2025-07-17T05:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 2025-07-18T06:50 AM by Sylvain Herlédan.)
So here are the results when applying the same procedure on ssha_unfiltered for pass 541: https://ftp.odl.bzh/odl/sherleda/maupiti...nfiltered/
As expected there is a lot more noise, and contrary to my assumption the areas masked in the ssha_filtered variable are also masked in ssha_unfiltered.
So I went one step further and repeated the process on the ssha_unedited variable: https://ftp.odl.bzh/odl/sherleda/maupiti..._unedited/
Now the areas are not masked anymore, and I think the lowering can still been seen quite clearly among the noise.
Finally, I regrouped plots for the filtered, unfiltered and unedited ssha and added a plot showing ssha_unedited only in the the areas that are masked in the other variables, to show what potentially useful information has been discarded: https://ftp.odl.bzh/odl/sherleda/maupiti...discarded/
As expected there is a lot more noise, and contrary to my assumption the areas masked in the ssha_filtered variable are also masked in ssha_unfiltered.
So I went one step further and repeated the process on the ssha_unedited variable: https://ftp.odl.bzh/odl/sherleda/maupiti..._unedited/
Now the areas are not masked anymore, and I think the lowering can still been seen quite clearly among the noise.
Finally, I regrouped plots for the filtered, unfiltered and unedited ssha and added a plot showing ssha_unedited only in the the areas that are masked in the other variables, to show what potentially useful information has been discarded: https://ftp.odl.bzh/odl/sherleda/maupiti...discarded/