I'm sorry mate, I'm truly sorry. It's not your fault you're one of the worst users. =( But look at the bright side, level 7 users are a great bunch. You'll get there! ;)
Short answer: yes, png is better, as there are no compression artefacts.
Long answer: In my personal experience the best way is to have a vector-based format (eps or ai) as a source and then export to png. In this way you'll be able to rescale and edit the graph style without any trouble (in the source file) and expert it to png (or tiff, if it's not web, but an actual journal) for easier incorporation into publications.
Also MS Excel is frowned upon in some scientific communities
Ah yes. For my thesis I used GraphPad Prism, which was effing awesome. I also learned various versions of SPSS in stats classes, so I can use them relatively well. But being out of uni for quite some time now, I no longer have the licenses for them which are outrageously expensive anyway.
That said, the first time I found out MS Excel's stat analysis capabilities, I was pretty dumbfounded. I mean, I always thought it was just some boring rows-and-columns app for accountants.
The GraphPad Prism graphics look nice (just took a look at them). The SPSSs are just too far away from what I'm doing: I'm sticking more to MATLAB and Origin with fine-tuning the style in Illustrator - that's heaps of money if I would buy it for myself, but, yep uni licenses %)
I assume I'd have to stick to Excel too, when I lose access to those... Or find some GPL options...
I used R with RStudio for some online courses - those seem to have some good features por statistics.
As far as presentation goes, once you learn how to tune it so it does not shout "Excel!" so loud, you can use it quite successfully for basic science. :-) But of course, for complex calculations, Matlab. :-)
Scientific publications ... hehehe.
In our group, not too long time ago, anatomists and MD-s carefully unmarked any compression what a slide scanner could offer, then ran around with 3-4 gigabytes uncompressed TIFF files, 2-300 at a time. However when it comes to write a publication, they take a screenshot of something, resize it in PS, and save it as JPEG. Then the dotted blurry mess goes into print. Or just comes back with a do-something-with-it request from the editors.
Otherwise please contribute to the extinction of TIFF by trying to avoid using it as much as possible. That standard is just crazy, while invented and maintained by Adobe, not even their own tools can handle all possible combinations of bitdepth-colorspace-compression options.
The MDs I've been working with (although not in the research environment, but in a clinical one) had the habit of grabbing the snapshots "for quick reference" of the patient images by taking the pictures of the screen with image on it with their phone cameras. I guess, the speed in those cases was far more important than image quality. maybe the habit just carries on into research.
I guess, it's just the pattern of thinking "I see the important thing" -> "I know what's happening" -> "I don't need the images anymore" and then missing out the "anymore" thing.
Well, I'll still stick to TIFF for publications (can't do much about all the author guidelines), but in daily work - why would I ever use it? %)
And found the third one! :D Gee, silly me for not looking at that Imgur description since the very beginning! I have no excuse. And you, sir, are the coolest scientist I know.
I do agree that users at level 5 are more tastefully selective in games, generous, and better-looking in general!
Comment has been collapsed.
Hot damn, you're right.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sadly you will become a level 6 user very soon, and they are the worst users :O
Comment has been collapsed.
What what!! There are no studies proving that!
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's create one!
Comment has been collapsed.
As I'm now lvl 6 I guess I can be part of the sample now :-(
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm sorry mate, I'm truly sorry. It's not your fault you're one of the worst users. =( But look at the bright side, level 7 users are a great bunch. You'll get there! ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
That does seem to be the general consensus.
Comment has been collapsed.
i agree also, cause i´m a very sexy frog!
Comment has been collapsed.
alright, found this one
but where is that 3rd one
So, now you are doing a study based on contibrutor levels & the reviews of the games given away ?
Comment has been collapsed.
Sssssh, don't disturb my study subjects!
Comment has been collapsed.
Haha nice one I had a good laugh reading it :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Some L4 are good looking too...
Comment has been collapsed.
I have to agree
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, can't belive I actually found another one.
I wonder, where the last one might be...
Comment has been collapsed.
Also, Why do you save graphs as jpeg?
Comment has been collapsed.
That's how I did it for my minor thesis. Is there any better way that I should know about? PNG I suppose?
Comment has been collapsed.
Short answer: yes, png is better, as there are no compression artefacts.
Long answer: In my personal experience the best way is to have a vector-based format (eps or ai) as a source and then export to png. In this way you'll be able to rescale and edit the graph style without any trouble (in the source file) and expert it to png (or tiff, if it's not web, but an actual journal) for easier incorporation into publications.
Also MS Excel is frowned upon in some scientific communities
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah yes. For my thesis I used GraphPad Prism, which was effing awesome. I also learned various versions of SPSS in stats classes, so I can use them relatively well. But being out of uni for quite some time now, I no longer have the licenses for them which are outrageously expensive anyway.
That said, the first time I found out MS Excel's stat analysis capabilities, I was pretty dumbfounded. I mean, I always thought it was just some boring rows-and-columns app for accountants.
Comment has been collapsed.
The GraphPad Prism graphics look nice (just took a look at them). The SPSSs are just too far away from what I'm doing: I'm sticking more to MATLAB and Origin with fine-tuning the style in Illustrator - that's heaps of money if I would buy it for myself, but, yep uni licenses %)
I assume I'd have to stick to Excel too, when I lose access to those... Or find some GPL options...
I used R with RStudio for some online courses - those seem to have some good features por statistics.
Comment has been collapsed.
As far as presentation goes, once you learn how to tune it so it does not shout "Excel!" so loud, you can use it quite successfully for basic science. :-) But of course, for complex calculations, Matlab. :-)
Comment has been collapsed.
Scientific publications ... hehehe.
In our group, not too long time ago, anatomists and MD-s carefully unmarked any compression what a slide scanner could offer, then ran around with 3-4 gigabytes uncompressed TIFF files, 2-300 at a time. However when it comes to write a publication, they take a screenshot of something, resize it in PS, and save it as JPEG. Then the dotted blurry mess goes into print. Or just comes back with a do-something-with-it request from the editors.
Otherwise please contribute to the extinction of TIFF by trying to avoid using it as much as possible. That standard is just crazy, while invented and maintained by Adobe, not even their own tools can handle all possible combinations of bitdepth-colorspace-compression options.
Comment has been collapsed.
The MDs I've been working with (although not in the research environment, but in a clinical one) had the habit of grabbing the snapshots "for quick reference" of the patient images by taking the pictures of the screen with image on it with their phone cameras. I guess, the speed in those cases was far more important than image quality. maybe the habit just carries on into research.
I guess, it's just the pattern of thinking "I see the important thing" -> "I know what's happening" -> "I don't need the images anymore" and then missing out the "anymore" thing.
Well, I'll still stick to TIFF for publications (can't do much about all the author guidelines), but in daily work - why would I ever use it? %)
Comment has been collapsed.
I still can't believe you've wasted your time doing this :p. Thank you
Comment has been collapsed.
And here I was, hoping to see the data in its unskewed beauty... (Thanks! Looks like Atlantis: The Lost Tales.)
Comment has been collapsed.
And found the third one! :D Gee, silly me for not looking at that Imgur description since the very beginning! I have no excuse. And you, sir, are the coolest scientist I know.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I won! This study wasn't useless after all...
Comment has been collapsed.