and standard deviation from EUVI B is ($14.0 \pm 0.9$) Mm, while from A it is ($12.7 \pm 1.2$) Mm. The two widths differ by less than 1.5$\sigma$ so that this measurement is consistent with a circular plume cross section. However, given the small separation angle, a more curtain-like structure cannot be ruled out either. More isolated and prominent plumes need to be analysed at large separation angles to come to a conclusion regarding the cross section of the plumes. It should be mentioned here that we have only considered the circular or simple noncircular cross sections for plumes and we have not taken into account the substructure that is known to exist within plumes [e.g., @DeForest:2007; @DeForest:etal:1997]. Unresolved morphology can mimic a surprising range of other effects including modifying the inferred density (both from photometric density estimates and from line-ratio estimates, in different ways for the two techniques) and the observed scale height.

### Plume and EUV bright points

To investigate the relationship between plumes and EUV bright points, we projected the reconstructed 3D plumes onto two EUVI images. For the data in April, given the small separation angle, only the projection onto EUVI A is plotted in Figure 