matplotlib-devel Mailing List for matplotlib

Michael Droettboom wrote:
> Ahh -- 0.91 avoided this by using non-antialiased rendering by default 
> for pcolor as well as pcolormesh. That's probably what Rob is seeing 
> when he went from 0.91 to 0.98.
I suspected that.
> 
> Of course, non-antialiased rendering has its own quality limitations, 
> and it only applies to the bitmap backends. The moire pattern still 
> appears in (for example) a pdf viewed with Acrobat Reader without the 
> edge workaround.
True. Still, it might be that turning off antialiasing is part of the 
best compromise for some backends. We weren't getting complaints with 
0.91, as far as I recall. There may be speed considerations here also.
> 
> Eric -- maybe we should experiment with different values for the edge 
> width to find a good compromise. Also, it might be good to add a 
Yes, this is worth some more experimentation. A problem is that the 
edge width is specified in points, and the effect of this will depend on 
backend and scaling. If it turns out that there is an optimal value for 
each backend then we could pass in a special value for this case, say 
-1, which would be intercepted by the backend and converted to whatever 
works for that backend.
As you note, the problem is made even more complex by the fact that 
different programs may render the vector graphics (pdf, ps, svg) 
differently.
Someone must have already sorted all this out for some software project, 
somewhere. Does cairo handle it better? I have not looked yet.
> regression test example where the edge workaround introduces noticeable 
> negative artifacts. quadmesh_demo.py (with its built-in smoothness) 
> doesn't really highlight the problems with that approach.
Yes, a really good set of test cases would help.
Eric
> 
> Cheers,
> Mike
> 
> Michael Droettboom wrote:
>> Ok -- sorry about that. It looked pretty good on the quadmesh_demo 
>> example, but I suppose that's just by accident due to the nature of 
>> the data. By this assessment, we should probably back out this hack 
>> in pcolormesh as well.
>>
>> Curiously, though, Rob says this is new behavior...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mike
>>
>> Eric Firing wrote:
>> 
>>> Michael Droettboom wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Rob Hetland wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> When I do a pcolor, there are white lines between the patches that 
>>>>> cause strange moray patterns, even when saved to a png. The 
>>>>> attached sample shows what I mean. Notice the strange coffee-cup 
>>>>> ring, where the pattern goes away. This is new behavior. 
>>>>> Unfortunately, I haven't been paying enough attention to the devel 
>>>>> list to know what the changes that cause this might be.
>>>>> 
>>>> The quads need to be enlarged by about 1 pixel, and the easiest way 
>>>> to do this is to give them an edge of width 1 pixel. The pcolormesh 
>>>> code has had this fix for a while, but it was overlooked for 
>>>> pcolor. (Both of which were virtually rewritten for 0.98, which is 
>>>> why this is a regression from 0.91).
>>>>
>>>> I have fixed this in SVN.
>>>> 
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> Not exactly. This is a very old problem and an old attempted 
>>> solution. I struggled with it a long time ago, and among the 
>>> various combinations of backends and antialiasing settings, I never 
>>> found a completely satisfactory solution. I don't know what the best 
>>> solution will be, but a linewidth of 1 point is definitely not it. 
>>> It is fundamentally wrong--expanding the patch dimensions by 1/144 
>>> inch, so that they overlap--and consequently creates its own 
>>> artifacts. If you run the attached script and look at the ps output, 
>>> you will see artifacts in the rectangle corners, and some of the tick 
>>> marks will be more misplaced than they used to be relative to the 
>>> rectangle boundaries.
>>>
>>> I'm sorry I don't have a good solution right now and can't look at it 
>>> in detail immediately, and I don't mean to dump more work on you. 
>>> Let's just consider the issue as open for discussion and 
>>> investigation. I can try to get back to it later.
>>>
>>> (It is conceivable that a thinner linewidth will be an adequate 
>>> compromise--still a hack, but maybe acceptable--although the last 
>>> time I worked on this problem, long before 0.98, I could not get it 
>>> to work well under all circumstances.)
>>>
>>> Eric
>>> 
>>
>> 
> 

Ahh -- 0.91 avoided this by using non-antialiased rendering by default 
for pcolor as well as pcolormesh. That's probably what Rob is seeing 
when he went from 0.91 to 0.98.
Of course, non-antialiased rendering has its own quality limitations, 
and it only applies to the bitmap backends. The moire pattern still 
appears in (for example) a pdf viewed with Acrobat Reader without the 
edge workaround.
Eric -- maybe we should experiment with different values for the edge 
width to find a good compromise. Also, it might be good to add a 
regression test example where the edge workaround introduces noticeable 
negative artifacts. quadmesh_demo.py (with its built-in smoothness) 
doesn't really highlight the problems with that approach.
Cheers,
Mike
Michael Droettboom wrote:
> Ok -- sorry about that. It looked pretty good on the quadmesh_demo 
> example, but I suppose that's just by accident due to the nature of the 
> data. By this assessment, we should probably back out this hack in 
> pcolormesh as well.
>
> Curiously, though, Rob says this is new behavior...
>
> Cheers,
> Mike
>
> Eric Firing wrote:
> 
>> Michael Droettboom wrote:
>> 
>>> Rob Hetland wrote:
>>> 
>>>> When I do a pcolor, there are white lines between the patches that 
>>>> cause strange moray patterns, even when saved to a png. The 
>>>> attached sample shows what I mean. Notice the strange coffee-cup 
>>>> ring, where the pattern goes away. This is new behavior. 
>>>> Unfortunately, I haven't been paying enough attention to the devel 
>>>> list to know what the changes that cause this might be.
>>>> 
>>> The quads need to be enlarged by about 1 pixel, and the easiest way 
>>> to do this is to give them an edge of width 1 pixel. The pcolormesh 
>>> code has had this fix for a while, but it was overlooked for pcolor. 
>>> (Both of which were virtually rewritten for 0.98, which is why this 
>>> is a regression from 0.91).
>>>
>>> I have fixed this in SVN.
>>> 
>> Mike,
>>
>> Not exactly. This is a very old problem and an old attempted 
>> solution. I struggled with it a long time ago, and among the various 
>> combinations of backends and antialiasing settings, I never found a 
>> completely satisfactory solution. I don't know what the best solution 
>> will be, but a linewidth of 1 point is definitely not it. It is 
>> fundamentally wrong--expanding the patch dimensions by 1/144 inch, so 
>> that they overlap--and consequently creates its own artifacts. If you 
>> run the attached script and look at the ps output, you will see 
>> artifacts in the rectangle corners, and some of the tick marks will be 
>> more misplaced than they used to be relative to the rectangle boundaries.
>>
>> I'm sorry I don't have a good solution right now and can't look at it 
>> in detail immediately, and I don't mean to dump more work on you. 
>> Let's just consider the issue as open for discussion and 
>> investigation. I can try to get back to it later.
>>
>> (It is conceivable that a thinner linewidth will be an adequate 
>> compromise--still a hack, but maybe acceptable--although the last time 
>> I worked on this problem, long before 0.98, I could not get it to work 
>> well under all circumstances.)
>>
>> Eric
>> 
>
> 
-- 
Michael Droettboom
Science Software Branch
Operations and Engineering Division
Space Telescope Science Institute
Operated by AURA for NASA

Ok -- sorry about that. It looked pretty good on the quadmesh_demo 
example, but I suppose that's just by accident due to the nature of the 
data. By this assessment, we should probably back out this hack in 
pcolormesh as well.
Curiously, though, Rob says this is new behavior...
Cheers,
Mike
Eric Firing wrote:
> Michael Droettboom wrote:
>> Rob Hetland wrote:
>>> When I do a pcolor, there are white lines between the patches that 
>>> cause strange moray patterns, even when saved to a png. The 
>>> attached sample shows what I mean. Notice the strange coffee-cup 
>>> ring, where the pattern goes away. This is new behavior. 
>>> Unfortunately, I haven't been paying enough attention to the devel 
>>> list to know what the changes that cause this might be.
>> The quads need to be enlarged by about 1 pixel, and the easiest way 
>> to do this is to give them an edge of width 1 pixel. The pcolormesh 
>> code has had this fix for a while, but it was overlooked for pcolor. 
>> (Both of which were virtually rewritten for 0.98, which is why this 
>> is a regression from 0.91).
>>
>> I have fixed this in SVN.
>
> Mike,
>
> Not exactly. This is a very old problem and an old attempted 
> solution. I struggled with it a long time ago, and among the various 
> combinations of backends and antialiasing settings, I never found a 
> completely satisfactory solution. I don't know what the best solution 
> will be, but a linewidth of 1 point is definitely not it. It is 
> fundamentally wrong--expanding the patch dimensions by 1/144 inch, so 
> that they overlap--and consequently creates its own artifacts. If you 
> run the attached script and look at the ps output, you will see 
> artifacts in the rectangle corners, and some of the tick marks will be 
> more misplaced than they used to be relative to the rectangle boundaries.
>
> I'm sorry I don't have a good solution right now and can't look at it 
> in detail immediately, and I don't mean to dump more work on you. 
> Let's just consider the issue as open for discussion and 
> investigation. I can try to get back to it later.
>
> (It is conceivable that a thinner linewidth will be an adequate 
> compromise--still a hack, but maybe acceptable--although the last time 
> I worked on this problem, long before 0.98, I could not get it to work 
> well under all circumstances.)
>
> Eric
-- 
Michael Droettboom
Science Software Branch
Operations and Engineering Division
Space Telescope Science Institute
Operated by AURA for NASA

Michael Droettboom wrote:
> Rob Hetland wrote:
>> When I do a pcolor, there are white lines between the patches that 
>> cause strange moray patterns, even when saved to a png. The attached 
>> sample shows what I mean. Notice the strange coffee-cup ring, where 
>> the pattern goes away. This is new behavior. Unfortunately, I 
>> haven't been paying enough attention to the devel list to know what 
>> the changes that cause this might be.
> The quads need to be enlarged by about 1 pixel, and the easiest way to 
> do this is to give them an edge of width 1 pixel. The pcolormesh code 
> has had this fix for a while, but it was overlooked for pcolor. (Both 
> of which were virtually rewritten for 0.98, which is why this is a 
> regression from 0.91).
> 
> I have fixed this in SVN.
Mike,
Not exactly. This is a very old problem and an old attempted solution. 
 I struggled with it a long time ago, and among the various 
combinations of backends and antialiasing settings, I never found a 
completely satisfactory solution. I don't know what the best solution 
will be, but a linewidth of 1 point is definitely not it. It is 
fundamentally wrong--expanding the patch dimensions by 1/144 inch, so 
that they overlap--and consequently creates its own artifacts. If you 
run the attached script and look at the ps output, you will see 
artifacts in the rectangle corners, and some of the tick marks will be 
more misplaced than they used to be relative to the rectangle boundaries.
I'm sorry I don't have a good solution right now and can't look at it in 
detail immediately, and I don't mean to dump more work on you. Let's 
just consider the issue as open for discussion and investigation. I can 
try to get back to it later.
(It is conceivable that a thinner linewidth will be an adequate 
compromise--still a hack, but maybe acceptable--although the last time I 
worked on this problem, long before 0.98, I could not get it to work 
well under all circumstances.)
Eric

Michael Droettboom wrote:
>> get_frame and get_patch deprecated - just use "patch" and "frame",
>> formerly "axesPatch" and "axesFrame". We'll add a deprecation warning
>> to get_frame and keep axesPatch and axesFrame around as aliases.
>>
>> Michael -- IIRC you added the axesFrame. Was this to support to
>> separate drawing of the edge and face since our patches don't
>> (currently) have support for separate alpha channels for edge and
>> face. Or are there additional motivations for the projection
>> backends?
I did it two years ago, r2415.
> It was so that the zorder could be something like:
> 
> axesPatch
> ... data ...
> ... grids ...
> axesFrame
> 
This was the main motivation, but the secondary thought was that it 
would facilitate doing something that people ask for now and then, which 
is allow one to specify only some axes boundaries instead of the whole 
rectangle. A common plot style is to have axes lines on the left and 
bottom, for example; but sometimes people want only a line on the 
bottom, and I am sure that sooner or later someone will want top and 
right, or top and bottom, or whatever. Obviously, I never got around to 
putting that option in place.
> It prevents data from overlapping the axes frame. This was most crucial 
> in the PDF and Cairo backends where the clipping rectangle is 
> pixel-aligned but the axes frame and background are not necessarily. In 
> the Agg backend, where we have more fine control, it actually doesn't 
> really matter.
No, I think it matters on all backends, especially if the frame is 
thick. Whether the zorder above is what one wants may be a matter of 
taste, but on any backend it will make a difference in the way the plot 
looks.
Eric
> 
> Cheers,
> Mike
> 

John Hunter wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 9:23 AM, John Hunter <jd...@gm...> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Michael Droettboom <md...@st...> wrote:
>> 
>>> "rectangle" might be a bad name for "axesPatch" since it can be a circle for
>>> polar plots, and ellipse for geo plots etc.
>>> 
>> Ahh yes, mind still mushy even after a good night's sleep. "patch" or
>> "background" I feel about the same. "patch" isn't terribly mnemonic
>> unless you are a matlab user, but at least it points you to the base
>> class and is most consistent with the current name, in which the
>> "figure" part of "figurePatch" is simply redundant.
>> 
>
> I was just confused by the method "get_axes_patch" which looks like an
> accessor method for the axesPatch, but instead is the method that
> generates a new rectangle (or circle or whatever). To add to the
> confusion, there is the method get_frame, which returns the axesPatch
> even though there is also an axesFrame (which was created by
> get_axes_patch). Is you head spinning like mine?
> 
Yes, I saw that when I added the transparent kwarg and was also 
confused, but thought best to leave it at the time... ;)
> How about:
>
> _generate_axes_patch to replace get_axes_patch - internal class use only
>
> get_frame and get_patch deprecated - just use "patch" and "frame",
> formerly "axesPatch" and "axesFrame". We'll add a deprecation warning
> to get_frame and keep axesPatch and axesFrame around as aliases.
>
> Michael -- IIRC you added the axesFrame. Was this to support to
> separate drawing of the edge and face since our patches don't
> (currently) have support for separate alpha channels for edge and
> face. Or are there additional motivations for the projection
> backends?
It was so that the zorder could be something like:
 axesPatch
 ... data ...
 ... grids ...
 axesFrame
It prevents data from overlapping the axes frame. This was most crucial 
in the PDF and Cairo backends where the clipping rectangle is 
pixel-aligned but the axes frame and background are not necessarily. In 
the Agg backend, where we have more fine control, it actually doesn't 
really matter.
Cheers,
Mike
-- 
Michael Droettboom
Science Software Branch
Operations and Engineering Division
Space Telescope Science Institute
Operated by AURA for NASA

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 9:23 AM, John Hunter <jd...@gm...> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Michael Droettboom <md...@st...> wrote:
>> "rectangle" might be a bad name for "axesPatch" since it can be a circle for
>> polar plots, and ellipse for geo plots etc.
>
> Ahh yes, mind still mushy even after a good night's sleep. "patch" or
> "background" I feel about the same. "patch" isn't terribly mnemonic
> unless you are a matlab user, but at least it points you to the base
> class and is most consistent with the current name, in which the
> "figure" part of "figurePatch" is simply redundant.
I was just confused by the method "get_axes_patch" which looks like an
accessor method for the axesPatch, but instead is the method that
generates a new rectangle (or circle or whatever). To add to the
confusion, there is the method get_frame, which returns the axesPatch
even though there is also an axesFrame (which was created by
get_axes_patch). Is you head spinning like mine?
How about:
 _generate_axes_patch to replace get_axes_patch - internal class use only
 get_frame and get_patch deprecated - just use "patch" and "frame",
formerly "axesPatch" and "axesFrame". We'll add a deprecation warning
to get_frame and keep axesPatch and axesFrame around as aliases.
Michael -- IIRC you added the axesFrame. Was this to support to
separate drawing of the edge and face since our patches don't
(currently) have support for separate alpha channels for edge and
face. Or are there additional motivations for the projection
backends?
JDH

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Michael Droettboom <md...@st...> wrote:
> "rectangle" might be a bad name for "axesPatch" since it can be a circle for
> polar plots, and ellipse for geo plots etc.
Ahh yes, mind still mushy even after a good night's sleep. "patch" or
"background" I feel about the same. "patch" isn't terribly mnemonic
unless you are a matlab user, but at least it points you to the base
class and is most consistent with the current name, in which the
"figure" part of "figurePatch" is simply redundant.
patch, going once, going twice,...
JDH

"rectangle" might be a bad name for "axesPatch" since it can be a circle 
for polar plots, and ellipse for geo plots etc.
Cheers,
Mike
John Hunter wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Stéfan van der Walt <st...@su...> wrote:
> 
>> 2008年6月25日 Michael Droettboom <md...@st...>:
>> 
>>> Maybe this should be made an option on the "transparent" kwarg to savefig,
>>> something like:
>>>
>>> transparent = 'figure' | 'figure_and_axes'
>>>
>>> Or is that just making things too complicated?
>>> 
>> Those options would both be very handy.
>> 
>
> Stefan -- just for a little background. The figure has a
> matplotlib.patches.Rectangle instance called "figurePatch" and the
> axes has a Rectangle instance called axesPatch. You can set any
> property on them directly (facecolor, edgecolor, linewidth, linestyle,
> alpha). Eg,
>
> fig = plt.figure()
> fig.figurePatch.set_alpha(0.5)
> ax = fig.add_subplot(111)
> ax.axesPatch.set_alpha(0.5)
>
> Michael's transparent kwarg is just a helper function to do this
> automatically at save time w/o affecting the screen rendered figure.
> For stylistic reasons, I'd like a new name for figurePatch and
> rectanglePatch. "background", "rectangle" and "patch" would all be
> nicer. I'm inclined toward "rectangle" -- I think I'll just put an
> alias in Figure and Axes unless someone has a better idea.
>
> JDH
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Mat...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
> 
-- 
Michael Droettboom
Science Software Branch
Operations and Engineering Division
Space Telescope Science Institute
Operated by AURA for NASA

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Stéfan van der Walt <st...@su...> wrote:
> 2008年6月25日 Michael Droettboom <md...@st...>:
>> Maybe this should be made an option on the "transparent" kwarg to savefig,
>> something like:
>>
>> transparent = 'figure' | 'figure_and_axes'
>>
>> Or is that just making things too complicated?
>
> Those options would both be very handy.
Stefan -- just for a little background. The figure has a
matplotlib.patches.Rectangle instance called "figurePatch" and the
axes has a Rectangle instance called axesPatch. You can set any
property on them directly (facecolor, edgecolor, linewidth, linestyle,
alpha). Eg,
 fig = plt.figure()
 fig.figurePatch.set_alpha(0.5)
 ax = fig.add_subplot(111)
 ax.axesPatch.set_alpha(0.5)
Michael's transparent kwarg is just a helper function to do this
automatically at save time w/o affecting the screen rendered figure.
For stylistic reasons, I'd like a new name for figurePatch and
rectanglePatch. "background", "rectangle" and "patch" would all be
nicer. I'm inclined toward "rectangle" -- I think I'll just put an
alias in Figure and Axes unless someone has a better idea.
JDH

2008年6月25日 Michael Droettboom <md...@st...>:
> Maybe this should be made an option on the "transparent" kwarg to savefig,
> something like:
>
> transparent = 'figure' | 'figure_and_axes'
>
> Or is that just making things too complicated?
Those options would both be very handy.
In the meantime, thanks for the workaround! My hack was to export to
SVG, then edit with Inkscape (first compiled Inkscape for OSX :), save
to PNG and finally convert the PNG to a PNG that Firefox can
understand, using GIMP (also compiled for OSX). Phew!
Regarding OSX: it seems that, for the first time in months, I can now
build matplotlib on OSX with gcc 4.1 without jumping through all sorts
of crazy loops. Thanks!
Regards
Stéfan

Rob Hetland wrote:
>
> When I do a pcolor, there are white lines between the patches that 
> cause strange moray patterns, even when saved to a png. The attached 
> sample shows what I mean. Notice the strange coffee-cup ring, where 
> the pattern goes away. This is new behavior. Unfortunately, I 
> haven't been paying enough attention to the devel list to know what 
> the changes that cause this might be.
The quads need to be enlarged by about 1 pixel, and the easiest way to 
do this is to give them an edge of width 1 pixel. The pcolormesh code 
has had this fix for a while, but it was overlooked for pcolor. (Both 
of which were virtually rewritten for 0.98, which is why this is a 
regression from 0.91).
I have fixed this in SVN.
>
> This moray pattern is very distracting, and means that publication 
> quality prints will be very difficult to produce, probably involving 
> printing at some insanely high resolution, then decimating with 
> imagemagick.
Yeah, let's try to avoid that... ;)
>
> I notice also that pcolormesh works with masked arrays (hurray!). 
> This could be a suitable substitution. However, pcolormesh does not 
> dither at the patch edges, so that there are jagged lines through the 
> image, especially at lower resolutions.
I assume by dithering you mean antialiasing. For speed, pcolormesh uses 
non-antialiased rendering by default. You can force it to be 
antialiased by passing "antialiased=True".
Cheers,
Mike
>
> Can pcolor be fixed?
>
> -Rob
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ----
> Rob Hetland, Associate Professor
> Dept. of Oceanography, Texas A&M University
> http://pong.tamu.edu/~rob
> phone: 979-458-0096, fax: 979-845-6331
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Mat...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
> 
-- 
Michael Droettboom
Science Software Branch
Operations and Engineering Division
Space Telescope Science Institute
Operated by AURA for NASA

Something similar was added to SVN yesterday. Pass "transparent=True" 
to savefig. This will set both the figure rectangle and the axes 
rectangles to transparent.
If you just want a transparent figure rectangle, you can do:
 fig().figurePatch.set_alpha(0.0)
Maybe this should be made an option on the "transparent" kwarg to 
savefig, something like:
 transparent = 'figure' | 'figure_and_axes'
Or is that just making things too complicated?
Cheers,
Mike
Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm generating plots for a document with a non-white background, and I
> need the outer rectangle (the one is normally gray on the screen) to
> be transparent. Savefig doesn't seem to have such an option: is it
> possible to do it already, and if not, would there be any interest in
> a patch?
>
> Regards
> Stéfan
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Mat...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
> 
-- 
Michael Droettboom
Science Software Branch
Operations and Engineering Division
Space Telescope Science Institute
Operated by AURA for NASA

When I do a pcolor, there are white lines between the patches that 
cause strange moray patterns, even when saved to a png. The attached 
sample shows what I mean. Notice the strange coffee-cup ring, where 
the pattern goes away. This is new behavior. Unfortunately, I 
haven't been paying enough attention to the devel list to know what 
the changes that cause this might be.
This moray pattern is very distracting, and means that publication 
quality prints will be very difficult to produce, probably involving 
printing at some insanely high resolution, then decimating with 
imagemagick.
I notice also that pcolormesh works with masked arrays (hurray!). 
This could be a suitable substitution. However, pcolormesh does not 
dither at the patch edges, so that there are jagged lines through the 
image, especially at lower resolutions.
Can pcolor be fixed?
-Rob

Hi all,
I'm generating plots for a document with a non-white background, and I
need the outer rectangle (the one is normally gray on the screen) to
be transparent. Savefig doesn't seem to have such an option: is it
possible to do it already, and if not, would there be any interest in
a patch?
Regards
Stéfan

Michael Droettboom wrote:
> I don't understand why anyone would want the one on the left, 
> but if you can provide a use case for it, it should be implementable.
I know I can't. I think john may be right that it's just not that hard 
to do by hand.
-Chris
-- 
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer
Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax
Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception
Chr...@no...