Poststamps have been created, with improvements from PIPE2D-487. I have posted examples (log scaling) for each of the arc lamps analyzed. In the top row, the defocus is -4, -3.5, and -3 mm. In the middle row, it is -1, 0, and 1 mm. Bottom row: 3, 3.5, and 4mm.

No obvious problems are seen and I will proceed with the analysis of these imags.

For completeness, I am also posting the image ``Subaru_LAM_comparison'', which shows differences in the illumination between Subaru and LAM images. It is not obvious to be what is happening here and is this a reason for concern.

I am reopening again because I discovered that some poststamps were the central spots images were saturated failed. I am going to take some new data with shorter exposures and see what I am doing wrong at the moment. These images were so saturated that they would not be useful for analysis.

Two improvments:

1. Code has been upgraded so that it does not fail with saturated images. The problem arose because I was passing mask values from the DRP into the code, and before I was only passing the mask with only possible values being 0 and 1.

2. I have also substituted the images which were oversaturated with images taken with shorter exposure times.