This is what I did mean. I used regular whiteboard magnets, but still its easy to detect where magnets has been. Not an issue from skating point of view but if you use Pro-Filer
Actually I'm not sure what you meant.
Why would magnetism be bad on the Pro-Filer. Do you think magnetism would interact with the tool? The Pro-Filer handle is aluminum - essentially non-magnetic. The stone - i.e., abrasive cylinder is probably a plastic resin, impregnated with diamond dust in the coarse case, and maybe something like Aluminum Oxide in the other (they don't say). In neither case would magnetism matter much.
Maybe a strong magnetic field could make iron/steel filings stick around, rather than fall off. I doubt that matters, but could be wrong. But I doubt the residual magnetic field from your whiteboard magnets have a strong enough field to significantly magnetize the blade or the filings.
If you instead mean that the force of the magnet creates little dents in the edge - that's obviously true. But that isn't going to affect the Pro-Filer tool.
OTOH, I like to create foil edges. I.E., I take the sharpening burr (which is typically bent sideways), and polish and re-align it to create my edge - a thin sheet of metal. Maybe your magnets - or, for that matter, the force from a micrometer - might disrupt the structure of the foil edges a little, and make them more fragile. However, if the level checks and measurements are done BEFORE the burr is polished and re-aligned, I THINK the foil edge won't be much affected by the pressure, because the pressure is spread out over a larger area.
But some people create foil edges using powered sharpening machines too. Again, a few people use Blackstone flat bottom V edges, which are almost as fragile - and which are ground to shape in proper alignment. I suppose very strong magnets, or perhaps a micrometer, might make a slight indentation in those edges, though I'm not certain of that. But FBV edges are not very commonly asked for.
*You then zoomed in on details of the picks, for which the imaging conditions were not optimized. Your enlarged frames show somewhat of a blurry, low-contrast mess; and you drew some conclusions from that.
I wasn't interested in the blurriness or low contrast. I was interested in the shapes of the picks - especially the boundaries between the nominally flat surfaces of the picks, which are supposed to dig into the ice. The look like the have been rounded off.
Since I don't jump much, perhaps I just don't appreciate how much wear and tear jumping places on the picks. Maybe that is normal. But it doesn't seem so to me.
If the edges on a toe pick are rounded off, it may be much less effective. That's why people sometimes re-sharpen toe picks too. Of course, that's a non-trivial thing to do. If your average level skate tech tried to do it, using a tyipcal powered sharpening machine, they might just make it even less effective.
If you want to delineate the boundary of a forest on a surveillance map, you don't zoom in on a tree; or worse yet, on a leaf.
I'm not completely going to agree with you there.
It might also depend what type of surveillance you are doing. E.g., do you want to estimate crop yield or crop health? That can have a huge affect on civilian government policy. Do you want to know where people or their machines can hide? Do you want to plot the best route for an invasion from the sea? Do you want to know what areas were flooded by a storm, and use that to plan relief efforts?
I used to do image processing and statistics work on radar (SAR) images, for the U.S. Navy. With the instruments we used, we couldn't see and weren't interested in individual leaves, but the statistical scattering characteristics that result from their presence and shapes can help you identify tree species, or other crop cover, as well as estimate tree or vegetation height. (Now there are published articles on super-resolution SAR. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them can see large leaves. For that matter, I never tried to look at palm trees, which have large leaves. Maybe they can be resolved.)
Again, if you want to create an elevation map, through interferometry (i.e., by looking at the relative wave phases from different viewing angles) the individual leave and tree features may not be relevant - but they help you identify corresponding areas in the two images. In particular, you might look at how to warp two images together to optimize larger area correlation coefficients. Elevation maps have a lot of applications in both the military and civilian world.
At one point I was asked to create a program which could do image segmentation (identified areas with similar statistical characteristics) on aircraft or satellite images, and generated maps, which could be used for various purposes. I don't know that anyone cared about the individual trees or other plants that might conceivably show up in such images, if the resolution was fine enough. But again, the statistical characteristics that result from such details to some extent underlie what is being done.
In the same ways, the very small details of shape on a toe pick, underlie how well it can punch into the ice surface.