The authors reply to the comment by R. P. Steer discussing the reasons for their incorrect assignment of the luminescence decay of the novel compound 5,10,15-(triphenyl),20-[ethynyl-(4-carboxy)phenyl]tetrabenzoporphyrinate Zn(ii) (PETBP). Further DFT and TDDFT calculations have been performed on the compound to investigate the possibility of a direct S2-S0 decay instead of a S2-S1 conversion with a subsequent emission to the ground state. In addition, the presence of traces of very luminescent contaminants of the ring-opened type has been considered on the grounds of calculated absorption and fluorescence spectra. The results of these investigations confirm that the S2-S0 emission reported in the commented paper is not attributable to the target molecule but rather to a neglected luminescent impurity.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.