Hierarchical Hologram based on Optical

Near- and Far-Field Responses

Naoya Tate 1 , Wataru Nomura1 , Takashi Yatsui2 , Makoto Naruse1,3 ,

and Motoichi Ohtsu1,2
1 The University of Tokyo,

2-11-16 Yayoi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan

2 SORST, Japan Science and Technology Agency,

2-11-16 Yayoi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan

3 National Institute of Information and Communications Technology,

4-2-1 Nukui-kita, Koganei, Tokyo 184-8795, Japan
tate@nanophotonics.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Abstract: A “hierarchical hologram” and experiments using it are

described. This type of hologram works both in optical far-fields and
near-fields. We exploit the physical difference between the propagating light
and optical near-field, where the former is associated with conventional
holographic patterns obtained in optical far-fields, whereas the latter is
associated with nanometric structure accessible only via optical near-fields.
We also describe an experimental demonstration of the basic principles with
our prototype optical elements.
© 2008 Optical Society of America
OCIS codes: (200.4560) Optical data processing; (090.5640) Rainbow holography; (180.5810)
Scanning microscopy; (220.4241) Nanostructure fabrication; (350.4238) Nanophotonics and
photonic crystals.

References and links

1. W. F. Fagan (ed), Optical security and anti-counterfeiting systems, (Society of Photo Optical Instrumentation
Engineers, 1990).
2. B. Javidi and J. L. Horner, “Optical pattern recognition for validation and security verification,” Opt. Eng. 33,
1752-1756 (1994).
3. P. Refregier and B. Javidi, “Optical image encryption based on input plane and Fourier plane random encoding,”
Opt. Lett. 20, 767-769 (1995).
4. G. A. Rakuljic, V. Leyva, and A. Yariv, “Optical data storage by using orthogonal wavelength-multiplexed volume
holograms,” Opt. Lett. 17, 1471-1473 (1992).
5. R. L. Van Renesse (ed), Optical document scanning, 69-225 (Altech House Optoelectronics Library, 1998).
6. S. P. McGrew, “Hologram counterfeiting: problems and solutions,” Proc. SPIE, Optical Security and Anticoun-
terfeiting Systems, William F. Fagan; Ed., 1210, 66-76 (1990).
7. M. Ohtsu, “Near-field nano-optics toward nano/atom deposition,” Tech. Dig. 18th Congr. Int. Commission for
Optics, SPIE, 3749 (1999).
8. M. Ohtsu, K. Kobayashi, T. Kawazoe, S. Sangu, and T. Yatsui, “Nanophotonics: design, fabrication, and operation
of nanometric devices using optical near fields,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 8, 839-862 (2002).
9. T. Yatsui, K. Itsumi, M. Kourogi, and M. Ohtsu, “Metallized pyramidal silicon probe with extremely high
throughput and resolution capability for optical near-field technology,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 2257-2259 (2002).
10. G. S. Zhdanov, M. N. Libenson, and G. A. Martsinovskii, “Optics in the diffraction limit: principles, results, and
problems,” PHYS-USP 41, 719-722 (1998).
11. M. Naruse, T. Yatsui, W. Nomura, N. Hirose, and M. Ohtsu, “Hierarchy in optical nearfields and its application
to memory retrieval,” Opt. Express 13, 9265-9271 (2005).

#89205 - $15.00 USD Received 31 Oct 2007; revised 20 Dec 2007; accepted 2 Jan 2008; published 8 Jan 2008
(C) 2008 OSA 21 January 2008 / Vol. 16, No. 2 / OPTICS EXPRESS 607
 12. M. Naruse, T. Inoue, and H. Hori, “Analysis and synthesis of hierarchy in optical near-field interactions at the
nanoscale based on angular spectrum,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 46, 6095-6103 (2007).
13. I. Lancaster (ed), Holopack holoprint guide book, 139-154 (Reconnaissance International Publishers and Con-
sultants, 2000).

1. Introduction
Many anti-counterfeiting techniques have been proposed in the fields of security and prod-
uct authenticity verification [1]. Optical techniques, which represent one kind of anti-
counterfeiting, have been well established, i.e., confidential information can be hidden in any
of the physical attributes of light, such as phase, wavelength, spatial frequency, or polariza-
tion [2–4]. For example, holography, which generates natural three-dimensional images, is the
most common anti-counterfeiting techniques [5]. The surface of the hologram is ingeniously
designed into a complicated structure, and it diffracts incident light in a specific direction. A
number of diffracted lights can form an arbitrary three-dimensional image. Generally, the struc-
tures are recognized as being difficult to duplicate. Because of the difficulty, a hologram has
been widely used in the anti-counterfeiting of bills, credit cards, etc. However, conventional
anti-counterfeiting methods based on the physical appearance of holograms are less than 100%
secure [6]. Although they provide ease of authentication, adding another securing feature with-
out causing any losses to the appearance is quite difficult.
However, advances in nanophotonics, by utilizing optical near-field interactions, allow opti-
cal devices and systems to be designed at densities beyond those conventionally constrained by
the diffraction limit of light [7]. Several nanophotonic fabrications and device operations based
on optical near-field techniques have been proposed [8, 9]. Because several physical parameters
of “propagating” light are not affected by nanometric structures, conventional optical responses
in the far-field also are not affected by these structures. This means another functional hierar-
chy in an optical near-field regime can be added in conventional optical devices and systems
without any loss of the primary quality, such as reflectance, absorptance, refractive index, and
diffraction efficiency.
In this paper, we describe our application of the nanophotonics techniques to holography: a
“hierarchical hologram.” We also describe our demonstration of the concept using commercial
optical devices. In Section 2, we discuss the fundamental concept of our hierarchical hologram.
Section 3 shows the experimental setup and the results of the demonstration using an embossed
hologram. For a quantitative evaluation of our method, we measured the efficiency of a diffrac-
tion grating with and without additional nanostructures. Section 4 concludes the paper.

2. Principles of hierarchical hologram

Existing optical devices and systems operate based on several phenomena of “propagating”
light. However, the performance is generally limited by the diffraction of light, which is one of
the most typical features of propagating light [10]. Therefore, reducing the physical scale be-
yond over the scale of the optical wavelength is difficult. The critical dimension of the conven-
tional hologram is also bounded by the diffraction limit, because the function of a conventional
hologram is based on the diffraction of light.
Nanophotonics has been proposed as an innovative technology that exceeds the diffraction
limit [7]. It is defined as utilizing local electromagnetic interactions between nanometric mat-
ter and an optical near-field. An optical near-field is free from diffraction, because its optical
energy localizes on the nanometric material surface and because the size of the localization is
equivalent to the size of the material. Generally, the optical near-field is observed by scanning
a fiber probe on the material surface. During the scan, the optical near-field is scattered by an
interaction between the fiber probe and the material. The scattered energy is observed via the

#89205 - $15.00 USD Received 31 Oct 2007; revised 20 Dec 2007; accepted 2 Jan 2008; published 8 Jan 2008
(C) 2008 OSA 21 January 2008 / Vol. 16, No. 2 / OPTICS EXPRESS 608
fiber probe as the local optical response of the nanometric material. Therefore, the resolution
of observing the optical near-field depends directly on the size of the fiber probe, and it is
independent of the diffraction limit.
Our “nanophotonic hierarchical hologram” is defined as a hologram that has multiple ob-
serving layers. It can be created by adding a nanometric structural change (< 100nm) to a
conventional hologram (> 100nm). Figure 1 shows the basic composition of the hierarchical
hologram. In principle, the phenomenon occurring at a subwavelength scale does not affect the

Fig. 1. Basic concept of functional hierarchy of hierarchical hologram. In principle, no

interference occurs between the two layers, “far-mode” and “near-mode”.

function induced by propagating light. Therefore, the visual aspect of the hologram is not af-
fected by such a small structural change on the surface. Figure 1 shows the optical response of
the hologram, which can be revealed by the propagating light during a “far-mode” observation,
and that of a nanometric structural change can be revealed by the optical nano-field during a
“near-mode” observation. Because the nanometric structural changes have an insignificant ef-
fect on the optical response at the far-mode observation, additional data can be written-in to the
nanometric layer without any incident. By applying this hierarchy, new functions can be added
to a conventional hologram.
The number of layers can be increased in the “near-mode” observation to further extend the
hierarchical function. An optical near-field interaction between multiple nanometric structures
causes characteristic spatial distribution depending on the size, the alignment, etc. Therefore,
various optical signal patterns can be observed depending on the size of the fiber probe, and
another layer is added in the “near-mode” observation [11, 12].

3. Determining of optical response at near-field and far-field

In actual use of the hierarchical hologram, we needed to demonstrate that nanometric structural
change does not affect the optical response during the far-mode observation. At the same time,
obvious change must be observed during the near-mode observation.
We used a commercially available embossed hologram in our experiment as a sample of
nanometric fabrication. Because an embossed hologram is easily mass produced at a low cost,
it is the type used in most security applications, such as credit cards and bank bills [13]. A 40-
nm-thick Au layer was coated on the sample surface of the hologram at the nanometric level.
Then, 40 nanometric holes were fabricated in a 10 μ m×10 μ m region using a focused ion
beam (FIB) system. Figure 2(a) shows an observed CCD image of the sample hologram. Fig-
ure 2(b) and (c) show optical microscope images of the non-fabricated hologram and fabricated
hologram, respectively, which are optical responses of the hierarchical hologram during the

#89205 - $15.00 USD Received 31 Oct 2007; revised 20 Dec 2007; accepted 2 Jan 2008; published 8 Jan 2008
(C) 2008 OSA 21 January 2008 / Vol. 16, No. 2 / OPTICS EXPRESS 609
far-mode observation. No difference was evident in a comparison between Figs. 2(b) and (c).

Fig. 2. (a) Observed CCD image of sample hologram. Magnified image of (b) non-
fabricated hologram and (c) fabricated hologram. The marked region in (a) corresponds
with the magnified region at (b) and (c).

The compared results indicate the independence of the far-mode observation from nanometric
fabrication of the hierarchical hologram.
Optical responses during a near-mode observation were detected using a near-field optical
microscope (NOM). A schematic diagram of the detecting setup is shown in Fig. 3(a), in which
a NOM was operated in an illumination-collection mode with a near-field probe having a tip
with a curvature radius of 5 nm (see Figs. 3(b) and (c)). The fiber probe was connected to a

Fig. 3. (a) Schematic diagram of near-mode observation using NOM and composition of
sample hologram. (b) SEM images of fiber probe.

tuning fork. Its position was finely regulated by sensing of shear force with the tuning fork and
was fed back to a piezoelectric actuator. The light source used was a laser diode (LD) with an
operating wavelength of 785 nm, and scattered light was detected by a photomultiplier (PMT).
Figure 4(a) shows a scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of three nanometric holes
that were fabricated on a hologram. The diameter of each hole is less than 100 nm, and some
structural changes were observed on the rim of each hole. Magnified SEM images of each hole
and the optical response during the near-mode observation are shown in Figs. 4(b)-(d). Evident
optical responses were observed, which were attributed to an optical near-field generated on the

#89205 - $15.00 USD Received 31 Oct 2007; revised 20 Dec 2007; accepted 2 Jan 2008; published 8 Jan 2008
(C) 2008 OSA 21 January 2008 / Vol. 16, No. 2 / OPTICS EXPRESS 610
 Fig. 4. (a) SEM image of fabricated nanometric holes on hologram. (b)-(d) Magnified im-
ages of each hole at (a) (left), and corresponding optical response observed by NOM (right).

rim of each hole.

The experimental results in Figs. 2 and 4 show that nanometric fabrications do not affect far-
mode observations, and they evidently affect near-mode observations. These results indicate
that conventional functions of a hologram at the far-field were not adversely affected by adding
another functional layer in the near-field.
We replaced the embedded hologram with a diffraction grating for a quantitative evaluation
of the independence between nanometric fabrications and a far-mode observation. After fabri-
cating nanometric holes on the surface of the grating, we measured the diffraction efficiency
and compared the efficiency with that of grating with no holes. Figure 5 shows a 40-nm-thick
Au layer that was coated on the surface of the grating (600 lines/mm) and 25 nanometric holes
(φ 100 nm) that were fabricated using a 100 μ m pitch with an FIB system. The fabricated re-

Fig. 5. (a) Composition of fabricated grating, and (b) magnified SEM images of nanometric
fabrication.

gion was illuminated by the light from the LD (λ =532 nm), and the diffracted light intensity
was measured. Figures 6(a) and (b) show the experimental results. For example, the first-order
diffraction intensity of each result was 30.9% and 29.6%, respectively, and the difference was
only about 10%. No differences were evident recognized in other orders of diffraction lights, as
well. This means that the nanometric fabrications do not have a profound effect on the optical
devices.

#89205 - $15.00 USD Received 31 Oct 2007; revised 20 Dec 2007; accepted 2 Jan 2008; published 8 Jan 2008
(C) 2008 OSA 21 January 2008 / Vol. 16, No. 2 / OPTICS EXPRESS 611
 Fig. 6. Diffraction efficiencies of (a) non-fabricated grating and (b) fabricated grating.

4. Summary
In this paper, we described a demonstration of the basic concept of our “hierarchical hologram”
and an experiment involving two hierarchical layers using a far-mode and near-mode observa-
tion. Our concept can be applied not only to a hologram but also any other media, such as lens
and jewelry. Adding extra functions creates value-added media with only a few deficits in the
primary functions. However, a trade-off occurs between the conditions of nanometric fabrica-
tions (e.g., size and pitch) and deficit of the primary functions. For actual use to several media,
the trade-off in each media is under investigation by the authors.

Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the research project of the New Energy and Industrial Technol-
ogy Organization (NEDO), Japan, and Special Coordination Funds for Promoting Science and
Technology, Japan.

#89205 - $15.00 USD Received 31 Oct 2007; revised 20 Dec 2007; accepted 2 Jan 2008; published 8 Jan 2008
(C) 2008 OSA 21 January 2008 / Vol. 16, No. 2 / OPTICS EXPRESS 612