You can subscribe to this list here.
2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(12) |
Sep
(12) |
Oct
(56) |
Nov
(65) |
Dec
(37) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2004 |
Jan
(59) |
Feb
(78) |
Mar
(153) |
Apr
(205) |
May
(184) |
Jun
(123) |
Jul
(171) |
Aug
(156) |
Sep
(190) |
Oct
(120) |
Nov
(154) |
Dec
(223) |
2005 |
Jan
(184) |
Feb
(267) |
Mar
(214) |
Apr
(286) |
May
(320) |
Jun
(299) |
Jul
(348) |
Aug
(283) |
Sep
(355) |
Oct
(293) |
Nov
(232) |
Dec
(203) |
2006 |
Jan
(352) |
Feb
(358) |
Mar
(403) |
Apr
(313) |
May
(165) |
Jun
(281) |
Jul
(316) |
Aug
(228) |
Sep
(279) |
Oct
(243) |
Nov
(315) |
Dec
(345) |
2007 |
Jan
(260) |
Feb
(323) |
Mar
(340) |
Apr
(319) |
May
(290) |
Jun
(296) |
Jul
(221) |
Aug
(292) |
Sep
(242) |
Oct
(248) |
Nov
(242) |
Dec
(332) |
2008 |
Jan
(312) |
Feb
(359) |
Mar
(454) |
Apr
(287) |
May
(340) |
Jun
(450) |
Jul
(403) |
Aug
(324) |
Sep
(349) |
Oct
(385) |
Nov
(363) |
Dec
(437) |
2009 |
Jan
(500) |
Feb
(301) |
Mar
(409) |
Apr
(486) |
May
(545) |
Jun
(391) |
Jul
(518) |
Aug
(497) |
Sep
(492) |
Oct
(429) |
Nov
(357) |
Dec
(310) |
2010 |
Jan
(371) |
Feb
(657) |
Mar
(519) |
Apr
(432) |
May
(312) |
Jun
(416) |
Jul
(477) |
Aug
(386) |
Sep
(419) |
Oct
(435) |
Nov
(320) |
Dec
(202) |
2011 |
Jan
(321) |
Feb
(413) |
Mar
(299) |
Apr
(215) |
May
(284) |
Jun
(203) |
Jul
(207) |
Aug
(314) |
Sep
(321) |
Oct
(259) |
Nov
(347) |
Dec
(209) |
2012 |
Jan
(322) |
Feb
(414) |
Mar
(377) |
Apr
(179) |
May
(173) |
Jun
(234) |
Jul
(295) |
Aug
(239) |
Sep
(276) |
Oct
(355) |
Nov
(144) |
Dec
(108) |
2013 |
Jan
(170) |
Feb
(89) |
Mar
(204) |
Apr
(133) |
May
(142) |
Jun
(89) |
Jul
(160) |
Aug
(180) |
Sep
(69) |
Oct
(136) |
Nov
(83) |
Dec
(32) |
2014 |
Jan
(71) |
Feb
(90) |
Mar
(161) |
Apr
(117) |
May
(78) |
Jun
(94) |
Jul
(60) |
Aug
(83) |
Sep
(102) |
Oct
(132) |
Nov
(154) |
Dec
(96) |
2015 |
Jan
(45) |
Feb
(138) |
Mar
(176) |
Apr
(132) |
May
(119) |
Jun
(124) |
Jul
(77) |
Aug
(31) |
Sep
(34) |
Oct
(22) |
Nov
(23) |
Dec
(9) |
2016 |
Jan
(26) |
Feb
(17) |
Mar
(10) |
Apr
(8) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(8) |
Jul
(6) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
2017 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(7) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(5) |
May
|
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(6) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
(2) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2020 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2025 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1
|
2
(6) |
3
(5) |
4
(5) |
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
(2) |
9
|
10
(1) |
11
(4) |
12
(1) |
13
|
14
(2) |
15
(1) |
16
(3) |
17
(5) |
18
|
19
(7) |
20
(1) |
21
(1) |
22
|
23
(2) |
24
(4) |
25
(5) |
26
(3) |
27
|
28
(3) |
29
(3) |
30
(5) |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All, On Dec 11, 2012, at 16:59 PM, Damon McDougall <dam...@gm...> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Benjamin Root <ben...@ou...> wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Chloe Lewis <ch...@be...> wrote: >>> >>> Would it be workable for the default to be proportional to the size of the >>> array passed in? (suggested only because I do that myself, when deciding how >>> coarse an investigative plot I can get away with.) >>> >>> &C >>> >> >> That is pretty much what the PR I was referring to does: >> >> https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/1040 >> >> It makes it so that the behavior of both plot_surface and plot_wireframe is >> the same in this respect. So, by default, the rstride and cstride would be >> 1% of the size of your data array. This would make the default for the >> recent example be 1, therefore showing every point. I wonder if a >> logarithmic default would make sense to better handle large data arrays? >> >> Thoughts? >> Ben Root > > I hope nobody minds if I chime in here. > > I'm in favour of making the defaults a little more intelligent that > what is implemented at present, i.e, a constant stride for any > surface. Any non-trivial scaling law to determine what stride to use > will result in more expected behaviour than what our users are > currently seeing. > > Could we do better? Could we have plot_surface try and estimate the > stride based on the 'roughness' of the surface to be plotted? This > method would grind to a halt for very rough surfaces, so we could > default to a scaling law in these cases. > OK, way late here, but 1) I wasted an hour today before I discovered what "rstride" and "cstride" were. Reading the documentation, I still don't actually know what they are, except that if I want to see all my data I need to set them to 1. "Array row stride (step size)", is pretty enigmatic! "stride" is a term I've never heard before except is reference to walking. I see it is used in computer science, but to refer to the byte-wise distance between array elements, so not very analogous. Can I suggest the docs be improved to say exactly what these do (I assume either average over cstride columns and rstride rows, or subsample on that frequency, not clear which)? Can I also suggest the default is 1? Its pretty frustrating for large a chunk of your data to not show up for no logical reason. If my data set is too large, I am smart enough to subsample it myself before I plot it. 2) Can I suggest this example be added to the tutorial? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6539944/color-matplotlib-plot-surface-command-with-surface-gradient None of the other examples explain how to colour your surface with data, which is what I wanted. 3) I think plot_surface should accept a fourth (optional) argument C for colouring the faces: plot_surface(X,Y,Z,C). I do this a lot if I want to make a 3-D plot, and normalizing C, clipping it, and indexing a colormap seem clunky, when the routine could do it for me. Thanks, Jody -- Jody Klymak http://web.uvic.ca/~jklymak/
On Sep 24, 2013, at 9:12 AM, Benjamin Root <ben...@ou...> wrote: > ne thing I try to do with my projects is to separate the graph production from the data processing. I would have the data processing save the relevant data, and then have separate scripts that would generate graphs from that data. Second this - if it takes longer than 30s to run the processing, then I save the output and reload it to do the plotting. If you want the processing and plotting in the same file (or ipython Notebook, like I do) then consider putting an "if 0:" statement in front of the processing. If you want to run it again later, you just change to an "if 1:". This approach lets you play with plots w/o reprocessing all the time. Cheers, Jody -- Jody Klymak http://web.uvic.ca/~jklymak/
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Grigoris Maravelias < gr....@gm...> wrote: > Hello to all! > > I have been using Matplotlib to create a series of plots and now the > time to submit the paper has come! But I experience problems now with > the font types of the eps images. The Type-3 fonts are not supported, > and they accept only Type-1. Is there an easy way to do this ?(and of > course not go through the reprocessing of all data to produce again the > same plots). > > best > Grigoris > > A word of advice with regards to your hesitation to redo the graphs. Almost always you will need to do so anyway when reviews come back. Either because one of the reviewers wanted a change in the graph, or some other fault in the process was discovered and needed to be corrected (and so new graphs have to be made anyway). Also, you may be asked to produce the data for others to use some time in the future. One thing I try to do with my projects is to separate the graph production from the data processing. I would have the data processing save the relevant data, and then have separate scripts that would generate graphs from that data. For bonus points, I usually tie everything together with Makefiles so that I don't have to remember the exact set of commands I used when the reviewer comments come back 6 months later. Cheers! Ben Root
You could try ps2ps (which comes with ghostscript) or similar tools. Mike On 09/23/2013 06:13 PM, Grigoris Maravelias wrote: > Hello to all! > > I have been using Matplotlib to create a series of plots and now the > time to submit the paper has come! But I experience problems now with > the font types of the eps images. The Type-3 fonts are not supported, > and they accept only Type-1. Is there an easy way to do this ?(and of > course not go through the reprocessing of all data to produce again the > same plots). > > best > Grigoris > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > October Webinars: Code for Performance > Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. > Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from > the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60133471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Matplotlib-users mailing list > Mat...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-users -- _ |\/|o _|_ _. _ | | \.__ __|__|_|_ _ _ ._ _ | ||(_| |(_|(/_| |_/|(_)(/_|_ |_|_)(_)(_)| | | http://www.droettboom.com