RE: Re: st: Combining graphs as is without resizing.

["Seed, Paul" <paul.seed@kcl.ac.uk>]

Many thanks once again Vince.  
That worked very well.

I can play with -iscale()- to get the relative size 
of the components as I want.

Best wishes,

Paul T Seed, Senior Lecturer in Medical Statistics, 
Division of Women's Health, King's College London
Women's Health Academic Centre, King's Health Partners 
(+44) (0) 20 7188 3642.


> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:25:27 -0500
> From: vwiggins@stata.com (Vince Wiggins, StataCorp)
> Subject: Re: st: Combining graphs as is without resizing.
> 
> Paul <paul.seed@kcl.ac.uk> writes that my solution for combining two
> graphs "asis" without resizing did not work.
> 
> He's right again, it doesn't work, and it particularly doesn't work
> when you have legends and are specifying aspect(1), as Paul is.  I
> wasn't careful enough with my first "solution".
> 
> Here s a modified suggestion,
> 
>     . graph combine a b, cols(1) iscale(.7273) ysize(8)
>                          graphregion(margin(zero))
> 
> Where:
> 
>     -- a and b        are the names of the original graphs
> 
>     -- cols(1)        requests a single column for the two subgraphs
> 
>     -- iscale(.7273)  specifies a rescaling of the fonts on the
>                       combined graph
> 
>     -- ysize(8)       specifies that the graph be 8 inches
>                       high -- twice the height of a default Stata
> graph.
> 		      Paul should substitute twice his original graph
> 		      heights for "8"
> 
>     -- graphregion(margin(zero))  removes the extra margins around the
>                                   combined graph.
> 
> What is ".7273"??
> 
> Assuming your final graph will be taller than it is wide and that your
> original graphs were wider than the were tall,
> 
>         iscale  =  ysize / xsize  =  4 / 5.5  ~=  .7273
> 
> Where ysize is the height of the original graph and xsize is the width
> of the combined graph.
> 
> Paul should substitute the dimensions from his graphs.
> 
> Why "ysize / xsize"?  (Warning technical explanation coming.)  The size
> of text, markers, and other graph elements are determined relative to
> the smaller dimension of the graph -- in this case the ysize.  So, a
> textsize of "medium" maps to 3.8194 which implies that the text height
> is 3.82% of the smaller of xsize and ysize.
> 
> This method of determining relative sizes works pretty well in a most
> situations.  It works so well that we rarely get questions like Paul's.
> That said, I too sometimes want the kind of exact control that Paul is
> asking for.
> 
> The sizes of all elements on our original graphs are derived relative
> to the ysize of the graph (the smaller of the two dimensions).  The
> sizes of the same elements on our combined graph are derived relative
> to xsize of that graph (the smaller of the two dimensions for the
> combined graph).  If we want the sizes on the combined graph to match
> those of the original graph we will need to scale those sizes by the
> ratio of dimensions used to scale the sizes on the two graphs -- the
> ysize of our original graph (4) and the xsize of our combined graph
> (5.5).
> 
> There is still a very small differences because we have only partially
> adjusted for the margins on the combined graph.  It is all-but
> undetectable on the graphs I have been drawing to test the suggestion
> above.
> 
> 
> - -- Vince
>    vwiggins@stata.com
> 
> *
> *   For searches and help try:
> *   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> *   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
> *   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
> 
> ------------------------------





*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/