>On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Brian H. Toby wrote:
>
>> Plotting in Q sounds good to me.
>....................
Well, in my opinion anyone has some reasons to prefer uniformity of
plotting (only one standard some time is good) or optimizing views (custom
representation, d, Q or 2-theta...). May be, as pointed by Alan Hewat,
better to use a representation that can be understood by non-experts also
(if we want someone else would read our works).
Jon Wright wrote:
>Horses for courses... shouldn't a fit show information which all has
>approximately equal weighting in the minimisation algorithm? In the same
>way that difference/esd is often more illuminating than just a
>plain difference curve.
I would like to focus more attention on the lines by Jon.
I am actually plotting my data using Sqrt(Intensity) instead of Intensity.
You have several advantages from that:
- first the plot is at iso-error. In the residual you can easily
distinguish statistical errors from model errors.
- small peaks are more visibles. Try it on the quartz; you will not need
anymore to zoom the plot on the other peaks.
Just my 0.2 cents,
best regards,
Luca Lutterotti
-----------------------Luca Lutterotti----------------------------
Dipartimento di Ingegneria dei Materiali, Universita' di Trento,
via Mesiano 77, 38050 Trento, Italy
e-mail address : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home page : http://www.ing.unitn.it/~luttero
Mirror: http://www.ccp14.ac.uk/ccp/web-mirrors/lutterotti/~luttero/
Phone number :+39-0461-88-2414
-Fax : +39-0461-88-1977-----------------------------------------
