Granted, black is at the boundary, but what we actually have is 80% black (because of the intensity in the scheme).
I take it Stata is evaluating the black*1.25 first to get (black*1.25)*.8 = black*.8 rather than black*1.25*.8 = black*1 = black (which would be nice).
David
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Vince Wiggins,
StataCorp
Sent: 01 September 2005 22:37
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: st: RE: bug in color(black) for twoway bar ?
Continuing the thread about getting fully black filled bars from -twoway bar-,
David Harrison <[email protected]> asks,
> My initial thought to solve the problem was to try
> -color(black*1.25)- to increase the intensity (or rather, in Stata
> 8, -bcolor(black*1.25)-), but this would not take the intensity
> above 80%. Any reason for this?
It doesn't work because black is at boundary of the color space. Black is the
complete absence of color; asking for it to be more black bumps against that
boundary and does nothing at all. The same would be true of white, cyan, or
any color that is already fully saturated. David's idea would have worked
with any color in the interior of the color space, such as tan or light green.
-- Vince
[email protected]
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
