gnuplot-beta

Plot order with pm3d?

[Philipp K. J. <ja...@ie...>]

According to the documentation to pm3d,
"when plotting several plots, they are plotted in
the order given on the command line"

So, I would expect that the following two plots
would appear different:

set pm3d explicit
splot [-2:2][-2:2] exp(-x**2-y**2) w pm3d, 2-exp(-x**2-y**2) 
splot [-2:2][-2:2] 2-exp(-x**2-y**2), exp(-x**2-y**2) w pm3d

Note that I switch the order of the functions between
both calls, but want the same function drawn with pm3d.

But, both plots appear to be the same.

Which is annoying, because I don't seem to be able
to get the transparent (wiremesh) function visually
on top of the opaque surface. 

Is this a bug or a feature?

In a similar spirit, I noticed that when setting
set pm3d (or set pm3d explicit) the surface hides
the border, but when using set pm3d implicit, the
border is always on top of the surface - even when
setting set border back.

Again, is this a bug, or am I using the commands
incorrectly?

(Version info below.)

Best,

		Ph.




        G N U P L O T
        Version 4.2 patchlevel 2 
        last modified 31 Aug 2007
        System: Linux 2.6.18.2-34-default

        Copyright (C) 1986 - 1993, 1998, 2004, 2007
        Thomas Williams, Colin Kelley and many others

        Type `help` to access the on-line reference manual.
        The gnuplot FAQ is available from http://www.gnuplot.info/faq/

        Send bug reports and suggestions to 
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuplot>

Compile options:
-READLINE  +LIBREADLINE  +HISTORY  +BACKWARDS_COMPATIBILITY  +BINARY_DATA  
+GD_PNG  +GD_JPEG  +GD_TTF  +GD_GIF  +ANIMATION  
-NOCWDRC  +X11  +X11_POLYGON  +MULTIBYTE  +USE_MOUSE  +HIDDEN3D_QUADTREE  
+DATASTRINGS  +HISTOGRAMS  +OBJECTS  +STRINGVARS  +MACROS  +IMAGE  

Re: Plot order with pm3d?

[Ethan A M. <merritt@u.washington.edu>]

On Thursday 21 February 2008 18:04, Philipp K. Janert wrote:
> 
> According to the documentation to pm3d,
> "when plotting several plots, they are plotted in
> the order given on the command line"

Yes, but that only applies to pm3d plots.
 
> So, I would expect that the following two plots
> would appear different:
> 
> set pm3d explicit
> splot [-2:2][-2:2] exp(-x**2-y**2) w pm3d, 2-exp(-x**2-y**2) 
> splot [-2:2][-2:2] 2-exp(-x**2-y**2), exp(-x**2-y**2) w pm3d
> 
> Note that I switch the order of the functions between
> both calls, but want the same function drawn with pm3d.

You are mixing pm3d and non-pm3d plots, which as you have
discovered raises an issue of what gets drawn first.
Further complicating the issue is that pm3d and non-pm3d
plots have separate options for depth ordering, which _also_
affects what gets drawn first.

> But, both plots appear to be the same.
> 
> Which is annoying, because I don't seem to be able
> to get the transparent (wiremesh) function visually
> on top of the opaque surface. 

 
> Is this a bug or a feature?

I think it's a design flaw;  with perfect foresight pm3d would
have been more integrated with other plot types, rather than 
acting as a parallel subsystem.  However, there are work-arounds.
In particular, see the first plot of the hidden2 demo:
   http://gnuplot.sourceforge.net/demo_4.3/hidden2.html

> In a similar spirit, I noticed that when setting
> set pm3d (or set pm3d explicit) the surface hides
> the border, but when using set pm3d implicit, the
> border is always on top of the surface - even when
> setting set border back.

I have noticed that also, or something very similar.
But I haven't been able to pin down exactly what causes this.
Sometimes the axes appear in front of the surface no matter
what I do, but other times they don't.  I suspect an 
un-initialized variable somewhere, but I haven't been able
to track it down.  A 100% reproducible test case would help.
But I've been working with the CVS code; maybe the issue
is more clear-cut in 4.2.

> Again, is this a bug, or am I using the commands
> incorrectly?

I think it's a bug, but it's a subtle one.

 
> (Version info below.)
> 
> Best,
> 
> 		Ph.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         G N U P L O T
>         Version 4.2 patchlevel 2 
>         last modified 31 Aug 2007
>         System: Linux 2.6.18.2-34-default
> 
>         Copyright (C) 1986 - 1993, 1998, 2004, 2007
>         Thomas Williams, Colin Kelley and many others
> 
>         Type `help` to access the on-line reference manual.
>         The gnuplot FAQ is available from http://www.gnuplot.info/faq/
> 
>         Send bug reports and suggestions to 
> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuplot>
> 
> Compile options:
> -READLINE  +LIBREADLINE  +HISTORY  +BACKWARDS_COMPATIBILITY  +BINARY_DATA  
> +GD_PNG  +GD_JPEG  +GD_TTF  +GD_GIF  +ANIMATION  
> -NOCWDRC  +X11  +X11_POLYGON  +MULTIBYTE  +USE_MOUSE  +HIDDEN3D_QUADTREE  
> +DATASTRINGS  +HISTOGRAMS  +OBJECTS  +STRINGVARS  +MACROS  +IMAGE  
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> gnuplot-beta mailing list
> gnu...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gnuplot-beta
> 

-- 
Ethan A Merritt
Biomolecular Structure Center
University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742

Re: Plot order with pm3d?

[Philipp K. J. <ja...@ie...>]

On Thursday 21 February 2008 19:26, you wrote:
> On Thursday 21 February 2008 18:04, Philipp K. Janert wrote:
> > According to the documentation to pm3d,
> > "when plotting several plots, they are plotted in
> > the order given on the command line"
>
> Yes, but that only applies to pm3d plots.

Ah, thanks - that was my misunderstanding.
I thought this also applied when mixing pm3d
and non-pm3d.

>
> > So, I would expect that the following two plots
> > would appear different:
> >
> > set pm3d explicit
> > splot [-2:2][-2:2] exp(-x**2-y**2) w pm3d, 2-exp(-x**2-y**2)
> > splot [-2:2][-2:2] 2-exp(-x**2-y**2), exp(-x**2-y**2) w pm3d
> >
> > Note that I switch the order of the functions between
> > both calls, but want the same function drawn with pm3d.
>
> You are mixing pm3d and non-pm3d plots, which as you have
> discovered raises an issue of what gets drawn first.
> Further complicating the issue is that pm3d and non-pm3d
> plots have separate options for depth ordering, which _also_
> affects what gets drawn first.
>
> > But, both plots appear to be the same.
> >
> > Which is annoying, because I don't seem to be able
> > to get the transparent (wiremesh) function visually
> > on top of the opaque surface.
> >
> >
> > Is this a bug or a feature?
>
> I think it's a design flaw;  with perfect foresight pm3d would
> have been more integrated with other plot types, rather than
> acting as a parallel subsystem.  However, there are work-arounds.
> In particular, see the first plot of the hidden2 demo:
>    http://gnuplot.sourceforge.net/demo_4.3/hidden2.html
>
> > In a similar spirit, I noticed that when setting
> > set pm3d (or set pm3d explicit) the surface hides
> > the border, but when using set pm3d implicit, the
> > border is always on top of the surface - even when
> > setting set border back.
>
> I have noticed that also, or something very similar.
> But I haven't been able to pin down exactly what causes this.
> Sometimes the axes appear in front of the surface no matter
> what I do, but other times they don't.  I suspect an
> un-initialized variable somewhere, but I haven't been able
> to track it down.  A 100% reproducible test case would help.
> But I've been working with the CVS code; maybe the issue
> is more clear-cut in 4.2.
>
> > Again, is this a bug, or am I using the commands
> > incorrectly?
>
> I think it's a bug, but it's a subtle one.
>
> > (Version info below.)
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > 		Ph.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         G N U P L O T
> >         Version 4.2 patchlevel 2
> >         last modified 31 Aug 2007
> >         System: Linux 2.6.18.2-34-default
> >
> >         Copyright (C) 1986 - 1993, 1998, 2004, 2007
> >         Thomas Williams, Colin Kelley and many others
> >
> >         Type `help` to access the on-line reference manual.
> >         The gnuplot FAQ is available from http://www.gnuplot.info/faq/
> >
> >         Send bug reports and suggestions to
> > <http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuplot>
> >
> > Compile options:
> > -READLINE  +LIBREADLINE  +HISTORY  +BACKWARDS_COMPATIBILITY  +BINARY_DATA
> > +GD_PNG  +GD_JPEG  +GD_TTF  +GD_GIF  +ANIMATION
> > -NOCWDRC  +X11  +X11_POLYGON  +MULTIBYTE  +USE_MOUSE  +HIDDEN3D_QUADTREE
> > +DATASTRINGS  +HISTOGRAMS  +OBJECTS  +STRINGVARS  +MACROS  +IMAGE
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnuplot-beta mailing list
> > gnu...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gnuplot-beta

Re: Plot order with pm3d?

[Philipp K. J. <ja...@ie...>]

Here is an update on the problem that the
border is visible when plotting with pm3d (cf
below).

The problem occurs after
	unset surface
It does NOT occur when set surface is active.

But after "unset surface", the problem seems
to be totally repeatable. It is also old: I could
replicate it in a version of gnuplot 4.0 which I
have still installed.

Just FYI - in case that helps to pin it down.
(Too bad, really, because plotting with unset
surface is so much faster.)

Best,

		Ph.


> > In a similar spirit, I noticed that when setting
> > set pm3d (or set pm3d explicit) the surface hides
> > the border, but when using set pm3d implicit, the
> > border is always on top of the surface - even when
> > setting set border back.
>
> I have noticed that also, or something very similar.
> But I haven't been able to pin down exactly what causes this.
> Sometimes the axes appear in front of the surface no matter
> what I do, but other times they don't.  I suspect an
> un-initialized variable somewhere, but I haven't been able
> to track it down.  A 100% reproducible test case would help.
> But I've been working with the CVS code; maybe the issue
> is more clear-cut in 4.2.
>
> > Again, is this a bug, or am I using the commands
> > incorrectly?
>
> I think it's a bug, but it's a subtle one.
>
> > (Version info below.)
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > 		Ph.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         G N U P L O T
> >         Version 4.2 patchlevel 2
> >         last modified 31 Aug 2007
> >         System: Linux 2.6.18.2-34-default
> >
> >         Copyright (C) 1986 - 1993, 1998, 2004, 2007
> >         Thomas Williams, Colin Kelley and many others
> >
> >         Type `help` to access the on-line reference manual.
> >         The gnuplot FAQ is available from http://www.gnuplot.info/faq/
> >
> >         Send bug reports and suggestions to
> > <http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuplot>
> >
> > Compile options:
> > -READLINE  +LIBREADLINE  +HISTORY  +BACKWARDS_COMPATIBILITY  +BINARY_DATA
> > +GD_PNG  +GD_JPEG  +GD_TTF  +GD_GIF  +ANIMATION
> > -NOCWDRC  +X11  +X11_POLYGON  +MULTIBYTE  +USE_MOUSE  +HIDDEN3D_QUADTREE
> > +DATASTRINGS  +HISTOGRAMS  +OBJECTS  +STRINGVARS  +MACROS  +IMAGE
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnuplot-beta mailing list
> > gnu...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gnuplot-beta

Re: Plot order with pm3d?

[Petr M. <mi...@ph...>]

> So, I would expect that the following two plots
> would appear different:
> 
> set pm3d explicit
> splot [-2:2][-2:2] exp(-x**2-y**2) w pm3d, 2-exp(-x**2-y**2) 
> splot [-2:2][-2:2] 2-exp(-x**2-y**2), exp(-x**2-y**2) w pm3d
>
> But, both plots appear to be the same.

No, they are different! See the minimum of the top mesh, or try it with
	1-exp(-x**2-y**2)

> In a similar spirit, I noticed that when setting
> set pm3d (or set pm3d explicit) the surface hides
> the border, but when using set pm3d implicit, the
> border is always on top of the surface - even when
> setting set border back.
> 
> Again, is this a bug, or am I using the commands
> incorrectly?

I cannot reproduce this. 
Can you post the sequence of commands which does it wrong?

---
PM