Abstract
The fundamental assumptions made in the revised Kubelka-Munk (KM) model of light propagation in scattering and absorptive media, recently proposed [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A21, 1942 (2004); 22, 866 (2005)], are critically reviewed and analyzed. The authors argue that the model, now questioned by Edström [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A24, 548 (2007)] is well founded on physical grounds and consistent with the original KM model, which has been the cornerstone of light propagation studies and utilized for more than half a century.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
