SplitCFA, an advantage in normal RGB imaging?

[Buzz]

I'm working through the DSLR linear processing workflow and came across SplitCFA.

I normally do LRGB imaging and wondered if there is an advantage in, after calibration, generating separate RGB files and separately registering and integrating them, as one would LRGB files?  I realise that it makes sense to strip off the L* component and do the deconvolve on that but I was just thinking.....

I have seen the posts on using SplitCFA on NB imaging - this question is relating to normal RGB imaging.

[pfile]

i don't think so - basically this will give you the two G channels as separate files. just about the only thing i can think of that would be an advantage is that if you have a stuck pixel in one of the two G pixels in a bayer quad, any normal debayering method will destroy the other (good) G pixel since the two G pixels are averaged together by the debayering step. if you used SplitCFA you'd then be able to reject that stuck pixel during integration, thus preserving the G pixel from that quad. but i think this is a pretty minor effect - if you've dithered you'll have good data for that particular pixel of the sky in a different image.

rob

[Buzz]

thanks Rob - that makes a lot of sense, I had forgotten about the two greens. I really should really write RGGB to remind myself each time.