Recently I was looking for something like this for a visualization. I had to find 16 nice looking distinct colors, which turned out to be pretty hard. Thanks!
"I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
21–30 of 40 posts
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#22Any solutions for colour blind scientists?
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#23Any solutions for colour blind scientists?
Check out http://colorbrewer2.org/
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#24As someone who has put together figures for a scientific paper, I can safely say that the last thing I want are a wide-range of colors to use. Many people are color-blind, and many people print on black & white printers. So when I design the figures, I stick with pure colors. Pure red (255,0,0) or pure green (0,255,0) or pure blue (0,0,255). I suppose it would be smarter to design a set of color codes where even if someone were missing one of the three color receptors in their eye, they would still be able to discern each individual color as distinct. Perhaps (128,128,0), (128,0,128), (0,128,128).
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#25It's interesting they've started this médialab in Science Po, which is (as the name implies) a social sciences university [0] in Paris [1].
Looking at the team [2] the name of Bruno Latour as a director seems a bit out of place. After his controversial views on the social construction of science [3] I find it astonishing that he is put at the head of the department that is in charge of bridging the world of the social scientists with that of the quantitative methods and hard sciences.
[1] Grande école actually.
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciences_Po
[2] http://www.medialab.sciences-po.fr/en/team/
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Latour#Laboratory_Life
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#26Great work!
Is there already an API to use? It would be great to use it directly and credit this website for the algorithms used.
The dynamical palette would become very useful in that case.
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#27It's interesting they've started this médialab in Science Po, which is (as the name implies) a social sciences university [0] in Paris [1]. Looking at the team [2] the name of Bruno Latour as a director seems a bit out of place. After his controversial views on the social construction of science [3] I find it astonishing that he is put at the head of the department that is in charge of bridging the world of the socia…
I don't see Latour as a particularly bad choice for bridging those worlds. One of his main points is paying close empirical attention to both how scientists actually work, and how non-human things work. Unlike a lot of humanities theorists of science, he actually went into laboratories and wrote down what seem like pretty honest accounts of what he found there. He's fairly controversial among pure social constructionists partly as a result. For example, he had a dispute with David Bloor some years ago [1] over Latour's insistence on including nonhuman objects in his explanation of how science works (rather than treating science as a purely social process). More recently, he's been attacking the tendency, born of the legacy of critical theory, to treat intellectual activity as a series of de-maskings of something the scholar will always find to be "naive" [2].
I mean, the last thing we should want, as scientists, is to have blind faith in a quasi-religious, idealized view of how science works, rather than empirically investigating how it actually works. Plus he seems pretty interested lately in tying in some philosophical ideas with quantitative network-analysis methods: http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/123-WHOLE-PAR...
[1] Bloor's attack on Latour, http://reclus.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bloor-anti-latour...., and a reply, http://www.melissa.ens-cachan.fr/IMG/pdf/latour_-_reponse_a_...
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#28As someone who has put together figures for a scientific paper, I can safely say that the last thing I want are a wide-range of colors to use. Many people are color-blind, and many people print on black & white printers. So when I design the figures, I stick with pure colors. Pure red (255,0,0) or pure green (0,255,0) or pure blue (0,0,255). I suppose it would be smarter to design a set of color codes where even if s…
Unless you're staying on a computer your 'pure colors' aren't really pure.
And pure green (0,255,0) is really unpleasant.
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#29It's interesting they've started this médialab in Science Po, which is (as the name implies) a social sciences university [0] in Paris [1]. Looking at the team [2] the name of Bruno Latour as a director seems a bit out of place. After his controversial views on the social construction of science [3] I find it astonishing that he is put at the head of the department that is in charge of bridging the world of the socia…
I don't see Latour as a particularly bad choice for bridging those worlds. One of his main points is paying close empirical attention to both how scientists actually work, and how non-human things work. Unlike a lot of humanities theorists of science, he actually went into laboratories and wrote down what seem like pretty honest accounts of what he found there. He's fairly controversial among pure social construction…
I agree, Latour has always been about bridging those worlds, in his own unique way.
Here's his reply to those who misunderstand him as somehow denying reality: http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/70-DO-YOU-BEL...
And, next week he is delivering the Gifford Lectures, which should be fun. There is a webcast: http://www.ed.ac.uk/news/2013/gifford-080213
Re: "I Want Hue" – Colors for Data Scientists
#30It's interesting they've started this médialab in Science Po, which is (as the name implies) a social sciences university [0] in Paris [1]. Looking at the team [2] the name of Bruno Latour as a director seems a bit out of place. After his controversial views on the social construction of science [3] I find it astonishing that he is put at the head of the department that is in charge of bridging the world of the socia…
I don't see Latour as a particularly bad choice for bridging those worlds. One of his main points is paying close empirical attention to both how scientists actually work, and how non-human things work. Unlike a lot of humanities theorists of science, he actually went into laboratories and wrote down what seem like pretty honest accounts of what he found there. He's fairly controversial among pure social construction…
I don't agree. The last thing we should want, as scientists, is to do bad science: to be actually dishonest or credulous, to get it wrong due to sloppy methods and reasoning, etc.
But this doesn't particularly correlate with agreement with or even attention to attempts to 'deconstruct' science from an ostensibly privileged and less-naive position. Nor does critical theory typically offer much useful advice for scientists to do the job better by the lights of anyone who is serious about doing good science. What comes is more in the vein of context-independent, pretentious negativity about the goal and the current state of knowledge, aimed at some academic-political end rather than improvements in understanding of the world.
Observing this and carrying on with one's careful work is not 'quasi-religious' or 'blind faith,' it is the application of a simple relevance filter. If you want to critique physics experiments, you should find an actual concrete scientific basis: a problem in their reasoning, a fishy thing in their data or in their procedure. Otherwise, you are really not talking about physics and what you have is more of a posture than an actual falsification or revision of scientific value.
Doing anthropology on scientists is something you can do, but no guarantees that the result will be accurate (unless you 'quasi-religiously' attend to scientific rigor and data, as if they really mattered and weren't just pointless masturbatory constructions which might as well be made up). And certainly no reason to think that scientists in other fields are obligated to care on pain of being bad scientists.