Hi, "off_axis_projection" doesn't seem to accept field parameters. This isn't a big problem and I can definitely get around it by using global variables, but should it have a field_parameter option for consistency with add_projection? Elizabeth
Hi Elizabeth, I agree, this makes sense. Last night I tried to take a crack at this, but I got very confused with the various definitions of volume, interpolated, etc etc, in the routine off_axis_projection. Cameron and Sam, do you think it would be okay if we simplified this routine and relied on the ProjectionCamera for advanced things, like specifying a volume? -Matt On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Elizabeth Tasker <tasker@astro1.sci.hokudai.ac.jp> wrote:
Hi,
"off_axis_projection" doesn't seem to accept field parameters.
This isn't a big problem and I can definitely get around it by using global variables, but should it have a field_parameter option for consistency with add_projection?
Elizabeth
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
Hi all, I think the only kwarg I'd be really +1 with getting rid of would be no_ghost. interpolated=True should just trigger no_ghost=False, and interpolated=False doesn't use the ghost zones no matter what. I think volume should stay, especially since I think it will soon be possible to do an off_axis_projection of a data object which would probably be fed in through the volume. Sam On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Elizabeth,
I agree, this makes sense.
Last night I tried to take a crack at this, but I got very confused with the various definitions of volume, interpolated, etc etc, in the routine off_axis_projection. Cameron and Sam, do you think it would be okay if we simplified this routine and relied on the ProjectionCamera for advanced things, like specifying a volume?
-Matt
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Elizabeth Tasker <tasker@astro1.sci.hokudai.ac.jp> wrote:
Hi,
"off_axis_projection" doesn't seem to accept field parameters.
This isn't a big problem and I can definitely get around it by using global variables, but should it have a field_parameter option for consistency with add_projection?
Elizabeth
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Sam Skillman <samskillman@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I think the only kwarg I'd be really +1 with getting rid of would be no_ghost. interpolated=True should just trigger no_ghost=False, and interpolated=False doesn't use the ghost zones no matter what. I think volume should stay, especially since I think it will soon be possible to do an off_axis_projection of a data object which would probably be fed in through the volume.
Why not get rid of volume and instead supply data_source, like projections?
Sam
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Elizabeth,
I agree, this makes sense.
Last night I tried to take a crack at this, but I got very confused with the various definitions of volume, interpolated, etc etc, in the routine off_axis_projection. Cameron and Sam, do you think it would be okay if we simplified this routine and relied on the ProjectionCamera for advanced things, like specifying a volume?
-Matt
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Elizabeth Tasker <tasker@astro1.sci.hokudai.ac.jp> wrote:
Hi,
"off_axis_projection" doesn't seem to accept field parameters.
This isn't a big problem and I can definitely get around it by using global variables, but should it have a field_parameter option for consistency with add_projection?
Elizabeth
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
That capability doesn't exist yet for interpolated=True. When that is possible, I would be +1 with moving from volume to data_source. On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Sam Skillman <samskillman@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I think the only kwarg I'd be really +1 with getting rid of would be no_ghost. interpolated=True should just trigger no_ghost=False, and interpolated=False doesn't use the ghost zones no matter what. I think volume should stay, especially since I think it will soon be possible to do an off_axis_projection of a data object which would probably be fed in through the volume.
Why not get rid of volume and instead supply data_source, like projections?
Sam
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Elizabeth,
I agree, this makes sense.
Last night I tried to take a crack at this, but I got very confused with the various definitions of volume, interpolated, etc etc, in the routine off_axis_projection. Cameron and Sam, do you think it would be okay if we simplified this routine and relied on the ProjectionCamera for advanced things, like specifying a volume?
-Matt
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Elizabeth Tasker <tasker@astro1.sci.hokudai.ac.jp> wrote:
Hi,
"off_axis_projection" doesn't seem to accept field parameters.
This isn't a big problem and I can definitely get around it by using global variables, but should it have a field_parameter option for consistency with add_projection?
Elizabeth
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
Okay. Cameron, I know you rely upon the off_axis_projection -- would it be okay, in your opinion, if we deprecated the interpolated = True option in some 2.X release and then in 3.0, if you want interpolation, you need to set up a projection camera yourself? I ask because the setup for these two is very different, and (in the spirit of the plot window!) I'd like to try to reduce the complexity. If you're -1 on this, then we can keep it the way it is. On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Sam Skillman <samskillman@gmail.com> wrote:
That capability doesn't exist yet for interpolated=True. When that is possible, I would be +1 with moving from volume to data_source.
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Sam Skillman <samskillman@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I think the only kwarg I'd be really +1 with getting rid of would be no_ghost. interpolated=True should just trigger no_ghost=False, and interpolated=False doesn't use the ghost zones no matter what. I think volume should stay, especially since I think it will soon be possible to do an off_axis_projection of a data object which would probably be fed in through the volume.
Why not get rid of volume and instead supply data_source, like projections?
Sam
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Elizabeth,
I agree, this makes sense.
Last night I tried to take a crack at this, but I got very confused with the various definitions of volume, interpolated, etc etc, in the routine off_axis_projection. Cameron and Sam, do you think it would be okay if we simplified this routine and relied on the ProjectionCamera for advanced things, like specifying a volume?
-Matt
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Elizabeth Tasker <tasker@astro1.sci.hokudai.ac.jp> wrote:
Hi,
"off_axis_projection" doesn't seem to accept field parameters.
This isn't a big problem and I can definitely get around it by using global variables, but should it have a field_parameter option for consistency with add_projection?
Elizabeth
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
participants (3)
-
Elizabeth Tasker -
Matthew Turk -
Sam Skillman