Services & ResourcesWolfram ForumsMathGroup Archive

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Re: without individual scaling?

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg124284] Re: without individual scaling?
• From: David Bevan <david.bevan at pb.com>
• Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:04:08 -0500 (EST)
• Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com

Hi!

Since asking this question I have discovered GraphicsRow[].

What I need is some way of doing GraphicsRow[objs] but without each graphics getting scaled individually.

Equivalently, I need is some way of doing Show[objs] but with the graphics in a row, not overlaid.

Clearly, Mathematica has the information to do this. Is there no way for a user to access this information?

Thanks.

David %^>

________________________________________
From: David Bevan [david.bevan at pb.com]
Sent: 10 January 2012 10:57
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
Subject: [mg124284] Graphics bounding box in source coordinates?

Is there some way of getting the bounding box of Graphics in the source coordinate system? For example, Show can be used to display an array of objects on top of each other:

showObj[z_]:=Graphics[{Circle[{z,z},z]}]
objs=showObj/@Range[5];
Show[objs]

But I want to display them side by side. The following can be used to offset each object by a fixed interval:

graphicsArray[g_,x_]:=Graphics[MapIndexed[Translate[#1,{x (First[#2]-1),0}]&,First/@g]]
graphicsArray[objs,5]

But I would like the gaps between each object to be of fixed size. So I want a version of graphicsArray which determines the value to pass to Translate by getting the bounding box info from each Graphic.

Rasterize[,"BoundingBox"] doesn't help because it returns the size in pixels after scaling:

Rasterize[#,"BoundingBox"]&/@objs
{{360,359,182},{360,359,182},{360,359,182},{360,359,182},{360,359,182}}

My real objects are more complex than these simple circles (and I want something reusable with different objects).

Thanks for your help (and apologies if I missed something obvious in the documentation).

David %^>

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: without individual scaling?
    • From: "Scot T. Martin" <smartin@seas.harvard.edu>
  • Re: without individual scaling?
    • From: David Bevan <david.bevan@pb.com>
  • Re: without individual scaling?
    • From: David Bevan <david.bevan@pb.com>
  • Re: without individual scaling?
    • From: Murray Eisenberg <murray@math.umass.edu>
  • Re: without individual scaling?
    • From: "Scot T. Martin" <smartin@seas.harvard.edu>