Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Question about the data value. #22

Closed
BarryBA opened this issue Mar 7, 2019 · 10 comments
Closed

Question about the data value. #22

BarryBA opened this issue Mar 7, 2019 · 10 comments

Comments

@BarryBA
Copy link

BarryBA commented Mar 7, 2019

Hi, I have processed the MODIS L1B data via the MCTK toolkit. The original data has been processed into the Reflectance and Emissive data.
But I found the maxmium value of some spectral bands is higher than 1.0.
Why is it happen? Shouldn't the data is in the range of 0 to 1.0?

@BarryBA
Copy link
Author

BarryBA commented Mar 7, 2019

image
This is how I used the toolkit to process MODIS L1B data.

@dawhite
Copy link
Owner

dawhite commented Mar 8, 2019

Yes, reflectance values should stay within the range of 0.0 to 1.0. MCTK uses the scale factor supplied by NASA with each HDF file to convert raw digital numbers to reflectance, so the issue is not with MCTK. What you're seeing is not uncommon, though. Many reflectance conversion algorithms overestimate or underestimate reflectance, so you will find values that fall below 0.0 or above 1.0 because they are using relatively simple approaches to solve a complex problem. Especially for Top of Atmosphere (TOA) reflectance, which is what NASA provides in Level 1B products.

@BarryBA
Copy link
Author

BarryBA commented Mar 8, 2019

Yes, reflectance values should stay within the range of 0.0 to 1.0. MCTK uses the scale factor supplied by NASA with each HDF file to convert raw digital numbers to reflectance, so the issue is not with MCTK. What you're seeing is not uncommon, though. Many reflectance conversion algorithms overestimate or underestimate reflectance, so you will find values that fall below 0.0 or above 1.0 because they are using relatively simple approaches to solve a complex problem. Especially for Top of Atmosphere (TOA) reflectance, which is what NASA provides in Level 1B products.

Ok, thanks for your reply.
What about the emissivity? what should the range of the emissivity be?
In my data, the emissivity of some bands is between 0~16.0. Is it common?

@dawhite
Copy link
Owner

dawhite commented Mar 9, 2019

What you actually receive for the emissive bands is radiance data in Watts per square meter per micrometer per steradian (W/m2/um/sr), not emissivity, so values on the order of 16 is normal. Here are links to the MODIS L1B User's Guide and Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document where you can learn more about the emissive bands:

https://mcst.gsfc.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/file_attachments/M1054.pdf
https://mcst.gsfc.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/file_attachments/MODIS_L1B_ATBD_ver4.pdf

The use of "emissivity" in MCTK is a holdover from the early days of plugin development when I was debating how to label the conversion options and distinguish between the reflective and emissive bands. I should clarify that to avoid confusion over what MCTK actually outputs.

@BarryBA
Copy link
Author

BarryBA commented Mar 10, 2019

What you actually receive for the emissive bands is radiance data in Watts per square meter per micrometer per steradian (W/m2/um/sr), not emissivity, so values on the order of 16 is normal. Here are links to the MODIS L1B User's Guide and Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document where you can learn more about the emissive bands:

https://mcst.gsfc.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/file_attachments/M1054.pdf
https://mcst.gsfc.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/file_attachments/MODIS_L1B_ATBD_ver4.pdf

The use of "emissivity" in MCTK is a holdover from the early days of plugin development when I was debating how to label the conversion options and distinguish between the reflective and emissive bands. I should clarify that to avoid confusion over what MCTK actually outputs.

Ok, now I understand.
Based on the option seletion in the above screenshot, the reflective solar bands (RSB) will generate the top of the atmosphere (TOA) reflectance factors, while the thermal emissive bands (ESB) will generate the TOA radiances.
Thank you very much. A great help to me.

@dawhite
Copy link
Owner

dawhite commented Mar 10, 2019

Yes. And I just noticed that you're apparently using a very old version of MCTK. It looks to be from 2008, which makes it more than ten years old. Please download and install the latest version from the Releases section. I've fixed a lot of bugs and performance issues over the years. https://github.com/dawhite/MCTK/releases

@dawhite dawhite closed this as completed Mar 10, 2019
@BarryBA
Copy link
Author

BarryBA commented Mar 11, 2019

Yes. And I just noticed that you're apparently using a very old version of MCTK. It looks to be from 2008, which makes it more than ten years old. Please download and install the latest version from the Releases section. I've fixed a lot of bugs and performance issues over the years. https://github.com/dawhite/MCTK/releases

I used the new version of MCTK in ENVI software. But when I input the data, it prompt the error:
image
what's the problem?

@dawhite
Copy link
Owner

dawhite commented Mar 11, 2019

Remove your old version, restart ENVI, and the error message should go away

@BarryBA
Copy link
Author

BarryBA commented Mar 11, 2019

Remove your old version, restart ENVI, and the error message should go away

Wow. Thanks a lot. It works now.
By the way, if we want to cite the toolkit MCTK in research papers, how to write?

@dawhite
Copy link
Owner

dawhite commented Mar 16, 2019

There is no one set way to do it, since it depends on the publication style you're required to use, but in general you can use something this:

White, D. A. (2018). MODIS Conversion Toolkit Version 2.1.9. Retrieved from https://github.com/dawhite/MCTK.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants