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. A 21, 1942 (2004); 22, 866 (2005) ], are critically reviewed and analyzed. The authors argue that the model, now questioned by Edström [ J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 24, 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.
© 2007 Optical Society of America
Original Manuscript: August 17, 2006
Manuscript Accepted: August 30, 2006
Vol. 2, Iss. 3 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics
Li Yang, Stanley J. Miklavcic, and Björn Kruse, "Qualifying the arguments used in the derivation of the revised Kubelka-Munk theory: reply," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 24, 557-560 (2007)