Which color scale to use when visualizing data
blog.datawrapper.de
blog.datawrapper.de
(1) Hue was not a good dimension for encoding magnitude information, i.e. rainbow color maps are bad.
(2) The mechanisms in human vision responsible for high spatial frequency information processing are luminance channels. If the data to be represented have high spatial frequency, use a color map which has a strong luminance variation across the data range.
(3) For interval and ratio data, both luminance- and saturation-varying color maps should produce the effect of having equal steps in data value correspond to equal perceptual steps, but the first will be most effective for high spatial frequency data variations and the second will be most effective for low spatial frequency variations.
===
[1] https://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/lloydt/color/color.HTM
or as pdf:
https://github.com/frankMilde/interesting-reads/blob/master/...
https://github.com/frankMilde/interesting-reads/raw/master/i...
> (1) Hue was not a good dimension for encoding magnitude information, i.e. rainbow color maps are bad.
Specifically the pdf claims that a naive rainbow color map is bad and references the work of S.S. Stevens for "hue was not a good dimension for encoding magnitude information"
===
For artistic affect, it may be preferred to have near equal luminosity throughout the image so that the luminance variance doesn't allow you to "make up your mind" about the image before processing the color.
Interesting to so soon come across related studies without searching.
I don’t really know enough about color theory and the terminology to imagine what you are describing. I don’t even know enough to properly search for example images myself. Hence the request. :-)
You probably mean "lightness", but you might mean "luminance" or "brightness", depending on the details. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminance
Try printing out one of their maps on a monochrome printer, and you'll see what I mean: The colour shades, grey boundaries for roads and natural features, and the road names all have virtually the same contrast. So they all print as nearly the same illegible light grey.
Agree, but stevesimmons's point still stands - Google's map colour scheme is not a good role model.
Long traveling/hiking.
To save smartphone batterie
to have something on your table, your hiking group can easier talk about, than by watching it on someones screen
* When running/cycling somewhere unfamiliar: My phone will be safe in my backpack. In my hands I want a map I can stuff in a pocket, not worry if it gets wet or rained on, that I can hold while gripping the handlebars, that I can use while wearing gloves, and write other notes on, etc. I could print in color on my inkjet printer, but the ink runs in the rain. A printout from my mono laser won't run, but Google Maps isn't legible then either.
* On occasions when you don't want to bring a phone: What actually prompted my original comment was yesterday I had a government language exam, in an unfamiliar location on the outskirts of town, with strict instructions that no phones or other personal possessions were allowed in... I wasn't sure what kind of lockers they would have, or whether they would need padlocks or coins (neither of which I had) or whatever. So I thought about printing out a map and leaving my phone at home. The weather forecast was for rain, and I planned on cycling, hence it made sense to laser-print rather than use my inkjet.
2. I have some kind of color blindness and it doesn’t matter whether I use a printer, I’m depending on contrast.
You can't tell river from forest from residential area. It's all basically some light almost-grey.
Regular street maps and topographical maps are way better.
Covering the "why" instead of just the "what" (e.g., with the history behind unclassed scales) is also very engaging content. It makes sense in retrospect but it had never occurred to me that it wouldn't have been plausible to create an unclassed scale for data points of arbitrary value until the 1970s.
In the figure caption of the charts/maps the author and sources are mentioned. The data is directly embedded and downloadable via octed-stream.
The figure annotations in the margins are nice. There are different sizes of figures: some with the width of the text content, some with full screen width.
There are different blog post categories which are listed in the blog header.
All blog authors are listed on a page. In each blog post the author briefly introduces himself/herself.
Great, widely-referenced site for quickly generating color scales, w color-blind safe options, and large amount of research behind it: https://colorbrewer2.org/#type=sequential&scheme=BuGn&n=3
I have several color blind colleagues and am regularly concerned I'm not displaying visuals in a way that is easy for them to digest.
Muti-generation photocopies tend toward black and white only.
And not just for printers and e-ink. In most parts of the world, 6-10% of population have some degree of color blindness: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness#Epidemiology
I’m not one of them but that’s huge count of people. Ideally, interfaces/visualizations need to be designed accordingly.
I've seen graphics and charts that looked fine on monitor become almost unreadable when projected, projectors tend to be lower resolution then monitors and color scale is not always the same.
There are lots of parameters which can be varied to choose which colour range to cover.
It's pretty concise and full of helpful rules like that
I'm sure someone who works with this on a daily basis is going to come in here with why I am wrong. No. I promise you, there are many more people like me who absolutely hate this way of visualizing data. It's frustrating, and every time I see it, I hate it, and I'm more dismissive about the data. Maybe that's irrational, but I'm not the one trying to effectively communicate with people using satan's color scheme.
- differences in hue are best for differences in kind
- differences in lightness or saturation are best for differences in amount
Ref.... Nault, W.H.: Children’s Map Reading Abilities. Geographic Society of Chicago, Newsletter, III (1967)
Relating to op’s question It might be said that we perceive a rainbow ramp as a continuous thing. Hence it might work to visual a graduation in intensity. But from experience I can say that such maps are difficult to read. One problem is that a hue ramp has no terminals (such as black and white in the case of a lightness ramp).
I don't know if it is coincidence or Jobs just had an eye for good color schemes and would tell them to change it, but it was noticeable to me. I usually pull up my old presentations and then copy/paste the graphs and change the data so I can get the old color schemes.
https://clauswilke.com/dataviz/color-basics.html https://clauswilke.com/dataviz/color-pitfalls.html
- differences in hue are best for differences in kind
- differences in lightness or saturation are best for differences in amount
Ref.... Nault, W.H.: Children’s Map Reading Abilities. Geographic Society of Chicago, Newsletter, III (1967)