UPDATE FROM MABULA
I have had a very rough 2 months unfortunately health wise. I was struck 3x in a row with bacterial infections. The second infection occurred  after a routine hospital checkup and I became very sick. I had to rest and take a lot of antibiotics. Once I was recovering and restarting work 1 month ago, I again became sick. The infection was not yet gone, so even more antibiotics and rest was needed. Needless to say, it took a lot of my energy and I needed a lot of rest.
Finally, the infection is really gone and my energy is coming back step-by-step now and I have started work again. I am terribly sorry to have kept you waiting for support. I will address all outstanding questions and e-mails step-by step and will be on the forum daily from today.
APP 2.0.0-beta47 will come soon as well, a lot of work was already completed before I became very ill, so the release is also nearly ready for you. Beta47 will be much faster actually. Many workflows will be more than 2x faster, mosaics can even be 10x faster than before because registration really received a major boost... all compared to beta46. Â Before I release it, I will make sure that everything is working properly and then I will release it.
When one panel is say 20 hours of data and another adjoining one is 1 hour of data and the object of interest is in both panels, how does APP handle it? Will the higher SNR data be favoured in the final mosaic or is the high and low SNR data averaged? The 1 hour panel is to give some 'breathing space' around the target for compositional options.
The higher SNR panel will likely be chosen as the reference I think. The result will be what you would expect, more noise in the panels with less data.
Hi,
An interesting question and I'm not sure I have the mathematical nous to give a full answer. Â
However as I understand your question, you have two overlapping mosaic panels, A and B.  For the area of the final image covered only by the area of Panel A there can be no improvement in SNR (or noise reduction) as there is no data from which to accumulate additional signal. Equally, for the area of the final image covered only by the area of Panel B, there can be no improvement in SNR (or noise reduction) as again there is no source of additional signal.  Lastly, in the area that is covered by both Panel A and Panel B I think it reasonable to expect that there might be a small SNR improvement /noise reduction as there is additional data available.
The interesting question then (for which I am not certain of the answer) is whether APP would actually show an improved SNR measurement in the final combined image bearing in mind that the SNR given by APP would be for the combined image area not for the specific areas sourced from Panel A, Panel B, and Panels A and B. For me the answer probably depends on the degree of overlap between the two panels. If the area of overlap is large the total area of the final image will be dominated by the area for which we might anticipate a small noise reduction.
There is also a question (and possibly actually the more important) of whether in post-processing the area of the combined image that is most noisy can be presented in such a way that it does not visually detract from the areas of the image where the noise is least!
I wish I could give a more definitive answer but there's my reasoning for what its worth.
Regards
Mike
