Hi Baptiste,Thanks for your suggestion. I have to look into this further, but anything I try with rasterImage() gives me this type of error (below is from running the example in the help file). This is with R 2.11.1 on OS X 10.5 - *** caught bus error ***address 0x24, cause 'non-existent physical address' Traceback: 1: rasterImage(image, 100, 300, 150, 350, interpolate = FALSE) Possible actions:1: abort (with core dump, if enabled)2: normal R exit3: exit R without saving workspace4: exit R saving workspace This is not an obvious error, is it? Thanks,Stephen > Subject: Re: [R] large files produced from image plots? > From: baptiste.aug...@googlemail.com > Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:41:46 +0200 > CC: r-help@r-project.org > To: obsessiv...@hotmail.com > > Hi, > > Have you tried the recent rasterImage() function? > > HTH, > > baptiste > > On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:30 PM, Stephen T. wrote: > > > > > Hi list, > > I wonder if anyone has thoughts on making image plots in R [using image() > > or image.plot(), or filled.contour()]- I've made quite a bit now, but they > > seem quite large in size when exported to pdf file format (even after > > compressing with pdftk or ghostscript, which I regularly do). I know that > > for "images", raster graphics output (png, tiff) may be the way to go, but > > often the ones I make are multi-panel plots with other graphics on them, > > and are usually included in a LaTeX document (PDFLaTeX does accept png) and > > require stretching/shrinking (and/or possibly editing with Adobe > > Illustrator). I have had some luck exporting image plots from Matlab (to > > postscript or pdf) before in the sense that the files seem smaller and less > > pixelated. Is this a difference in the way image() plots are produced, or > > with the way the image is written to the pdf() device (if anyone is > > familiar with other image-exporting programs...)? The other day I had a > > 13MB dataset, and probably plotted 3/4 o! f it! > > using image() and the compressed pdf output was about 8 MB (it contained > > other stuff but was an addition of a few KB). I tried filled.contour(), as > > I understand that it colors polygons to fill contours instead of coloring > > rectangles at each pixel - and it has saved me before - but this time the > > contours may have been too sharp as as its compressed pdf came out to be 62 > > MB... (ouch!). I have not tested this data set with other software programs > > so it may just have been a difficult data set. > > Is there a good solution to this (or is it simply not to use a > > vector-graphics format in these instances), and just for my curiosity, are > > you aware of any things that other software (data analysis) programs do > > uder the hood to make their exported images smaller/smoother? > > Thanks much! > > Stephen > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > > > ______________________________________________ > > R-help@r-project.org mailing list > > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > > PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. > [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
