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.

Reply via email to