan size as opposed to
magnification was used it would readily allow side by side comparison of images from
different instruments as well as easier comparison to AFM images. With the scan size,
and therefore the scale of the image known, digital image processing delivers increasing
sophistication in what can be analyzed in the collected image data.
09 | Keysight | Why Magnification is Irrelevant in Modern Scanning Electron Microscopes - Application Note

Nanomeasurement Systems
from Keysight Technologies
Keysight Technologies, the premier measure-
ment company, offers high-precision, modular
nanomeasurement solutions for research,
industry, and education. Exceptional worldwide
support is provided by experienced application
scientists and technical service personnel.
Keysight ’s leading-edge R&D laboratories
ensure the continued, timely introduction
and optimization of innovative, easy-to-use
nanomeasure system technologies.
www.keysight.com/find/nano
For more information on Keysight
Technologies’ products, applications or
services, please contact your local Keysight
office. The complete list is available at:
www.keysight.com/find/contactus
Americas
Canada (877) 894 4414
Brazil 55 11 3351 7010
Mexico 001 800 254 2440
United States (800) 829 4444

Asia Pacific
Australia 1 800 629 485
China 800 810 0189
Hong Kong 800 938 693
India 1 800 11 2626
Japan 0120 (421) 345
Korea 080 769 0800
Malaysia 1 800 888 848
Singapore 1 800 375 8100
Taiwan 0800 047 866
Other AP Countries (65) 6375 8100

Europe & Middle East

Austria 0800 001122
Belgium 0800 58580
Finland 0800 523252
France 0805 980333
Germany 0800 6270999
Ireland 1800 832700
Israel 1 809 343051
Italy 800 599100
Luxembourg +32 800 58580
Netherlands 0800 0233200
Russia 8800 5009286
Spain 800 000154
Sweden 0200 882255
Switzerland 0800 805353
Opt. 1 (DE)
Opt. 2 (FR)
Opt. 3 (IT)
United Kingdom 0800 0260637
For other unlisted countries:
www.keysight.com/find/contactus
(BP-03-20-15)

This information is subject to change without notice.

© Keysight Technologies, 2011 – 2015
Published in USA, April 10, 2015
5990-8594EN
www.keysight.com