Some data...

...to quote Demetri Martin. I've just come across a bad graphs at FINN.no. First off, is a pie chart of the different browseres used on FINN.no:

So what's wrong with this? First off all, pie charts are depending on us camparing areas to each other, and we can't do that very well when there are some many. So this is the wrong type of chart. To make it even worse, the gradient, shading and 3D-effect makes it even harder to compare the ares. The alignment of the numbers can also have an effect to make the perceived area larger or smaller (though there aren't any really good examples on this chart). They should at least have ordered the slices in decreasing or increasing size. Also, the legend on the right makes your eye go back and fourth to match the browser with the corresponding slice of the pie.

A simple table would have made these data much more available and faster to explore for the reader.

But since I'm in a mood for exploring the possibilities and limitations of Excel and improve my presentation/ charting skills, I've suggested a better graph:
I made this just with Excel, no editing. The numbers next to the where made using a "fake" second series with value 0% and named after the value of each browser share, and I use series name as data label, aglined to the left. I would have loved if Excel could do that automatically, and to be able to formate each of the labels individually. For example, I would prefer to have the "%"-sign a couple of points smaller then the number. Also, I think the point of the author was that IE6 is now used of less then 10% of the users. To emphasise that, I could have given the IE6 bar a red color. But, when it comes to colors, I prefer the following rule:

So, I made a version in black and white. Slightly less fancy, but it does get the point across:
Yes, I could have worked a bit more with selecting the greys, but this is the default grey's in Excel 2003.

Next up was a line plot showing the trends over time:

Line plots greatest strength is to show trends over time, so in that case, they've choosen the correct type of chart. But there are some bad graphing here as well: The background gradient takes too much attention, the alignment of the titles of the axis are wrong (they should be horisontal), your eyes again has to go back and fourth between the legende and the plot, etc. But my main concern is the numbers on the lines. First of all, they don't add up to 100% (just sum the numbers on the right end) and especially from sept. '08 march '09 it's really hard to read the values on the smallest browseres. I even had to "guesstimate" the values there when I made my own version. Line plots does not do a good job of presenting individual values, bar charts are much better at that. Or a table. So my suggestion for improving this graph, is a combination of a line plot and a table, to get the best of two worlds:
Again I could have spent more time on the colors, but I used the standard palette in Excel 2003. What I really would want to be able to do here, is to formate the table better, so make the legende and headers stand out from the data. But here I'm falling short, I don't even know how to "cheat" in Excel to make that happen. Any suggestions? Still, I do feel my suggestion is clearer and better then the default ones from FINN.no.

Triple book review...

Since I've been on holiday, I've had the time to read some books. Some geeky stuff this time, not much fine litterature here. Sort of a red thread with regards to the topic of these books. Anyway, here we go.


Presentation Zen: Simple Ideas on Presentation Design and Delivery
by Garr Reynolds

I've been following mr. Reynolds fine blog with the same name for three years now, and have probably read about 90-100% of his posts. My first impression is how much of this book Garr has given away for free on his blog. That's not important for people who hasn't read his blog, but people like me might feel cheated for paying for something we've already have gotten. Not me, I think it's great have all this collected in a book, and presented in a complete manner.

This book explains Garr Reynolds idea of presentation, where simplicity in design and delivery is sentral. This is not a "Powerpoint primer" or similar, in fact, it hardly mentions how things is done in Powerpoint, Keynote or similar. It focus on the content and style, rather then the technical details. And mr. Reynolds have compiled a pretty good argument for his style. It's backed up with a lot of real life and fixtional examples that showcases his points. And as he closes the book with, this is not a final conclusion about presentation, but a first step on a long way of making better presentations.

As for me, I really have learned a lot about slide layout and design in general from this book, and I really like it. However, I do feel that the approch does not really apply to my needs. It's more suitable for buisness and sharing ideas and visions (but not exclusivly that). In a lecture situation, you can't cut your presentation down to the three most important points. You gotta cover the curricilum. And sometimes, you need to put in formulas and complex data (which mr. Reynolds at least partially aknowledge). At the end, there are sample slides of some other people using the presentation zen approch, among them a University lecture on aromatic chemisty. I really would love to see that lecture, because I still believe that you can't apply this approch "unmodified" to such a complex topic. But I sure like to be convinced, cause this is a book everybody who present or lecure could learn from. Recommended.

The back of the napkin

by Dan Roam

This book is about visual thinking using simple (hand-drawn) pictures to stimulate creative thinking in problem solving and present and sell ideas. I'm a sucker for icons, and I've browsed through mr. Roam's blog a couple of times, and I liked the icon-like quality of some of his drawings and his simple and effective way of picture different things (I even think I made a post about it before the US election last year). Loved the examples I found on the blog.

The book? Well, first of all, it's really buisness oriented. And I've heard mr. Roam state that buisness people us pictures and graphs far less then, say, science people. I don't know about that, but what struck me when I start reading the book, is that I actually use pictures to communicate, solve problems and illustrate a point. Many of those hand drawn, but I can't remember the last time I went into a meeting with a hand-drawn picuture or graph. Then I have them electronically in Excel/ powerpoint or similar. I also think that people with basic knowledge in statistics or chemometrics have a lot of powerful, and sometimes better, charts we can make. That's especially true for the elaborated multi-variable charts.

Apart from the point above, I did enjoy reading this book even though it is really a buisness book; a world pretty unknown to me. I did enjoy his ture stories of how he has used his pictures and graphs in selling ideas and solving problems as a buisness consultant. Some of the tools where you stimulate both the "right and left side" of the brain is also interesting and something I might consider trying out. But what I really found inspiring about this book, is the way to focus an idea and deliever it in a way that people can follow quickly. Even though the examples are buisness, it's something everybody can learn from. Another recommandation from me.

The Visual Display of Quantitative Information

by Edward Tufte

Now this is something different. Edward Tufte is an American statistician and Professor of statistics and whatnot, and this book is in a different league then the two above. While they emphasize simplicity and crystalizing out the essential message to present or sell, Tufte with his background is a strong defender of the other use of charts: To plot a lot of data to make data-dence charts that allows researcher and normal people to explore data, rather then just being sold an idea. In fact, Tufte argues that simple data/ small data sets are better represented in a table. Though I do see the use of both kinds, I am geeky enough to really enjoy Tuftes' argument and examples, going all the way back to Leonard and the first pie and bar charts ever made, up to current issues of newspapers and scientific journals. The only drawback is that this book is a reprint from 1980 or so, and a few of his arguments are obsolete. For example, one of his charts he states that he had reduced the number of lines needed to draw the chart from 80 to 10, thus saving the scientist time that should be spent better doing research. In this time of Excel and computers, I don't know of any scientist that still makes charts by hand. Furthermore, some of the changes, that improves the chart, does take longer to make then just pulling up the standard Excel-graph. And sometimes that is enough.

But his data-ink ratio (how much of the ink on a graph is used to represent data, and how much is "chart junk") and data density are really interesting. And he makes a compelling argument that the newspapers use advanced language, but simple charts. I wonder how the situation is today. This is a great book that everybody that draws charts or deal with large data sets should read. Even if it is old. Highly recommended, I will buy more of his books.

Apparently, trees are my bag

I got a digital single-lens reflex camera (Nikon D60) from my wife for Christmas, and I've slowly gotten to the stage where I don't suck quite as much anymore. Don't get me wrong; I'm still a complete dilettante, but I'm getting better. I used to be the guy who'd take someone's picture and end up with a photograph consisting of 76% skyline and the actual motive out of focus. I also used to be the guy who'd keep insisting that we'd stop the car whenever we crossed Valdresflya or something of similar scenic value, so that I could snap some shots, completely neglecting that trying to take pictues of large, scenic landscapes with a small digital camera is a little bit like trying to drink water out of a firehose operating at full capacity.

No more of that - or at least I'm putting more effort into it. The technical aspect of photography is improving in what I do, although I'm still mostly clinging to the comfort of the "Auto" setting. The biggest change has to do with my finally starting to come to terms with the limitations of a camera lens compared to the human eyes. My ability to pick out motives and compose a picture is slowly improving. I don't really know why my ability to select motives has been so abysmal, seeing as how I'm used to microscopy and I'm more than competent at making PowerPoint presentations that are functional as well as easy on the eyes. This deficiency has also taught me that photography is one of them things that can be checked off as not being hereditary, since my dad is a really good amateur photographer.

In as far as selecting motives, my thing at the moment is how light interacts with trees under various conditions - trees are currently my bag.

El books del duo

as the bumblebee man would say.

So I bought these two books about design. Not because I got a sudden urge too design clothes or go enterior designer; these books are not about making things pretty. I relized that most of the things a do; like write stuff at work, making presentations, making web-pages and so forth, are really releated to communicate a something. A good design would help to make that message clear. And my goal of reading these books are to start to learn the basic elements of design. I figure that knowing the basic would make me able to understand what to do with a design (a memo, a presentation or whatever) and not just simple "try and fail" untill it looks OK.

Universal Principles of Design
100 Ways to Enhance Usability, Influence Perception, Increase Appeal, Make Better Design Decisions, and Teach Through Design
William Lidwell, Kritina Holden & Jill Butler

Well, the title says it all. This book covers everything form the layout of book stores and parks, to software design and airplane saftey. Built as a reference, with each principle covered in a two page layout: An explanation of the principle on the left hand page, and examples on the right had side. And when we talk about "design", it's not making thing pretty, it's making things clear, safe and understandable. For example, a door that you push to open shouldn't have a door handle and a sign that says "push". Replace the the handle with a flat bracket, and it's self explaining how to open the door. No need for the extra sign. Excellent use of white space, this books is not only informative but also a feast for the eye. Ok, man of the principles are know, but here they are organized and explained in a really effective and simple way. Good to read from start to end, but also an easy reference book.

The Elements of Graphic Design

Space, Unity, Page Architecture, and Type

Alexander W. White

This on book is more focused, and is focused on layout and print. The design of the book is also good, but very different from the one above. This book has a lot of text and little white space, but it still very readable. And this is actually something I like about this book. It gives you the general principles, but the author also gives clear examples and his opinions. For example, many books says you should use high contrast between background and font. This book says that 70% different in contrast gives optimum readability. And that white fonts on a black background may "bleed" and that a white background in a dark room will seem too bright. Good and useful info!

So, I basically love both these books. The first one because it gives a really good introduction and is really easy to use as a reference book. The last one is so much more useful, since "graphic design" is what I do (e.g. presentations, reports, summaries, the odd christmas card, blogging, etc, etc). The chances that I one day will design a plane or an iPod store is really slim.

And the last book gave a really good definition of good design (paraphrased from memory): "If two designs are equal simple, the one conveying the most information is the most elegant. And in two designs that conveys the same amout of information, the simplest one is the most elegant".

A tribute to Mitch Hedberg

Mitch Hedberg - a great comedian who passed away way too early. His stand-up acts are in my opinion some of the best ever, especially if you appreciate disjunct and sometimes bizarre everyday observations beyond the cliché "Don't you hate it when ..." or "Have you ever wondered why ...". Enjoy these four Mitch Hedberg clips.

on est chez nous !!!

Wilhelm's not there so for now on, the blog is french

Evaluating Art. Part one - Movies

Scott Adams has recently written an entry about "Judging Art" in his blog. Note how my clever substitution of the word "Judging" makes it look like I designed the title by my very self.

His main point is that instead of applying the standard, subjective criteria of (essentially) "do I like this", the quality of art should be judged by how well the artist achieves his or her objectives, whatever they might be. Thus, when art achieves its goal, it must be considered great. The primary example he mentions is the comic strip "Garfield" by Jim Davis, who set out to create a massively popular comic strip. Seeing as how he has realized this goal, "Garfield" is great art (if you consider comic strips as art, that is) regardless of its content or how many people actually find it amusing.

Although I do not necessarily agree that this is a good way of measuring anything but the artist's fragile grasp of reality, it certainly opens up for different interpretations of books, movies, music, paintings and whatnot than the ones you've already applied. It also requires the goals of the artist to be clearly stated as the project is released, so as to avoid situations wherein for example Jack Black would be able to say "Yeah; I was tired of being funny, so I made Nacho Libre just to get out of the media and lose momentum for a while" after the fact. Ditto Eddie Murphy post 1988.

Still, the method does not provide you with any criteria by which to estimate your potential interest for the product prior to e.g. watching/renting/buying a movie. Although if I had known ahead of time that George Lucas set out to emulate the massive success of Teletubbies by incorporating a similar character in his prequels, it would certainly have affected the odds of me seeing Episode 1 - The Merchandising Misanthrope....

Anyway; in the simple view that the quality of a movie is affected by the components (i.e. the script/story, the choice of actors, the director, etc.), it should be possible to get a decent estimation of whether or not the movie sucks by evaluating parameters independently, such as:

• Storyline/script: Here, you often don't have much to go on, even if it's based on a book you've read several times, or a historical event. Even movies based on excellent novels can suck (e.g. "The Man in the Iron Mask"), and if you're assuming historical accuracy from movies based on actual events, I've got some prime office space in WTC2 you can rent real cheap. What you can safely assume, however, is that any movie based on a computer game probably won't have much in the way of what one traditionally refers to as a "plot".
• Actors/Actresses: Parameter wherein the quality is proportional to [presence of (Gary Oldman + DeNiro + Ed Norton + Nicholas Cage + Allison Janney + Meryl Streep + Glenn Close +..) plus absence of (Tom Cruise + Leonardo DiCaprio + Keanu Reeves + Antonio Banderas + Samuel L. Jackson + Angelina Jolie + Mary-Louise Parker +...)]
• Director: ...what I like to call the "Absence of Michael Moore and whomever made The Blair Witch project"-factor
• Title/taglines: Phrases/words to avoid: "Snakes on a ...", "Frat", "ex-marine", "ex-black ops", "...this time, ...", "Revenge Of The........", "James Bond"
• Budget: Sometimes, small, independent films can be absolutely great, i.e. "Clerks". However, if a movie comes with the label "as seen at the Sundance film festival" or something to that effect, odds are it's more akin to "The Blair Witch project". And that's not a good thing..
• More?