1D two disk model versus 2D two disk model

We performed a 1D Constrained Two Disk fit and a 2D Two Disk fit on two galaxies so we could compare the respective results. For IC 3322A J the $\mu_{n-k}$ of the 1D fit is somewhat smaller than the 2D fit, but within its errors. The values of $z_n$ are quite close and can be considered to be a robust match. $f_z$ is for the 1D fit higher than the 2D fit, but this value has a high error range. For NGC 5981 J the $\mu_{n-k}$ value matches better, but $z_n$ is much higher, while $f_z$ is also quite higher in the 1D fit. These higher values are somewhat surprising as one might expect the quadrasized average galaxy to flatten and smoothen the profile as it takes averages of all four sides, but the opposite is the case in our results.
Although the results of the 1D and the 2D fit do not deviate much, the results of the 2D fit are an average wherein the contribution of the individual cuts are weighted to their quality to fit the model in comparison with the other cuts. This is not the case for the 1D Two Disk model. Profiles had to be removed to acquire representative thick disk parameters for the average. This selection, although appropriate enough, gives equal weight to each profile for calculating the average while it is impossible to make a weighting depending on the quality of the profile. This shows in the large range of parameter results. The most important conclusion from the comparison is that the 2D Two Disk fit gives similar results as the 1D Two Disk Fit, thus confirming the quality of the 2D Two Disk fit results.