Landsat 8 - Reflectance ValuesCalculating albedo from Landsat in ArcGIS Desktop?Different band file format when downloading Landsat 8 from earthexplorerRemote Sensing Landsat Surface Reflectance and AlbedoStrange reflectance values in Sentinel-2 images over sea iceLandsat 7 - 8 surface reflectance bands from ESPA (LEDAPS)How to use Landsat surface reflectance pixel quality band?NDWI Calculation with Surface Reflectance ProductsNegative values in Landsat 8 surface reflectance higher level productLandsat 8 Collection Level 1 and 2Set multiple values to nodata - Erdas Imagine 2015How to Correct Landsat 8 Imagery with TOA Reflectance >1 and <0?

Integer addition + constant, is it a group?

Why not increase contact surface when reentering the atmosphere?

What is the opposite of 'gravitas'?

Is exact Kanji stroke length important?

Proof of work - lottery approach

Lay out the Carpet

What can we do to stop prior company from asking us questions?

How does buying out courses with grant money work?

Is a stroke of luck acceptable after a series of unfavorable events?

Customer Requests (Sometimes) Drive Me Bonkers!

India just shot down a satellite from the ground. At what altitude range is the resulting debris field?

How did Doctor Strange see the winning outcome in Avengers: Infinity War?

How can I get through very long and very dry, but also very useful technical documents when learning a new tool?

Applicability of Single Responsibility Principle

Crossing the line between justified force and brutality

Did Dumbledore lie to Harry about how long he had James Potter's invisibility cloak when he was examining it? If so, why?

I'm in charge of equipment buying but no one's ever happy with what I choose. How to fix this?

Inappropriate reference requests from Journal reviewers

What is the intuitive meaning of having a linear relationship between the logs of two variables?

Would this custom Sorcerer variant that can only learn any verbal-component-only spell be unbalanced?

What does "I’d sit this one out, Cap," imply or mean in the context?

Where does the Z80 processor start executing from?

Is there a problem with hiding "forgot password" until it's needed?

You cannot touch me, but I can touch you, who am I?



Landsat 8 - Reflectance Values


Calculating albedo from Landsat in ArcGIS Desktop?Different band file format when downloading Landsat 8 from earthexplorerRemote Sensing Landsat Surface Reflectance and AlbedoStrange reflectance values in Sentinel-2 images over sea iceLandsat 7 - 8 surface reflectance bands from ESPA (LEDAPS)How to use Landsat surface reflectance pixel quality band?NDWI Calculation with Surface Reflectance ProductsNegative values in Landsat 8 surface reflectance higher level productLandsat 8 Collection Level 1 and 2Set multiple values to nodata - Erdas Imagine 2015How to Correct Landsat 8 Imagery with TOA Reflectance >1 and <0?













2















I downloaded some Landsat 8 OLI/TIRS C1 Level-1 images from EarthExplorer. I was hoping to get reflectance data out of the blue, green and red band; however, when I opened those images in ArcMap, the scale does not seem to be reflectance, given that is not in the range between 0 - 1 (theoretical values of reflectance).



The values that I am getting are 0 - 40079 (blue band) and 0 - 40336 (red band). My question is, is there some type of corrections that I need to do? maybe some transformation?










share|improve this question

















  • 3





    Read the Landsat users manual, it clearly states that level-1 reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with what your observed data range. If you want a 0-1 just rescale the data.

    – Jeffrey Evans
    yesterday












  • Thank you @JeffreyEvans

    – Perro
    yesterday















2















I downloaded some Landsat 8 OLI/TIRS C1 Level-1 images from EarthExplorer. I was hoping to get reflectance data out of the blue, green and red band; however, when I opened those images in ArcMap, the scale does not seem to be reflectance, given that is not in the range between 0 - 1 (theoretical values of reflectance).



The values that I am getting are 0 - 40079 (blue band) and 0 - 40336 (red band). My question is, is there some type of corrections that I need to do? maybe some transformation?










share|improve this question

















  • 3





    Read the Landsat users manual, it clearly states that level-1 reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with what your observed data range. If you want a 0-1 just rescale the data.

    – Jeffrey Evans
    yesterday












  • Thank you @JeffreyEvans

    – Perro
    yesterday













2












2








2








I downloaded some Landsat 8 OLI/TIRS C1 Level-1 images from EarthExplorer. I was hoping to get reflectance data out of the blue, green and red band; however, when I opened those images in ArcMap, the scale does not seem to be reflectance, given that is not in the range between 0 - 1 (theoretical values of reflectance).



The values that I am getting are 0 - 40079 (blue band) and 0 - 40336 (red band). My question is, is there some type of corrections that I need to do? maybe some transformation?










share|improve this question














I downloaded some Landsat 8 OLI/TIRS C1 Level-1 images from EarthExplorer. I was hoping to get reflectance data out of the blue, green and red band; however, when I opened those images in ArcMap, the scale does not seem to be reflectance, given that is not in the range between 0 - 1 (theoretical values of reflectance).



The values that I am getting are 0 - 40079 (blue band) and 0 - 40336 (red band). My question is, is there some type of corrections that I need to do? maybe some transformation?







remote-sensing landsat landsat-8 reflectance






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked yesterday









PerroPerro

8511




8511







  • 3





    Read the Landsat users manual, it clearly states that level-1 reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with what your observed data range. If you want a 0-1 just rescale the data.

    – Jeffrey Evans
    yesterday












  • Thank you @JeffreyEvans

    – Perro
    yesterday












  • 3





    Read the Landsat users manual, it clearly states that level-1 reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with what your observed data range. If you want a 0-1 just rescale the data.

    – Jeffrey Evans
    yesterday












  • Thank you @JeffreyEvans

    – Perro
    yesterday







3




3





Read the Landsat users manual, it clearly states that level-1 reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with what your observed data range. If you want a 0-1 just rescale the data.

– Jeffrey Evans
yesterday






Read the Landsat users manual, it clearly states that level-1 reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with what your observed data range. If you want a 0-1 just rescale the data.

– Jeffrey Evans
yesterday














Thank you @JeffreyEvans

– Perro
yesterday





Thank you @JeffreyEvans

– Perro
yesterday










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1














The values you are getting are NOT real reflectance values like the other comment said. They are actually DN (digital number) values.



You need to go from DN to radiance and then to TOA (Top Of Atmosphere) reflectance. This link shows the necessary steps you need to go through in order to get reflectance values.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • If you are working with the level 1 reflectance product it is, in fact, the reflectance values, just scaled to 16 bit. It is a bit confusing but, please make sure that advice that directly contradicts somebody is actually correct. And to compound this issue, the data is not always bounded to 0 so, you can have very large negative numbers resulting from the 16-bit scaling process. A colleague of mine at USGS-EROS has confirmed this.

    – Jeffrey Evans
    11 hours ago











  • @JeffreyEvans Check the Standard Processing Parameters section. It is not a simple rescale, but rather a series of conversions using the formulas provided by the USGS.

    – Mouad Alami
    10 hours ago












  • You are referring to converting the standard DN values to reflectance. In earth explorer, you can explicitly request the reflectance product and receive reflectance bands, as well as TOA, in addition to DN. These are scaled to 16 bit just like the DN bands. In the case of DN only data, you indeed must use the solar angle band with the standard coefficients to convert to reflectance but, not if you requested the reflectance data in the archive. I have regularly worked with NASA and USGS for 27 years so, please do not be dogmatic and perhaps admit that somebody may know something that you do not

    – Jeffrey Evans
    10 hours ago











  • @JeffreyEvans I am a total newbie in the fields of remote sensing and GIS. Your years of experience alone exceed how long I've been alive.You are however making a mistake, because the data is in level 1 which means that is it in DN. You sir are talking about level 2 data.

    – Mouad Alami
    10 hours ago












  • Documentation is very confusing and the USGS keeps contradicting itself on what constitutes a processing level and tier. In the indices handbook this would be level 1, tier 2. Honestly, we are both correct but thank you for pointing this discrepancy out because it should likely be referred to as level 2, or even 3. The TIRS collections are really confusing matters in regard to historic terminology. Historically, level 1 was minimally processed, 2 was geometrically corrected and 3 terrain and radiometrically corrected. Ideally now we want L1TP (level 1, tier 1).

    – Jeffrey Evans
    10 hours ago


















0














This information is a bit buried but, if you read the USGS Landsat Surface Reflectance-derived Spectral Indices product guide and the associate processing software guide, you can ascertain that reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with your observed data range. This processing and rescaling occurs in the LEDAPS (TM4,TM5,ETM+7) or L8SR (OLI) software so, you can track down the USGS documentation for technical details. If you want a 0-1 data range just rescale the data accordingly. One confusing factor is that floating point reflectance values do not always bound 0-1 and when rescaled to 16-bit, in the processing workflow, can end up having large negative numbers. I just bound the lower data range to 0 before rescaling as it is functionally the same as doing this on floating point data.



As @Mouad Alami pointed out, if you did not request reflectance as part of the data archive and are working with the DN values, it is necessary to apply a simple workflow to convert the data to reflectance. It should be noted that the equations are sensor specific.



If you want to operate on the DN values directly, here is an R example of DN to reflectance for OLI data that gives the general code syntax.



oli.reflectance <- function(x, sun.elev = NULL, multiplicative.rescaling = 0.00002, 
additive.rescaling = -0.100000)
if(!class(x) %in% c("RasterLayer", "RasterStack"))
stop( "x must be raster class object" )
if(is.null(sun.elev))
stop("Must provide sun elevation angle value from SUN_ELEVATION in metadata")
refl <- function(x, m, a, se)
y <- (x * m + a) / sin(as.numeric(se) * pi /180)
return(y)

return( refl( x, multiplicative.rescaling, additive.rescaling, sun.elev) )



Model parameters (arguments)



  • m (additive.rescaling) - Additive rescaling factor (REFLECTANCE_MULT_BAND_x)


  • a (multiplicative.rescaling) - Quantized calibrated standard product pixel values (REFLECTANCE_ADD_BAND_x)


  • se (sun.elev) - sun elevation angle (SUN_ELEVATION)


The terms "at-sensor" (4,5,7) and "surface" (8) reflectance are synonymous but are used in the context of the specific sensor as the atmospheric correction algorithms are quite different. The tier 2 products are have terrain and radiometric calibration (cross-sensor and temporal) applied making the bands and indices comparable across scenes. However, this type of temporal comparison should always be carried out on the reflectance data.






share|improve this answer
























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "79"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgis.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f316749%2flandsat-8-reflectance-values%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1














    The values you are getting are NOT real reflectance values like the other comment said. They are actually DN (digital number) values.



    You need to go from DN to radiance and then to TOA (Top Of Atmosphere) reflectance. This link shows the necessary steps you need to go through in order to get reflectance values.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.




















    • If you are working with the level 1 reflectance product it is, in fact, the reflectance values, just scaled to 16 bit. It is a bit confusing but, please make sure that advice that directly contradicts somebody is actually correct. And to compound this issue, the data is not always bounded to 0 so, you can have very large negative numbers resulting from the 16-bit scaling process. A colleague of mine at USGS-EROS has confirmed this.

      – Jeffrey Evans
      11 hours ago











    • @JeffreyEvans Check the Standard Processing Parameters section. It is not a simple rescale, but rather a series of conversions using the formulas provided by the USGS.

      – Mouad Alami
      10 hours ago












    • You are referring to converting the standard DN values to reflectance. In earth explorer, you can explicitly request the reflectance product and receive reflectance bands, as well as TOA, in addition to DN. These are scaled to 16 bit just like the DN bands. In the case of DN only data, you indeed must use the solar angle band with the standard coefficients to convert to reflectance but, not if you requested the reflectance data in the archive. I have regularly worked with NASA and USGS for 27 years so, please do not be dogmatic and perhaps admit that somebody may know something that you do not

      – Jeffrey Evans
      10 hours ago











    • @JeffreyEvans I am a total newbie in the fields of remote sensing and GIS. Your years of experience alone exceed how long I've been alive.You are however making a mistake, because the data is in level 1 which means that is it in DN. You sir are talking about level 2 data.

      – Mouad Alami
      10 hours ago












    • Documentation is very confusing and the USGS keeps contradicting itself on what constitutes a processing level and tier. In the indices handbook this would be level 1, tier 2. Honestly, we are both correct but thank you for pointing this discrepancy out because it should likely be referred to as level 2, or even 3. The TIRS collections are really confusing matters in regard to historic terminology. Historically, level 1 was minimally processed, 2 was geometrically corrected and 3 terrain and radiometrically corrected. Ideally now we want L1TP (level 1, tier 1).

      – Jeffrey Evans
      10 hours ago















    1














    The values you are getting are NOT real reflectance values like the other comment said. They are actually DN (digital number) values.



    You need to go from DN to radiance and then to TOA (Top Of Atmosphere) reflectance. This link shows the necessary steps you need to go through in order to get reflectance values.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.




















    • If you are working with the level 1 reflectance product it is, in fact, the reflectance values, just scaled to 16 bit. It is a bit confusing but, please make sure that advice that directly contradicts somebody is actually correct. And to compound this issue, the data is not always bounded to 0 so, you can have very large negative numbers resulting from the 16-bit scaling process. A colleague of mine at USGS-EROS has confirmed this.

      – Jeffrey Evans
      11 hours ago











    • @JeffreyEvans Check the Standard Processing Parameters section. It is not a simple rescale, but rather a series of conversions using the formulas provided by the USGS.

      – Mouad Alami
      10 hours ago












    • You are referring to converting the standard DN values to reflectance. In earth explorer, you can explicitly request the reflectance product and receive reflectance bands, as well as TOA, in addition to DN. These are scaled to 16 bit just like the DN bands. In the case of DN only data, you indeed must use the solar angle band with the standard coefficients to convert to reflectance but, not if you requested the reflectance data in the archive. I have regularly worked with NASA and USGS for 27 years so, please do not be dogmatic and perhaps admit that somebody may know something that you do not

      – Jeffrey Evans
      10 hours ago











    • @JeffreyEvans I am a total newbie in the fields of remote sensing and GIS. Your years of experience alone exceed how long I've been alive.You are however making a mistake, because the data is in level 1 which means that is it in DN. You sir are talking about level 2 data.

      – Mouad Alami
      10 hours ago












    • Documentation is very confusing and the USGS keeps contradicting itself on what constitutes a processing level and tier. In the indices handbook this would be level 1, tier 2. Honestly, we are both correct but thank you for pointing this discrepancy out because it should likely be referred to as level 2, or even 3. The TIRS collections are really confusing matters in regard to historic terminology. Historically, level 1 was minimally processed, 2 was geometrically corrected and 3 terrain and radiometrically corrected. Ideally now we want L1TP (level 1, tier 1).

      – Jeffrey Evans
      10 hours ago













    1












    1








    1







    The values you are getting are NOT real reflectance values like the other comment said. They are actually DN (digital number) values.



    You need to go from DN to radiance and then to TOA (Top Of Atmosphere) reflectance. This link shows the necessary steps you need to go through in order to get reflectance values.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.










    The values you are getting are NOT real reflectance values like the other comment said. They are actually DN (digital number) values.



    You need to go from DN to radiance and then to TOA (Top Of Atmosphere) reflectance. This link shows the necessary steps you need to go through in order to get reflectance values.







    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer






    New contributor




    Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    answered 16 hours ago









    Mouad AlamiMouad Alami

    994




    994




    New contributor




    Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





    New contributor





    Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    Mouad Alami is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.












    • If you are working with the level 1 reflectance product it is, in fact, the reflectance values, just scaled to 16 bit. It is a bit confusing but, please make sure that advice that directly contradicts somebody is actually correct. And to compound this issue, the data is not always bounded to 0 so, you can have very large negative numbers resulting from the 16-bit scaling process. A colleague of mine at USGS-EROS has confirmed this.

      – Jeffrey Evans
      11 hours ago











    • @JeffreyEvans Check the Standard Processing Parameters section. It is not a simple rescale, but rather a series of conversions using the formulas provided by the USGS.

      – Mouad Alami
      10 hours ago












    • You are referring to converting the standard DN values to reflectance. In earth explorer, you can explicitly request the reflectance product and receive reflectance bands, as well as TOA, in addition to DN. These are scaled to 16 bit just like the DN bands. In the case of DN only data, you indeed must use the solar angle band with the standard coefficients to convert to reflectance but, not if you requested the reflectance data in the archive. I have regularly worked with NASA and USGS for 27 years so, please do not be dogmatic and perhaps admit that somebody may know something that you do not

      – Jeffrey Evans
      10 hours ago











    • @JeffreyEvans I am a total newbie in the fields of remote sensing and GIS. Your years of experience alone exceed how long I've been alive.You are however making a mistake, because the data is in level 1 which means that is it in DN. You sir are talking about level 2 data.

      – Mouad Alami
      10 hours ago












    • Documentation is very confusing and the USGS keeps contradicting itself on what constitutes a processing level and tier. In the indices handbook this would be level 1, tier 2. Honestly, we are both correct but thank you for pointing this discrepancy out because it should likely be referred to as level 2, or even 3. The TIRS collections are really confusing matters in regard to historic terminology. Historically, level 1 was minimally processed, 2 was geometrically corrected and 3 terrain and radiometrically corrected. Ideally now we want L1TP (level 1, tier 1).

      – Jeffrey Evans
      10 hours ago

















    • If you are working with the level 1 reflectance product it is, in fact, the reflectance values, just scaled to 16 bit. It is a bit confusing but, please make sure that advice that directly contradicts somebody is actually correct. And to compound this issue, the data is not always bounded to 0 so, you can have very large negative numbers resulting from the 16-bit scaling process. A colleague of mine at USGS-EROS has confirmed this.

      – Jeffrey Evans
      11 hours ago











    • @JeffreyEvans Check the Standard Processing Parameters section. It is not a simple rescale, but rather a series of conversions using the formulas provided by the USGS.

      – Mouad Alami
      10 hours ago












    • You are referring to converting the standard DN values to reflectance. In earth explorer, you can explicitly request the reflectance product and receive reflectance bands, as well as TOA, in addition to DN. These are scaled to 16 bit just like the DN bands. In the case of DN only data, you indeed must use the solar angle band with the standard coefficients to convert to reflectance but, not if you requested the reflectance data in the archive. I have regularly worked with NASA and USGS for 27 years so, please do not be dogmatic and perhaps admit that somebody may know something that you do not

      – Jeffrey Evans
      10 hours ago











    • @JeffreyEvans I am a total newbie in the fields of remote sensing and GIS. Your years of experience alone exceed how long I've been alive.You are however making a mistake, because the data is in level 1 which means that is it in DN. You sir are talking about level 2 data.

      – Mouad Alami
      10 hours ago












    • Documentation is very confusing and the USGS keeps contradicting itself on what constitutes a processing level and tier. In the indices handbook this would be level 1, tier 2. Honestly, we are both correct but thank you for pointing this discrepancy out because it should likely be referred to as level 2, or even 3. The TIRS collections are really confusing matters in regard to historic terminology. Historically, level 1 was minimally processed, 2 was geometrically corrected and 3 terrain and radiometrically corrected. Ideally now we want L1TP (level 1, tier 1).

      – Jeffrey Evans
      10 hours ago
















    If you are working with the level 1 reflectance product it is, in fact, the reflectance values, just scaled to 16 bit. It is a bit confusing but, please make sure that advice that directly contradicts somebody is actually correct. And to compound this issue, the data is not always bounded to 0 so, you can have very large negative numbers resulting from the 16-bit scaling process. A colleague of mine at USGS-EROS has confirmed this.

    – Jeffrey Evans
    11 hours ago





    If you are working with the level 1 reflectance product it is, in fact, the reflectance values, just scaled to 16 bit. It is a bit confusing but, please make sure that advice that directly contradicts somebody is actually correct. And to compound this issue, the data is not always bounded to 0 so, you can have very large negative numbers resulting from the 16-bit scaling process. A colleague of mine at USGS-EROS has confirmed this.

    – Jeffrey Evans
    11 hours ago













    @JeffreyEvans Check the Standard Processing Parameters section. It is not a simple rescale, but rather a series of conversions using the formulas provided by the USGS.

    – Mouad Alami
    10 hours ago






    @JeffreyEvans Check the Standard Processing Parameters section. It is not a simple rescale, but rather a series of conversions using the formulas provided by the USGS.

    – Mouad Alami
    10 hours ago














    You are referring to converting the standard DN values to reflectance. In earth explorer, you can explicitly request the reflectance product and receive reflectance bands, as well as TOA, in addition to DN. These are scaled to 16 bit just like the DN bands. In the case of DN only data, you indeed must use the solar angle band with the standard coefficients to convert to reflectance but, not if you requested the reflectance data in the archive. I have regularly worked with NASA and USGS for 27 years so, please do not be dogmatic and perhaps admit that somebody may know something that you do not

    – Jeffrey Evans
    10 hours ago





    You are referring to converting the standard DN values to reflectance. In earth explorer, you can explicitly request the reflectance product and receive reflectance bands, as well as TOA, in addition to DN. These are scaled to 16 bit just like the DN bands. In the case of DN only data, you indeed must use the solar angle band with the standard coefficients to convert to reflectance but, not if you requested the reflectance data in the archive. I have regularly worked with NASA and USGS for 27 years so, please do not be dogmatic and perhaps admit that somebody may know something that you do not

    – Jeffrey Evans
    10 hours ago













    @JeffreyEvans I am a total newbie in the fields of remote sensing and GIS. Your years of experience alone exceed how long I've been alive.You are however making a mistake, because the data is in level 1 which means that is it in DN. You sir are talking about level 2 data.

    – Mouad Alami
    10 hours ago






    @JeffreyEvans I am a total newbie in the fields of remote sensing and GIS. Your years of experience alone exceed how long I've been alive.You are however making a mistake, because the data is in level 1 which means that is it in DN. You sir are talking about level 2 data.

    – Mouad Alami
    10 hours ago














    Documentation is very confusing and the USGS keeps contradicting itself on what constitutes a processing level and tier. In the indices handbook this would be level 1, tier 2. Honestly, we are both correct but thank you for pointing this discrepancy out because it should likely be referred to as level 2, or even 3. The TIRS collections are really confusing matters in regard to historic terminology. Historically, level 1 was minimally processed, 2 was geometrically corrected and 3 terrain and radiometrically corrected. Ideally now we want L1TP (level 1, tier 1).

    – Jeffrey Evans
    10 hours ago





    Documentation is very confusing and the USGS keeps contradicting itself on what constitutes a processing level and tier. In the indices handbook this would be level 1, tier 2. Honestly, we are both correct but thank you for pointing this discrepancy out because it should likely be referred to as level 2, or even 3. The TIRS collections are really confusing matters in regard to historic terminology. Historically, level 1 was minimally processed, 2 was geometrically corrected and 3 terrain and radiometrically corrected. Ideally now we want L1TP (level 1, tier 1).

    – Jeffrey Evans
    10 hours ago













    0














    This information is a bit buried but, if you read the USGS Landsat Surface Reflectance-derived Spectral Indices product guide and the associate processing software guide, you can ascertain that reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with your observed data range. This processing and rescaling occurs in the LEDAPS (TM4,TM5,ETM+7) or L8SR (OLI) software so, you can track down the USGS documentation for technical details. If you want a 0-1 data range just rescale the data accordingly. One confusing factor is that floating point reflectance values do not always bound 0-1 and when rescaled to 16-bit, in the processing workflow, can end up having large negative numbers. I just bound the lower data range to 0 before rescaling as it is functionally the same as doing this on floating point data.



    As @Mouad Alami pointed out, if you did not request reflectance as part of the data archive and are working with the DN values, it is necessary to apply a simple workflow to convert the data to reflectance. It should be noted that the equations are sensor specific.



    If you want to operate on the DN values directly, here is an R example of DN to reflectance for OLI data that gives the general code syntax.



    oli.reflectance <- function(x, sun.elev = NULL, multiplicative.rescaling = 0.00002, 
    additive.rescaling = -0.100000)
    if(!class(x) %in% c("RasterLayer", "RasterStack"))
    stop( "x must be raster class object" )
    if(is.null(sun.elev))
    stop("Must provide sun elevation angle value from SUN_ELEVATION in metadata")
    refl <- function(x, m, a, se)
    y <- (x * m + a) / sin(as.numeric(se) * pi /180)
    return(y)

    return( refl( x, multiplicative.rescaling, additive.rescaling, sun.elev) )



    Model parameters (arguments)



    • m (additive.rescaling) - Additive rescaling factor (REFLECTANCE_MULT_BAND_x)


    • a (multiplicative.rescaling) - Quantized calibrated standard product pixel values (REFLECTANCE_ADD_BAND_x)


    • se (sun.elev) - sun elevation angle (SUN_ELEVATION)


    The terms "at-sensor" (4,5,7) and "surface" (8) reflectance are synonymous but are used in the context of the specific sensor as the atmospheric correction algorithms are quite different. The tier 2 products are have terrain and radiometric calibration (cross-sensor and temporal) applied making the bands and indices comparable across scenes. However, this type of temporal comparison should always be carried out on the reflectance data.






    share|improve this answer





























      0














      This information is a bit buried but, if you read the USGS Landsat Surface Reflectance-derived Spectral Indices product guide and the associate processing software guide, you can ascertain that reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with your observed data range. This processing and rescaling occurs in the LEDAPS (TM4,TM5,ETM+7) or L8SR (OLI) software so, you can track down the USGS documentation for technical details. If you want a 0-1 data range just rescale the data accordingly. One confusing factor is that floating point reflectance values do not always bound 0-1 and when rescaled to 16-bit, in the processing workflow, can end up having large negative numbers. I just bound the lower data range to 0 before rescaling as it is functionally the same as doing this on floating point data.



      As @Mouad Alami pointed out, if you did not request reflectance as part of the data archive and are working with the DN values, it is necessary to apply a simple workflow to convert the data to reflectance. It should be noted that the equations are sensor specific.



      If you want to operate on the DN values directly, here is an R example of DN to reflectance for OLI data that gives the general code syntax.



      oli.reflectance <- function(x, sun.elev = NULL, multiplicative.rescaling = 0.00002, 
      additive.rescaling = -0.100000)
      if(!class(x) %in% c("RasterLayer", "RasterStack"))
      stop( "x must be raster class object" )
      if(is.null(sun.elev))
      stop("Must provide sun elevation angle value from SUN_ELEVATION in metadata")
      refl <- function(x, m, a, se)
      y <- (x * m + a) / sin(as.numeric(se) * pi /180)
      return(y)

      return( refl( x, multiplicative.rescaling, additive.rescaling, sun.elev) )



      Model parameters (arguments)



      • m (additive.rescaling) - Additive rescaling factor (REFLECTANCE_MULT_BAND_x)


      • a (multiplicative.rescaling) - Quantized calibrated standard product pixel values (REFLECTANCE_ADD_BAND_x)


      • se (sun.elev) - sun elevation angle (SUN_ELEVATION)


      The terms "at-sensor" (4,5,7) and "surface" (8) reflectance are synonymous but are used in the context of the specific sensor as the atmospheric correction algorithms are quite different. The tier 2 products are have terrain and radiometric calibration (cross-sensor and temporal) applied making the bands and indices comparable across scenes. However, this type of temporal comparison should always be carried out on the reflectance data.






      share|improve this answer



























        0












        0








        0







        This information is a bit buried but, if you read the USGS Landsat Surface Reflectance-derived Spectral Indices product guide and the associate processing software guide, you can ascertain that reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with your observed data range. This processing and rescaling occurs in the LEDAPS (TM4,TM5,ETM+7) or L8SR (OLI) software so, you can track down the USGS documentation for technical details. If you want a 0-1 data range just rescale the data accordingly. One confusing factor is that floating point reflectance values do not always bound 0-1 and when rescaled to 16-bit, in the processing workflow, can end up having large negative numbers. I just bound the lower data range to 0 before rescaling as it is functionally the same as doing this on floating point data.



        As @Mouad Alami pointed out, if you did not request reflectance as part of the data archive and are working with the DN values, it is necessary to apply a simple workflow to convert the data to reflectance. It should be noted that the equations are sensor specific.



        If you want to operate on the DN values directly, here is an R example of DN to reflectance for OLI data that gives the general code syntax.



        oli.reflectance <- function(x, sun.elev = NULL, multiplicative.rescaling = 0.00002, 
        additive.rescaling = -0.100000)
        if(!class(x) %in% c("RasterLayer", "RasterStack"))
        stop( "x must be raster class object" )
        if(is.null(sun.elev))
        stop("Must provide sun elevation angle value from SUN_ELEVATION in metadata")
        refl <- function(x, m, a, se)
        y <- (x * m + a) / sin(as.numeric(se) * pi /180)
        return(y)

        return( refl( x, multiplicative.rescaling, additive.rescaling, sun.elev) )



        Model parameters (arguments)



        • m (additive.rescaling) - Additive rescaling factor (REFLECTANCE_MULT_BAND_x)


        • a (multiplicative.rescaling) - Quantized calibrated standard product pixel values (REFLECTANCE_ADD_BAND_x)


        • se (sun.elev) - sun elevation angle (SUN_ELEVATION)


        The terms "at-sensor" (4,5,7) and "surface" (8) reflectance are synonymous but are used in the context of the specific sensor as the atmospheric correction algorithms are quite different. The tier 2 products are have terrain and radiometric calibration (cross-sensor and temporal) applied making the bands and indices comparable across scenes. However, this type of temporal comparison should always be carried out on the reflectance data.






        share|improve this answer















        This information is a bit buried but, if you read the USGS Landsat Surface Reflectance-derived Spectral Indices product guide and the associate processing software guide, you can ascertain that reflectance values are scaled to 16-bit, which is consistent with your observed data range. This processing and rescaling occurs in the LEDAPS (TM4,TM5,ETM+7) or L8SR (OLI) software so, you can track down the USGS documentation for technical details. If you want a 0-1 data range just rescale the data accordingly. One confusing factor is that floating point reflectance values do not always bound 0-1 and when rescaled to 16-bit, in the processing workflow, can end up having large negative numbers. I just bound the lower data range to 0 before rescaling as it is functionally the same as doing this on floating point data.



        As @Mouad Alami pointed out, if you did not request reflectance as part of the data archive and are working with the DN values, it is necessary to apply a simple workflow to convert the data to reflectance. It should be noted that the equations are sensor specific.



        If you want to operate on the DN values directly, here is an R example of DN to reflectance for OLI data that gives the general code syntax.



        oli.reflectance <- function(x, sun.elev = NULL, multiplicative.rescaling = 0.00002, 
        additive.rescaling = -0.100000)
        if(!class(x) %in% c("RasterLayer", "RasterStack"))
        stop( "x must be raster class object" )
        if(is.null(sun.elev))
        stop("Must provide sun elevation angle value from SUN_ELEVATION in metadata")
        refl <- function(x, m, a, se)
        y <- (x * m + a) / sin(as.numeric(se) * pi /180)
        return(y)

        return( refl( x, multiplicative.rescaling, additive.rescaling, sun.elev) )



        Model parameters (arguments)



        • m (additive.rescaling) - Additive rescaling factor (REFLECTANCE_MULT_BAND_x)


        • a (multiplicative.rescaling) - Quantized calibrated standard product pixel values (REFLECTANCE_ADD_BAND_x)


        • se (sun.elev) - sun elevation angle (SUN_ELEVATION)


        The terms "at-sensor" (4,5,7) and "surface" (8) reflectance are synonymous but are used in the context of the specific sensor as the atmospheric correction algorithms are quite different. The tier 2 products are have terrain and radiometric calibration (cross-sensor and temporal) applied making the bands and indices comparable across scenes. However, this type of temporal comparison should always be carried out on the reflectance data.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 9 hours ago

























        answered 10 hours ago









        Jeffrey EvansJeffrey Evans

        22.1k22869




        22.1k22869



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Geographic Information Systems Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgis.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f316749%2flandsat-8-reflectance-values%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            រឿង រ៉ូមេអូ និង ហ្ស៊ុយលីយេ សង្ខេបរឿង តួអង្គ បញ្ជីណែនាំ

            Crop image to path created in TikZ? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Crop an inserted image?TikZ pictures does not appear in posterImage behind and beyond crop marks?Tikz picture as large as possible on A4 PageTransparency vs image compression dilemmaHow to crop background from image automatically?Image does not cropTikzexternal capturing crop marks when externalizing pgfplots?How to include image path that contains a dollar signCrop image with left size given

            Romeo and Juliet ContentsCharactersSynopsisSourcesDate and textThemes and motifsCriticism and interpretationLegacyScene by sceneSee alsoNotes and referencesSourcesExternal linksNavigation menu"Consumer Price Index (estimate) 1800–"10.2307/28710160037-3222287101610.1093/res/II.5.31910.2307/45967845967810.2307/2869925286992510.1525/jams.1982.35.3.03a00050"Dada Masilo: South African dancer who breaks the rules"10.1093/res/os-XV.57.1610.2307/28680942868094"Sweet Sorrow: Mann-Korman's Romeo and Juliet Closes Sept. 5 at MN's Ordway"the original10.2307/45957745957710.1017/CCOL0521570476.009"Ram Leela box office collections hit massive Rs 100 crore, pulverises prediction"Archived"Broadway Revival of Romeo and Juliet, Starring Orlando Bloom and Condola Rashad, Will Close Dec. 8"Archived10.1075/jhp.7.1.04hon"Wherefore art thou, Romeo? To make us laugh at Navy Pier"the original10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.O006772"Ram-leela Review Roundup: Critics Hail Film as Best Adaptation of Romeo and Juliet"Archived10.2307/31946310047-77293194631"Romeo and Juliet get Twitter treatment""Juliet's Nurse by Lois Leveen""Romeo and Juliet: Orlando Bloom's Broadway Debut Released in Theaters for Valentine's Day"Archived"Romeo and Juliet Has No Balcony"10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.O00778110.2307/2867423286742310.1076/enst.82.2.115.959510.1080/00138380601042675"A plague o' both your houses: error in GCSE exam paper forces apology""Juliet of the Five O'Clock Shadow, and Other Wonders"10.2307/33912430027-4321339124310.2307/28487440038-7134284874410.2307/29123140149-661129123144728341M"Weekender Guide: Shakespeare on The Drive""balcony"UK public library membership"romeo"UK public library membership10.1017/CCOL9780521844291"Post-Zionist Critique on Israel and the Palestinians Part III: Popular Culture"10.2307/25379071533-86140377-919X2537907"Capulets and Montagues: UK exam board admit mixing names up in Romeo and Juliet paper"Istoria Novellamente Ritrovata di Due Nobili Amanti2027/mdp.390150822329610820-750X"GCSE exam error: Board accidentally rewrites Shakespeare"10.2307/29176390149-66112917639"Exam board apologises after error in English GCSE paper which confused characters in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet""From Mariotto and Ganozza to Romeo and Guilietta: Metamorphoses of a Renaissance Tale"10.2307/37323537323510.2307/2867455286745510.2307/28678912867891"10 Questions for Taylor Swift"10.2307/28680922868092"Haymarket Theatre""The Zeffirelli Way: Revealing Talk by Florentine Director""Michael Smuin: 1938-2007 / Prolific dance director had showy career"The Life and Art of Edwin BoothRomeo and JulietRomeo and JulietRomeo and JulietRomeo and JulietEasy Read Romeo and JulietRomeo and Julieteeecb12003684p(data)4099369-3n8211610759dbe00d-a9e2-41a3-b2c1-977dd692899302814385X313670221313670221