images 
that th 
Analysi 
improve 
be obse 
By anal 
the use 
notice 
and con 
occurs 
new euc 
in Figu 
proport 
them si 
class, 
charact 
other m 
  
a) IR b) 2R a) Vegetation b) Soil 
The rea 
within 
of the 
forest 
additioi 
provide: 
   
Table 4 
first tl 
used. 
c) 3R c) Shadow 
Figure 4.3 - Synthetic bands generated 
by the CLS method: a) 
Vegetation Band; b) Soil 
Band; c) Shadow Band. 
  
  
   
Table 4. 
e) 5R f) 7R Canonica 
  
Figure 4.1 - Landsat TM image (values converted 
to reflectance): a) IR; b) ?R: 
C) 3R; d) 4R; e) 5B; f£) 7R 
  
a) Vegetation b) Soil Soil 
  
STUDY AREA: "ITAPEVA" TM: 07/18/84 
LEGEND 
- B= EUCALYPTUS 
ej] ®-S0IL 
4- SHADOW 
  
  
Table 4, 
original 
4R, 5R) : 
  
  
  
  
  
\ Y / | 
» es c) Shadow New E. 
otc Old E 
Q 45 = 0.80 145 1.50 
WAVELENGTH ( um) 
  
Figure 4.2 - Spectral signatures os eucalyptus, Figure 4.4 - Synthetic bands generated Average 
soil and shadow referring to the by the WLS method: a) 
study area "ITAPEVA" (TM data). Vegetation Band; b) Soil 
Band; c) Shadow Band. 
  
  
  
262