Every field of study and practice has established terminology and usage. It generally does not make sense to apply the jargon of one to another. For instance, suppose you take photos with a "720nm" bandpass filter. "720nm" may be considered a misnomer because some shorter wavelengths and most longer wavelengths are allowed through. But for the sake of efficiency of communication, it's sufficient to refer to them as 720nm filters. Those who are interested may refer to the transmission charts.

Full-Spectrum Photography adequately communicates the concept of light capture beyond the visible and is understood by most people. The use of the word Photography excludes wavelengths that are generally not considered to be light, such as X-rays, gamma rays, and heat. The recording of other spectra often have their own specific terms, such as radiography.

Some options to consider:

• Visible and Near Infrared (VNIR). String together the specific spectra you're interested in. UV + V + NIR + ETC.

• Specify the nominal wavelengths of the filters. Wonder why scientists don't object that the filters are imperfect and allow other wavelengths through.

• Dual spectrum. For photography that excludes certain spectra. Examples: blue + IR and UV+IR.

• Expanded Spectrum, Extended Spectrum, Broad Spectrum, etc.

• NDVI (Normalized difference vegetation index) – For photography used to evaluate plant health.

• Ghost Hunting. I'd consider this phrase, just to see how people respond. If they insist that ghosts don't exist, I'd show them some flare ghosts:

  

• Tell them it really is "full spectrum", they just can't see all of it.