This paper reviews the state of the art of protocols for measurement of water-leaving radiance in the context of fiducial reference measurements (FRM) of water reflectance for satellite validation. Measurement of water reflectance requires the measurement of water-leaving radiance and downwelling irradiance just above water. For the former there are four generic families of method, based on: (1) underwater radiometry at fixed depths; or (2) underwater radiometry with vertical profiling; or (3) above-water radiometry with skyglint correction; or (4) on-water radiometry with skylight blocked. Each method is described generically in the FRM context with reference to the measurement equation, documented implementations and the intra-method diversity of deployment platform and practice. Ideal measurement conditions are stated, practical recommendations are provided on best practice and guidelines for estimating the measurement uncertainty are provided for each protocol-related component of the measurement uncertainty budget. The state of the art for measurement of water-leaving radiance is summarized, future perspectives are outlined, and the question of which method is best adapted to various circumstances (water type, wavelength) is discussed. This review is based on practice and papers of the aquatic optics community for the validation of water reflectance estimated from satellite data but can be relevant also for other applications such as the development or validation of algorithms for remote-sensing estimation of water constituents including chlorophyll a concentration, inherent optical properties and related products.

A field intercomparison was conducted at the Acqua Alta Oceanographic Tower (AAOT) in the northern Adriatic Sea, from 9 to 19 July 2018 to assess differences in the accuracy of in- and above-water radiometer measurements used for the validation of ocean colour products. Ten measurement systems were compared. Prior to the intercomparison, the absolute radiometric calibration of all sensors was carried out using the same standards and methods at the same reference laboratory. Measurements were performed under clear sky conditions, relatively low sun zenith angles, moderately low sea state and on the same deployment platform and frame (except in-water systems). The weighted average of five above-water measurements was used as baseline reference for comparisons. For downwelling irradiance ( $E_d$ ), there was generally good agreement between sensors with differences of <6% for most of the sensors over the spectral range 400 nm–665 nm. One sensor exhibited a systematic bias, of up to 11%, due to poor cosine response. For sky radiance ( $L_{sky}$ ) the spectrally averaged difference between optical systems was <2.5% with a root mean square error (RMS) <0.01 mWm⁻² nm⁻¹ sr⁻¹. For total above-water upwelling radiance ( $L_t$ ), the difference was <3.5% with an RMS <0.009 mWm⁻² nm⁻¹ sr⁻¹. For remote-sensing reflectance ( $R_{rs}$ ), the differences between above-water TriOS RAMSES were <3.5% and <2.5% at 443 and 560 nm, respectively, and were <7.5% for some systems at 665 nm. Seabird-Hyperspectral Surface Acquisition System (HyperSAS) sensors were on average within 3.5% at 443 nm, 1% at 560 nm, and 3% at 665 nm. The differences between the weighted mean of the above-water and in-water systems was <15.8% across visible bands. A sensitivity analysis showed that $E_d$ accounted for the largest fraction of the variance in $R_{rs}$ , which suggests that minimizing the errors arising from this measurement is the most important variable in reducing the inter-group differences in $R_{rs}$ . The differences may also be due, in part, to using five of the above-water systems as a reference. To avoid this, in situ normalized water-leaving radiance ( $L_{wn}$ ) was therefore compared to AERONET-OC SeaPRiSM $L_{wn}$ as an alternative reference measurement. For the TriOS-RAMSES and Seabird-HyperSAS sensors the differences were similar across the visible spectra with 4.7% and 4.9%, respectively. The difference between SeaPRiSM $L_{wn}$ and two in-water systems at blue, green and red bands was 11.8%. This was partly due to temporal and spatial differences in sampling between the in-water and above-water systems and possibly due to uncertainties in instrument self-shading for one of the in-water measurements.

This paper reviews the state of the art of protocols for the measurement of downwelling irradiance in the context of Fiducial Reference Measurements (FRM) of water reflectance for satellite validation. The measurement of water reflectance requires the measurement of water-leaving radiance and downwelling irradiance just above water. For the latter, there are four generic families of method, using: (1) an above-water upward-pointing irradiance sensor; (2) an above-water downward-pointing radiance sensor and a reflective plaque; (3) a Sun-pointing radiance sensor (sunphotometer); or (4) an underwater upward-pointing irradiance sensor deployed at different depths. Each method—except for the fourth, which is considered obsolete for the measurement of above-water downwelling irradiance—is described generically in the FRM context with reference to the measurement equation, documented implementations, and the intra-method diversity of deployment platform and practice. Ideal measurement conditions are stated, practical recommendations are provided on best practice, and guidelines for estimating the measurement uncertainty are provided for each protocol-related component of the measurement uncertainty budget. The state of the art for the measurement of downwelling irradiance is summarized, future perspectives are outlined, and key debates such as the use of reflectance plaques with calibrated or uncalibrated radiometers are presented. This review is based on the practice and studies of the aquatic optics community and the validation of water reflectance, but is also relevant to land radiation monitoring and the validation of satellite-derived land surface reflectance.

Earth observation data can help us understand and address some of the grand challenges and threats facing us today as a species and as a planet, for example climate change and its impacts and sustainable use of the Earth’s resources. However, in order to have confidence in earth observation data, measurements made at the surface of the Earth, with the intention of providing verification or validation of satellite-mounted sensor measurements, should be trustworthy and at least of the same high quality as those taken with the satellite sensors themselves. Metrology tells us that in order to be trustworthy, measurements should include an unbroken chain of SI-traceable calibrations and comparisons and full uncertainty budgets for each of the in situ sensors. Until now, this has not been the case for most satellite validation measurements. Therefore, within this context, the European Space Agency (ESA) funded a series of Fiducial Reference Measurements (FRM) projects targeting the validation of satellite data products of the atmosphere, land, and ocean, and setting the framework, standards, and protocols for future satellite validation efforts. The FRM4SOC project was structured to provide this support for evaluating and improving the state of the art in ocean colour radiometry (OCR) and satellite ocean colour validation through a series of comparisons under the auspices of the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS). This followed the recommendations from the International Ocean Colour Coordinating Group’s white paper and supports the CEOS ocean colour virtual constellation. The main objective was to establish and maintain SI traceable ground-based FRM for satellite ocean colour and thus make a fundamental contribution to the European system for monitoring the Earth (Copernicus). This paper outlines the FRM4SOC project structure, objectives and methodology and highlights the main results and achievements of the project: (1) An international SI-traceable comparison of irradiance and radiance sources used for OCR calibration that set measurement, calibration and uncertainty estimation protocols and indicated good agreement between the participating calibration laboratories from around the world; (2) An international SI-traceable laboratory and outdoor comparison of radiometers used for satellite ocean colour validation that set OCR calibration and comparison protocols; (3) A major review and update to the protocols for taking irradiance and radiance field measurements for satellite ocean colour validation, with particular focus on aspects of data acquisition and processing that must be considered in the estimation of measurement uncertainty and guidelines for good practice; (4) A technical comparison of the main radiometers used globally for satellite ocean colour validation bringing radiometer manufacturers together around the same table for the first time to discuss instrument characterisation and its documentation, as needed for measurement uncertainty estimation; (5) Two major international side-by-side field intercomparisons of multiple ocean colour radiometers, one on the Atlantic Meridional Transect (AMT) oceanographic cruise, and the other on the Acqua Alta oceanographic tower in the Gulf of Venice; (6) Impact and promotion of FRM within the ocean colour community, including a scientific road map for the FRM-based future of satellite ocean colour validation and vicarious calibration (based on the findings of the FRM4SOC project, the consensus from two major international FRM4SOC workshops and previous literature, including the IOCCG white paper on in situ ocean colour radiometry).

The Sentinel-3 mission launched its first satellite Sentinel-3A in 2016 to be followed by Sentinel-3B and Sentinel-3C to provide long-term operational measurements over Earth. Sentinel-3A and 3B are in full operational status, allowing global coverage in less than two days, usable to monitor optical water quality and provide data for environmental studies. However, due to limited ground truth data, the product quality has not yet been analyzed in detail with the fiducial reference measurement (FRM) dataset. Here, we use the fully characterized ground truth FRM dataset for validating Sentinel-3A Ocean and Land Colour Instrument (OLCI) radiometric products over optically complex Estonian inland waters and Baltic Sea coastal areas. As consistency between satellite and local data depends on uncertainty in field measurements, filtering of the in situ data has been made based on the uncertainty for the final comparison. We have compared various atmospheric correction methods and found POLYMER (POLYnomial-based algorithm applied to MERIS) to be most suitable for optically complex waters under study in terms of product accuracy, amount of usable data and also being least influenced by the adjacency effect.

We describe a method to evaluate an uncertainly budget for the in situ Ocean Colour Radiometric measurements. A Monte Carlo approach is chosen to propagate the measurement uncertainty inputs through the measurements model. The measurement model is designed to address instrument characteristics and uncertainty associated with them. We present the results for a particular example when the radiometers were fully characterised and then use the same data to show a case when such characterisation is missing. This, depending on the measurement and the wavelength, can increase the uncertainty value significantly; for example, the downwelling irradiance at 442.5 nm with fully characterised instruments can reach uncertainty values of 1%, but for the instruments without such characterisation, that value could increase to almost 7%. The uncertainty values presented in this paper are not final, as some of the environmental contributors were not fully evaluated. The main conclusion of this work are the significance of thoughtful instrument characterisation and correction for the most significant uncertainty contributions in order to achieve a lower measurements uncertainty value.