Hi, I am new to R. With the command below, I generated the image on the left in R. On the right, with the same data (x,y,z in columns), I generated a similar image in SigmaPlot. If you look at the R image, one can see that the resolution is low. Even though the data represents a 131 X 131 matrix, there appears to be only approximately 40 X 40 pixels. I was wondering how I could generate an image in R that looks similar to the to the one I produced SigmaPlot. Should I use a different function, such as heatmap or contour? I noticed that the interp function does not work with the heatmap function. Should I convert my xyz column data into a matrix to make things simpler? There are also a few other questions that I have that could be helpful for me in the future in regards to legends, automated scaling, grids, and labeling, but I think I may ask those at a later time or figure that out on my own. But if you have some helpful tips, please let me know. Thanks, Clay image(interp(ytar_rcayrtgy$V2, ytar_rcayrtgy$V4, ytar_rcayrtgy$V5)) http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/file/n3466765/ytar_rcayrtgy.jpg http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/file/n3466765/R_graph_thing.jpg -- View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/image-function-with-large-matrices-tp3466765p3466765.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
image function with large matrices
2 messages · cutcopy11
I realized that my problem was not the image function but with the interp
function.
The default for the interp arguements xo and yo = 40, which is why I had a
40 X 40 square image.
Here is the revised command.
image(
interp(
ytar_rcayrtgy$V2, ytar_rcayrtgy$V4, ytar_rcayrtgy$V5,
xo=seq(min(ytar_rcayrtgy$V2), max(ytar_rcayrtgy$V2), length = 131),
yo=seq(min(ytar_rcayrtgy$V4),max(ytar_rcayrtgy$V4), length = 131)
)
)
--
View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/image-function-with-large-matrices-tp3466765p3466879.html
Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.