Concur with @Macan above. Just downloaded my week's dives from Key Largo, and the difference is quite apparent on the deep wrecks.
The 35% Surfacing GF that was recorded in the SW log for printing can be found somewhere very close to surfacing, by scrolling on the graph on Desktop Cloud. Yet GF99 as plotted on the graph contributes to rise for a minute or so as the software processes previous ascent data. I choose to record on my paper log the peak GF99 on that curve, until the expected descent in the curve from surfacing offgassing commences. As noted above, on a deeper rec dive, the difference can be as much as 15%, and my peak for one of the Vandenberg dives was 50%.
There just seems to be a lag in the GF99 display, as the peak GF99 and the Surfacing GF recorded for logging never agree. Peak plotted GF99 seems to be very close to SurGF as noted just before ascent, but I'm working from memory there.
The 35% Surfacing GF that was recorded in the SW log for printing can be found somewhere very close to surfacing, by scrolling on the graph on Desktop Cloud. Yet GF99 as plotted on the graph contributes to rise for a minute or so as the software processes previous ascent data. I choose to record on my paper log the peak GF99 on that curve, until the expected descent in the curve from surfacing offgassing commences. As noted above, on a deeper rec dive, the difference can be as much as 15%, and my peak for one of the Vandenberg dives was 50%.
There just seems to be a lag in the GF99 display, as the peak GF99 and the Surfacing GF recorded for logging never agree. Peak plotted GF99 seems to be very close to SurGF as noted just before ascent, but I'm working from memory there.