Remove the application of Rayleigh correction above 0.8 micron on the Geo sats

[adybbroe]

This PR removes the attempt to apply Rayleigh correction above 0.8 micron on the Geo sats, where it has no effect anyhow.

It also adds back the rayleigh correction at two places, both for the natual-color RGB on ABI and AHI, where it was commented out - don't know for what reason it was taken away? Maybe that needs clarification?

This PR is similar to #2970 - that did the same for VIIRS

• Closes #xxxx
• Tests added
• Fully documented
• Add your name to AUTHORS.md if not there already

[adybbroe]

Here the spectral responses for the three sats affected, for reference:

[adybbroe]

@gerritholl and @pnuu You make imagery from both AHI and ABI right?
Do you use the nartual-color RGB? In case you do, is there a reason not to include the Rayleigh correction on the 0.6 micron channel? I guess the effect is really small, but to be consistent with how we do elsewhere I think it should also be corrected for the false-color RGB?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.10%. Comparing base (573de5e) to head (4a8d8ff).
Report is 21 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2972   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.10%   96.10%           
=======================================
  Files         377      377           
  Lines       55134    55134           
=======================================
  Hits        52984    52984           
  Misses       2150     2150           

Flag	Coverage Δ
behaviourtests	3.94% <ø> (ø)
unittests	96.19% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 11743751123

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

• For more information on this, see Tracking coverage changes with pull request builds.
• To avoid this issue with future PRs, see these Recommended CI Configurations.
• For a quick fix, rebase this PR at GitHub. Your next report should be accurate.

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall first build on bugfix-rayleigh-corrections-geo-sats at 96.206%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 11723344367:	96.2%
Covered Lines:	53228
Relevant Lines:	55327

---

💛 - Coveralls

[gerritholl]

@adybbroe We process ABI and AHI, but we produce only one RGB (airmass), so have no experience with Rayleigh correction for those sensors.

This would be a good case to test our image comparison tests! See https://github.com/pytroll/image-comparison-tests-dev/pull/2 and #2912

[mraspaud]

have we ever applied rayleigh correction to natural_colors?

[pnuu]

have we ever applied rayleigh correction to natural_colors?

No, I don't think we have.

[adybbroe]

have we ever applied rayleigh correction to natural_colors?

I just saw that it was there but commented out. So, I suspect it was at some point?

[adybbroe]

Can it be for computational speed it is avoided (and the fact that it doesn't probably have a big positive/negative effect either or)?

[mraspaud]

Lgtm