Re: [R] wireframe zlim option

From: Deepayan Sarkar <deepayan.sarkar_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon 06 Feb 2006 - 16:58:30 EST

On 2/5/06, Marius Hofert <mhofert@mathematik.uni-ulm.de> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to plot a wireframe of a function which is defined on the
> unit square using the lattice library (for trellis-like plots). The plot
> contains z-values of about 100 (only in the neighborhood of zero) although
> most of the z-values are in the range of -let's say- 0 to 10. If I
> evaluate this function on an equidistant grid of 25 points on the unit
> square the plot quality is not very good, but I can see the rough shape of
> the plot (i.e. I can see the that the points in the range of 0 to 10 have
> different heights). If I increase the grid points to 100 (so the function
> is evaluated on an equidistant grid with 100^2 points), the plot quality
> increases (i.e. the plot gets smooth), but I can hardly see any structure
> of the plot as the points in the neighborhood of zero of course dominate
> the plot (and all points in the range from 0 to 10 seem to just have the
> same height) and as I evaluate more of the points close to 0 this behavior
> is obvious. Therefore I would like to restrict the z-values plotted. I
> couldn't find any help for that and the usual "zlim=c(0,30)" (which should
> only plot the z-values lying in the range from 0 to 30) did not work for
> the wireframe function of the lattice package.
> The call I tried was
>
> >library(lattice)
> >wireframe(z~x*y,zlim=c(0,30),drape=T,distance=0,colorkey=list(tick.number=6))
>
> Any hints are appreciated

If I understand you correctly, setting

z[z > 30] <- NA

before the call to wireframe may help.

Deepayan

--
http://www.stat.wisc.edu/~deepayan/

______________________________________________
R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
Received on Mon Feb 06 17:08:37 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue 07 Feb 2006 - 00:53:18 EST