Menu
▾
▴
gnuplot-beta
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 05:35:45
|
Is there a reason that "monochrome" can't or shouldn't cast objects specified with explicit color to a shade of gray? " The option `color` enables color, while `monochrome` prefers black and white",\ " drawing elements. Further, `monochrome` uses gray `palette` but it does not",\ " change color of objects specified with an explicit `colorspec`."\ For example, plot x with points lc rgb "blue" set term postscript monochrome eps set output 'foo.eps' replot set output will produce a plot that still has blue points. Dan |
|
From: Ethan A M. <merritt@u.washington.edu> - 2006-08-03 05:42:59
|
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 10:45 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > > set term postscript monochrome eps > plot x with points lc rgb "blue" > > will produce a plot that still has blue points. You ask for blue, you get blue. If you don't want blue, don't ask for blue. -- Ethan A Merritt Biomolecular Structure Center University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742 |
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 05:56:08
|
Ethan A Merritt wrote: > On Wednesday 02 August 2006 10:45 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > >>set term postscript monochrome eps >>plot x with points lc rgb "blue" >> >>will produce a plot that still has blue points. > > > You ask for blue, you get blue. > If you don't want blue, don't ask for blue. But I asked for monochrome too. Why can't I have that instead? Dan |
|
From: Ethan A M. <merritt@u.washington.edu> - 2006-08-03 06:15:55
|
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 11:05 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > Ethan A Merritt wrote: > > > > You ask for blue, you get blue. > > If you don't want blue, don't ask for blue. > > But I asked for monochrome too. Why can't I have that instead? If you ask for default dashed lines via "set term post dashed" that doesn't stop you from explicitly drawing a solid line. If you ask for a small default font via "set term post font 'Times' 4" that doesn't stop you from explicitly writing labels in a larger font. If you ask for default thick lines via 'set term post lw 5' that doesn't stop you from explicitly drawing a thin line. So if you ask for default black lines via 'set term post mono', why should it stop you from explicitly drawing a blue line? The terminal options are defaults, not restrictions. -- Ethan A Merritt Biomolecular Structure Center University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742 |
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 06:23:04
|
Daniel J Sebald wrote: > Ethan A Merritt wrote: > >>On Wednesday 02 August 2006 10:45 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: >> >> >>>set term postscript monochrome eps >>>plot x with points lc rgb "blue" >>> >>>will produce a plot that still has blue points. >> >> >>You ask for blue, you get blue. >>If you don't want blue, don't ask for blue. > > > But I asked for monochrome too. Why can't I have that instead? And now in PDF things are doubly problematic: gnuplot> plot x gnuplot> set term pdf Terminal type set to 'pdf' Options are ' noenhanced fname 'Helvetica' fsize 6 linewidth 1.0 ' gnuplot> set output 'foo.pdf' gnuplot> replot gnuplot> set output OK, as expected, red line, black borders. Now: gnuplot> set term pdf monochrome Terminal type set to 'pdf' Options are 'monochrome noenhanced fname 'Helvetica' fsize 6 linewidth 1.0 ' gnuplot> set output 'foo2.pdf' gnuplot> plot x lc rgb "red" gnuplot> set output Not only is the PDF file not monochrome, in addition to the line being red, the borders are red. Dan |
|
From: Ethan A M. <merritt@u.washington.edu> - 2006-08-03 06:53:09
|
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 11:32 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > gnuplot> set term pdf monochrome > Terminal type set to 'pdf' > Options are 'monochrome noenhanced fname 'Helvetica' fsize 6 linewidth 1.0 ' > gnuplot> set output 'foo2.pdf' > gnuplot> plot x lc rgb "red" > > Not only is the PDF file not monochrome, in addition to the line being red, the borders are red. Dang. That was Bug #1517932. I thought I fixed that one already. grumble, grumble. Wait a minute. The "monochrome" option to pdf seems never to have been implemented fully. It doesn't actually *do* anything. It just *doesn't* change the linetype. So in mono mode, whatever linetype you have is stuck forever. At the least, setting "mono" should also select "dashed" so you can tell the lines apart. But it doesn't, perhaps because "dashed" is itself not supported by all versions of PDFlib. So this one may not be fixable for 4.2, although I suppose I can at least patch it to set the line color back to black. Obviously no one is using PDF in mono mode, or this would have been noticed a long time ago. -- Ethan A Merritt Biomolecular Structure Center University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742 |
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 07:06:19
|
Ethan A Merritt wrote: >>Not only is the PDF file not monochrome, in addition to the line being red, the borders are red. > > The "monochrome" option to pdf seems never to have been > implemented fully. It doesn't actually *do* anything. > It just *doesn't* change the linetype. It should do something. Regular color mode would be better than the colored borders. > So in mono mode, whatever linetype > you have is stuck forever. At the least, setting "mono" should also > select "dashed" so you can tell the lines apart. Right. > So this one may not be fixable for 4.2, although I suppose I can at > least patch it to set the line color back to black. > > Obviously no one is using PDF in mono mode, or this would have > been noticed a long time ago. Not 4.2 critical, and what you said is probably true. PDF is a "standalone" sort of output in the fact that it isn't going to be imported into any other document. If one outputs in color, fine, because the PDF viewer can deal with that. But an EPS file, or TIFF file, might be something imported into another document or sent to a journal or proceedings where color plots are not allowed. Dan |
|
From: Petr M. <mi...@ph...> - 2006-08-03 07:22:44
|
> Not 4.2 critical, and what you said is probably true. PDF is a > "standalone" sort of output in the fact that it isn't going to be imported > into any other document. It is imported by people using pdf(la)tex -- useful mainly when writing reports with a lot of images (the pdf files is considerably small than latex -> dvips -> postscript file). > But an EPS file, or TIFF file, might be something imported into another > document or sent to a journal or proceedings where color plots are not > allowed. > Well, probably little. But I think it _should_ come out as gray in > monochrome mode. > I too would prefer the 'monochrome' terminal property to cause the plot to > come out in shades of gray only. It saves some effort to duplicate scripts > when you want colored and monochrome versions of a plot. In any case > consistency across terminals would be a good thing ;-) I agree; it would be helpful for 4.2. --- PM |
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 07:27:31
|
Petr Mikulik wrote: >> Not 4.2 critical, and what you said is probably true. PDF is a >> "standalone" sort of output in the fact that it isn't going to be >> imported into any other document. > > > It is imported by people using pdf(la)tex -- useful mainly when writing > reports with a lot of images (the pdf files is considerably small than > latex -> dvips -> postscript file). But there is ps2pdf that can be applied after that. It wouldn't surprise me however that pdf(la)tex is smaller. dvips doesn't create efficient files from what I recall. Dan |
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 06:28:51
|
Ethan A Merritt wrote: > On Wednesday 02 August 2006 11:05 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > >>Ethan A Merritt wrote: >> >>>You ask for blue, you get blue. >>>If you don't want blue, don't ask for blue. >> >>But I asked for monochrome too. Why can't I have that instead? > > > If you ask for default dashed lines via "set term post dashed" > that doesn't stop you from explicitly drawing a solid line. > > If you ask for a small default font via "set term post font 'Times' 4" > that doesn't stop you from explicitly writing labels in a larger font. > > If you ask for default thick lines via 'set term post lw 5' > that doesn't stop you from explicitly drawing a thin line. > > So if you ask for default black lines via 'set term post mono', > why should it stop you from explicitly drawing a blue line? Because term property "monochrome" outranks other colors in the chess game of display mediums, I don't know. None of those other defaults are term properties. If there were a term property "nosolidlines" I would expect to not be able to draw any solid lines. I programmed "with rgbimage" to come out as gray when postscript monochrome property is active. Dan |
|
From: Ethan A M. <merritt@u.washington.edu> - 2006-08-03 06:58:38
|
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 11:38 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > > I programmed "with rgbimage" to come out as gray when postscript > monochrome property is active. It may be too late to change it now. How much work would it be? -- Ethan A Merritt Biomolecular Structure Center University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742 |
|
From: Petr M. <mi...@ph...> - 2006-08-03 07:01:21
|
> I programmed "with rgbimage" to come out as gray when postscript > monochrome property is active. The same is true for plots "with palette" options, as the palette fallbacks into grayish in the monochrome postscript file. --- PM |
|
From: <tim...@en...> - 2006-08-03 16:41:41
|
Daniel J Sebald wrote: > Ethan A Merritt wrote: > =20 >> >> If you ask for default dashed lines via "set term post dashed" >> that doesn't stop you from explicitly drawing a solid line. >> >> If you ask for a small default font via "set term post font 'Times' 4" >> that doesn't stop you from explicitly writing labels in a larger font. >> >> If you ask for default thick lines via 'set term post lw 5' >> that doesn't stop you from explicitly drawing a thin line. >> >> So if you ask for default black lines via 'set term post mono', >> why should it stop you from explicitly drawing a blue line? >> =20 > > Because term property "monochrome" outranks other colors in the chess g= ame of display mediums, I don't know. None of those other defaults are t= erm properties. > =20 That's where the ambiguity comes from. As they are options to 'set=20 term', I would tend to agree with Daniel. If you ask the terminal to=20 output in monochrome, you expect everything to be in monochrome. However, if the above options could be handled by the core, via a=20 command 'set default' for example, then Ethan's described behaviour=20 makes much more sense. Ex : 'set default dashed font "Times,4" lw 5 mono' would not prevent=20 from override them in particular labels, lines, or whatever. Implementing these options in the core seems reasonable, not that hard,=20 and would save a lot of code duplication in the terminals. One more=20 thing on my post-4.2 projects list. Best regards, Timoth=E9e |
|
From: Ethan M. <merritt@u.washington.edu> - 2006-08-03 17:24:39
|
On Thursday 03 August 2006 11:41 am, Timoth=E9e Lecomte wrote:
> Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> >None of those other defaults are term properties.
>
> Implementing these options in the core seems reasonable, not that
> hard, and would save a lot of code duplication in the terminals.
Despite what Daniel said, these things *are* terminal properties.
The defaults cannot go into the core because they are different for
different terminals.
=46or example, I almost always use lw 2 for png and x11 output,
but lw 1 for PostScript. Setting "dashed" for x11 produces=20
really ugly output, but it is perfectly reasonable for mono
PostScript. =20
I have a question about these "mono" options.
If you send a color postscript or pdf to a mono printer, you
get a nice grayscale plot courtesy of PostScript itself.
Ghostscript offers the same flexibility:
Usage: gv [OPTION]... [FILE]
PostScript and PDF viewer.
--monochrome display document using only black and white
--grayscale display document without colors
Even MSword and PowerPoint offer the option to toggle=20
color/grayscale for individual imported images.
So why is it necessary to have two output modes from gnuplot?
In other words, why do we even have a "mono" option in
the first place?
=2D-=20
Ethan A Merritt
Biomolecular Structure Center
University of Washington, Seattle WA
|
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 19:07:45
|
Ethan Merritt wrote: > On Thursday 03 August 2006 11:41 am, Timoth=E9e Lecomte wrote: >=20 > So why is it necessary to have two output modes from gnuplot? > In other words, why do we even have a "mono" option in > the first place? It's a reasonable question, but I think it is useful for the situation wh= ere one sends graphics to a publisher of some sort that doesn't want colo= r figures or plots without charging a very expensive rate. By first conv= erting them, as opposed to letting the publisher do that, one will know w= hat they look like rather than having to wait perhaps until the final pro= duct appears in print. There are publishers who are behind the curve on electronic word processi= ng and graphics for some reason. Dan |
|
From: Jonathan T. <jt...@ae...> - 2006-08-03 19:08:14
|
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, Ethan Merritt wrote: > Even MSword and PowerPoint offer the option to toggle > color/grayscale for individual imported images. > > So why is it necessary to have two output modes from gnuplot? > In other words, why do we even have a "mono" option in > the first place? I would very much want to keep the option of monochrome postscript. I use this for figures in latex documents which I know will be printed in monochrome. In this case having gnuplot produce monochrome ps gives more control over just what will print than having gnuplot produce a color ps which some software at the publisher will then map to monochrome using some algorithm which I have no control over. -- -- "Jonathan Thornburg -- remove -animal to reply" <jt...@ae...> Max-Planck-Institut fuer Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut), Golm, Germany, "Old Europe" http://www.aei.mpg.de/~jthorn/home.html "Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral." -- quote by Freire / poster by Oxfam |
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 19:14:05
|
Jonathan Thornburg wrote: > In this case having gnuplot produce monochrome ps > gives more control over just what will print than having gnuplot > produce a color ps which some software at the publisher will then > map to monochrome using some algorithm which I have no control over. Which is exactly what I pointed out. Dan |
|
From: <br...@ph...> - 2006-08-03 19:20:54
|
Ethan Merritt wrote: > I have a question about these "mono" options. > If you send a color postscript or pdf to a mono printer, you > get a nice grayscale plot courtesy of PostScript itself. Whether that plot comes out nice grayscale or unreadable grayscale depends on a lot of unrelated things. > Even MSword and PowerPoint offer the option to toggle > color/grayscale for individual imported images. Unfortunately, the PostScript world is a lot larger and more varied than Ghostscript, Word and PP. The primary customer class insisting on black&white plots seem to be certain scientific journals. Those editors apparently reject colour PostScript on sight, because they don't want the troubles caused by different output devices rendering the same colour to different shades of gray. |
|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2006-08-03 07:08:03
|
Ethan A Merritt wrote: > On Wednesday 02 August 2006 11:38 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > >>I programmed "with rgbimage" to come out as gray when postscript >>monochrome property is active. > > > It may be too late to change it now. > How much work would it be? Well, probably little. But I think it _should_ come out as gray in monochrome mode. Dan |
|
From: Bastian M. <bma...@we...> - 2006-08-03 07:16:17
|
Daniel J Sebald wrote: > Ethan A Merritt wrote: >> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 11:38 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: >> >>> I programmed "with rgbimage" to come out as gray when postscript >>> monochrome property is active. >> >> It may be too late to change it now. >> How much work would it be? > > Well, probably little. But I think it _should_ come out as gray in monochrome mode. I too would prefer the 'monochrome' terminal property to cause the plot to come out in shades of gray only. It saves some effort to duplicate scripts when you want colored and monochrome versions of a plot. In any case consistency across terminals would be a good thing ;-) Bastian |
|
From: Ethan A M. <merritt@u.washington.edu> - 2006-08-03 15:33:38
|
On Thursday 03 August 2006 12:18 am, Bastian Maerkisch wrote: > I too would prefer the 'monochrome' terminal property to cause the plot to come > out in shades of gray only. It saves some effort to duplicate scripts when you > want colored and monochrome versions of a plot. Huh? What effort? There's a flag at the top of the PotScript output file: /Color true def Just toggle the flag; no need to run your script again. So I really don't care that much one way or the other how the PostScript driver acts by default, because it's so easy to change your mind later. But the PDF output is not so easily edited. Therefore it is of more importance that the initial output be sensible. If you guys are arguing that for consistency with PostScript, "set term pdf mono" should map pm3d colors onto a gray scale, I can see that point of view. But up till now that has never been coded into the pdf driver. So it would not be a simple matter of changing the default; someone would have to add new code. -- Ethan A Merritt Biomolecular Structure Center University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742 |
