Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make gz effects more obvious in point mass example #113

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 14, 2019

Conversation

leouieda
Copy link
Member

The previous version was using viridis as a colormap with sources
generating very smooth fields due to their depth. I made the sources a
bit shallower so they have more pronounced lobes and used seismic to
bring out the positive and negative effects.

Reminders

  • Run make format and make check to make sure the code follows the style guide.
  • Add tests for new features or tests that would have caught the bug that you're fixing.
  • Add new public functions/methods/classes to doc/api/index.rst.
  • Write detailed docstrings for all functions/methods.
  • If adding new functionality, add an example to the docstring, gallery, and/or tutorials.

The previous version was using viridis as a colormap with sources
generating very smooth fields due to their depth. I made the sources a
bit shallower so they have more pronounced lobes and used seismic to
bring out the positive and negative effects.
@leouieda
Copy link
Member Author

This is the new plot for the example:
sphx_glr_point_mass_001

Move them so we know which coordinate corresponds to what.
Contours better highlight the different signs and places the points
on top of the actual extremes of the anomaly
@leouieda
Copy link
Member Author

Actually, this might be a better plot:
sphx_glr_point_mass_001

Copy link
Member

@santisoler santisoler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice looking figure @leouieda! 😎

I always have some doubts about using contourf vs pcolormesh.
The former creates better looking figures, but it hides the resolution of the grid, which could be considered as a very important piece of information when analyzing results. That's why I usually prefer the latter.
What do you think about this?

@leouieda
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, that is usually true. For this case, the grid resolution doesn’t really matter because it isn’t real data. That’s why I chose the contours.

@leouieda
Copy link
Member Author

Merging this in 👍

@leouieda leouieda merged commit 1b1744e into master Oct 14, 2019
@leouieda leouieda deleted the point_mass_recipe branch October 14, 2019 10:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants