Thanks to A-team and uniquorn for the heavy lifting on neXtSIM.
The amount of change in just one hour in the two frames of the top image are hard to believe as being anything close to realistic. The ice could not possibly have changed that much in one hour. Are the date and time stamps correct? Or does the methodology allow for large variation between images taken just one hour apart?
Not complaining, just trying to understand. Even if neXtSIM images exaggerate variation, that is OK as long as the exaggeration is consistent and therefore can be accounted for in interpretation. But if inconsistent, such as big differences in how the method distorts data for images just one hour apart, then interpretation becomes almost impossible because you won't know what degree of exaggeration to account for. I'm rooting for neXtSIM as being a superbly informative monitoring tool if it comes with a stable frame of reference for how to interpret images. Otherwise it would just be pictures that can mean different things at different days or hours, i.e. just images without much meaning.