A Little help interpreting spectral data from an article

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on interpreting spectral data from a database of absorption and reflection spectra for pigments. Users express confusion over reflectance values exceeding 100% and the presence of negative values in the data, questioning whether these represent percentages or signal intensities. It is clarified that reflectance values are relative to a white reference standard, and values above 100% indicate stronger reflection than the standard. The negative values are attributed to noise at low wavelengths. The conversation also touches on the complexities of measurement methods and the potential effects of fluorescence in pigments.
Guilherme Franco
Messages
10
Reaction score
1
I'm trying to find a good database of absorption or reflection spectra in visible light for pigments.

I've found a wonderful database in this article: http://e-conservation.org/issue-2/36-FORS-spectral-database#CSV

It's almost exactly what I needed

Except I don't understand the data

The graphs in the article show a lot of reflectance values over 100% (and doesn't explain them) and the data in the CSV files have both numbers greater than 100 and lower than 0 (negative numbers), not to mention I don't know if those values are percentages (the same on the graphs of the article) or some signal intensity value.

I can't seem to find explanation for these things on the article.

Can anyone help me?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I assume the numbers in the csv files are the same as the percentages in the graphs. The article explains that reflectance values are not absolute but are with reference to a white reflectance standard. If the sample reflects more strongly than the reference, the reflectance value is > 100%. The few negative numbers look like just the result of noise at low wavelengths.
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude, davenn and sophiecentaur
Seems crazy, on the face of it. There must be something in the 'small print' that allows for >100% reflectance. I have been skipping around a number of Google hits and the reference seems to be a 99% Spectralon diffuse reflectance standard, whatever that is. That makes it even more weird.
On the face of it, you'd need some frequency shifting mechanism to get more out at a given frequency than is put in. Fluorescence happens in some materials but I thought it needed UV energies.
 
this isn't my field of expertise
Am some others will chime in

@Dale @Andy Resnick
Guilherme Franco said:
I don't know if those values are percentages (the same on the graphs of the article) or some signal intensity value.

this comment in the introduction explains that part of the query

A FORS spectrum shows for each wavelength, the ratio between the intensity of the reflected light and the incident light, measured with respect to a standard white reference. This ratio is called reflectance and is given in percentage (%).
I am just also not sure how more than 100% is achieved ?

mjc123 said:
I assume the numbers in the csv files are the same as the percentages in the graphs. The article explains that reflectance values are not absolute but are with reference to a white reflectance standard. If the sample reflects more strongly than the reference, the reflectance value is > 100%. The few negative numbers look like just the result of noise at low wavelengths.
yes, exactly
 
davenn said:
I am just also not sure how more than 100% is achieved ?
I guess this is so familiar to the 'experts' that they don't even feel the need to explain it away. Or perhaps it takes a Physicist to even notice something like this? We have a 'learned intuition'.
 
Guilherme Franco said:
I'm trying to find a good database of absorption or reflection spectra in visible light for pigments.

The graphs in the article show a lot of reflectance values over 100% (and doesn't explain them) and the data in the CSV files have both numbers greater than 100 and lower than 0 (negative numbers), not to mention I don't know if those values are percentages (the same on the graphs of the article) or some signal intensity value.

mjc123 said:
I assume the numbers in the csv files are the same as the percentages in the graphs. The article explains that reflectance values are not absolute but are with reference to a white reflectance standard. If the sample reflects more strongly than the reference, the reflectance value is > 100%. The few negative numbers look like just the result of noise at low wavelengths.

davenn said:
this isn't my field of expertise
Am some others will chime in

@Dale @Andy Resnick

I've done a lot of these kinds of measurements, there could be a number of reasons why reflectance measurements > 100%, and unfortunately, I couldn't get a clear understanding of the measurement method from the article. For example: it's not clear if the reflectance measurement is 'normal' reflection or retroreflection (back reflection). It could be 'normal' (http://oceanoptics.com//wp-content/uploads/example-setup-reflectance-1.jpg), but it's not explicit. For normal incidence this doesn't matter, but it does for 45-degree angle incidence. Also, I didn't see in the article where they discuss a 'reflection standard': not only could certain materials reflect more than a standard material (like spectralon), if the material is more specular than the diffuse standard, the reflectance measurement could >100%.

A more complete reflectance specification is the 'bi-directional reflectance distribution function':

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bidirectional_reflectance_distribution_function

One other (probably minor) effect: the authors mention some of the pigments fluoresce; if they illuminate the sample with white light some of the short-wavelength energy will convert to longer wavelengths increasing the apparent reflectance.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
Back
Top