All Tables

Table 1: Parameters of the computer-simulated LBT raw images (Fig. 1).
Table 2: Restoration errors of the reconstructions using the galaxy test object shown in Fig. 1 (see also Table 1) with total magnitudes of $J=16.0^{\rm m}$ , $J=17.0^{\rm m}$ , and $J=18.0^{\rm m}$ . The restoration errors listed are averages of 10 statistically independent LBT data sets (see text).
Table 3: Parameters of our laboratory simulation.
Table 4: Restoration errors of the reconstructions obtained with the RL, OSEM, and BB methods from the Fourier-masked laboratory LBT raw images.
Table 5: Computer simulation with space-variant PSFs (Fig. 7): magnitudes of the stars reconstructed with the space-variant BB (sv. BB) and the conventional BB (conv. BB) methods, and the differences ( $\Delta$ ) between the reconstructed and original star magnitudes. The values show that the deviations from the true magnitudes are on average $\sim$ 4 times smaller in the reconstruction obtained with the space-variant BB method.
Table B.1: Restauration errors of the reconstructions obtained with the RL, OSEM, and BB methods from the computer-simulated LBT raw images of the galaxy (see Table 1) without Fourier-masking (see Sect. 3.2).
Table B.2: Restauration errors of the reconstructions obtained with the RL, OSEM, and BB methods from the laboratory LBT raw images without Fourier-masking (see Sect. 4.2).