Data looks better naked
darkhorseanalytics.com
darkhorseanalytics.com
Counting carbs is what is important. Low Carb, High Fat is what science tells you should do to loose wait. Using thermodynamics to understand our biology is useless.
EDIT for on topic add: Useless data is useless, naked or not. They should have chosen a better example.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartjunk
Any of you on HN that aren't familiar with "The Visual Display of Quantitative Information" should give it a read (and the rest of his books).
I find his books to be a bit too light on the content. All of them combined would've made a great book that would still be of a reasonable thickness, but he is self-published and he makes his living from lectures and book sales, so he's probably not too interested in that.
Tufte has some great ideas, but would benefit from a ruthless editor. As a guy who's self-published, he does not get the benefit of that kind of feedback.
If you just want to make better charts, buy, a from memory guess, Envisioning Information. It provides most of the basics of The Visual Display of Quantitative Information but develops the ideas a little further and provides better, more modern examples. If you think it's a cool topic then buy them all because they're all pretty nice books.
http://blog.bissantz.com/images/2008/01/tod_der_businessgraf...
I wonder why they add the table grid at the end. A grid could have been useful if there were a lot of columns, but certainly not in this case.
This is a similar idea I was working on http://vpj.svbtle.com/variable-length-underlining-to-help-se...
http://i.imgur.com/zXkkJw4.png
vs.
http://i.imgur.com/f6A84ds.png
It's the same exact data (which I made up, by the way) but the first one tells a very different story from the second.
Don't get me wrong--I agree that the units/what-are-we-actually-measuring, 'Calories per 100g', should be darker in the final graph (though I don't think it needed to be bold). I also think the direct-labelling step, which obviates the lightening of the y-axis and over-shoots attenuation in favor of full, bright whiteness is an improvement.
Lightening may not be the best independent step but I think it's at least illustrative as an intermediate one.
not web-centric but the best source I know of offhand
(edit to add ..)
http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1230000000345/index.ht... is a viz book that uses d3. I haven't read it but the guy who wrote it does good work
And later - look at examples (https://github.com/mbostock/d3/wiki/Gallery or http://christopheviau.com/d3list/gallery.html). IMHO it is the best way to learn D3.js and data vis in general.
Some other links: https://delicious.com/stared/d3js
If you don't have the y-axis, then a) there's no point in having it as a graph and b) there's the possibility for manipulative display.
edit: Chaz pointed the original out.
But it did start off seriously ugly, but then again, it was made to be. I guess it was something of a straw graph, no one would really make a graphic like that.
http://www.perceptualedge.com/
I've read books by both these authors and they were very good. Their websites cover most of the important content found in the books.
http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i247/f05/readings/Clevel...