Yes that is true, I understand the quality problem. But we can't do anything about it...Gephi use OpenGL for displaying graphs...and OpenGL rely on your hardware. Most of users have compatible graphic card that has anti-aliasing capabilities. I tested it on a Notebook, with anti-aliasing and it was looking great.It really depends on how you use Gephi. This Tuesday I will make a presentation showing networks, and how they spatialize. What when you erase a node, what when you move one, what when you change the gravity parameters... all this not in the preview mode. So I need a perfect rendering quality. Also, with the dynamic arriving, what if the movies of networks evolving can't be seen in the preview mode? So they would also need a perfect rendering since the start.
Note that color and edge weight is changing a lot how edges are aliased.
Statistics:Posted by mbastian — 13 Feb 2010 16:04
]]>
Thriving for performance is certainly good, especially since progress in hardware will allow soon, if not now, to handle commonly what Gephi offers. I just really don't know how many users would have *today* computers that are compatible with the features, like 16x AA, which come with this increased performance.
A simple way to measure this would be: can anybody tell me the starting price for a laptop equipped with a graphic card that would support 16x AA?
Thx,
Clement
Statistics:Posted by seinecle — 13 Feb 2010 11:07
]]>
It really depends on how you use Gephi. This Tuesday I will make a presentation showing networks, and how they spatialize. What when you erase a node, what when you move one, what when you change the gravity parameters... all this not in the preview mode. So I need a perfect rendering quality. Also, with the dynamic arriving, what if the movies of networks evolving can't be seen in the preview mode? So they would also need a perfect rendering since the start.
If anti-aliasing, even at x8, is not supported by most graphic cards, I think it is good to reconsider its use by Gephi. Mathieu, just try to use Gephi 0.7 for a week on a computer without anti-aliasing capabilities, and tell us then if you don't reconsider your approach!
I decided that I had to use Gephi 0.6 instead of Gephi 0.7 for my presentation, and in my view this tells it all.
Statistics:Posted by seinecle — 13 Feb 2010 10:48
]]>
@aurelienb: AA is a general setting, that apply on 3D polygons (nodes and edges).
You can usually force AA setting in your graphic card driver panel, or let application decide.
Statistics:Posted by mbastian — 13 Feb 2010 00:42
]]>
]]>
Anti-aliasing is not supported by my laptop graphic card, which is very standard I think:
- Mobile Intel(R) 4 Series Express Chipset Family (installed on an ACER Aspire, 2009 model)
And anti-aliasing is supported up to 6x by the graphic card of my desk computer, which is a very standard graphic card as well I suppose:
- ATI Radeon X1300 (installed on a DELL, 2006 Model).
(so for both graphic cards, aliasing is still very much present at 4x, 8x or 16x for Gephi 0.7).
So as a user, I suppose that the rendering quality should not depend on anti-aliasing, and just function as Gephi 0.6 did.
Statistics:Posted by seinecle — 12 Feb 2010 11:43
]]>
- "screen size" or "zoom size"
- Color and size set by a parameter (ranking, partition)
- Show / hide (all or by filtering)
- Tweak global size (the sliders)
For the moment the labels are the most settable graphical objects, but this discussion leads to generalizing these options and maybe build a more unified, more consistent UI for these...
For example, nodes are always "zoom sized" but it's an interesting option to have them "screen sized", some graph softwares already work like this. The same way, edges may look nicer if "screen sized" like in 0.6 and this option isn't useless for simple unweighted directed graphs. And I notice that it doesn't prevent from sizing by a parameter, and it is easy to set a "good" size with the sliders.
So the panel in the bottom of the graph may have four sections: node, node labels, edges, edge labels
And each section may have these options: "show / hide", "screen size/zoom size", "appearance", "global size slider"
Of course appearance would be different for each type (edges="source node, target node, chosen color", node labels="node color, chosen color; font" ...)
Finally this also asks the question of "proportional node labels" versus "make it proportional manually by ranking"
Statistics:Posted by jacomyma — 11 Feb 2010 11:31
]]>
- put a default "edge zoom" (the slider) to a more "thick" value, because thicker edges have less artifacts
Statistics:Posted by jacomyma — 10 Feb 2010 23:49
]]>
I'll check on my side if there isn't a bug about antialiasing and if edges can be rendered more smooth. With proper antialising, it is as nice as 0.6 on my computer.
@aurelien On your screenshot you don't have any antialiasing
Statistics:Posted by mbastian — 10 Feb 2010 22:19
]]>
Statistics:Posted by aurelienb — 10 Feb 2010 20:11
]]>
I post 3 screen shots to show that in terms of rendering,
gephi 0.7 anti-aliasing x 16 < gephi 0.7 anti-aliasing x 8 < gephi 0.6
My question: What is the anti-aliasing factor of gephi 0.6? Would the x16 in gephi 0.7 match it, or even do better?
Statistics:Posted by seinecle — 10 Feb 2010 12:40
]]>
Statistics:Posted by mbastian — 10 Feb 2010 12:35
]]>
8x aa looks good:
Statistics:Posted by jacomyma — 10 Feb 2010 11:25
]]>
]]>
I guess your graphic drivers are up to date, aren't they ? Do you have the possibility to try on an other OS on the same machine ?
Statistics:Posted by mbastian — 10 Feb 2010 10:13
]]>
]]>
]]>
Any other tip to improve the rendering? It might seem trivial as compared to much more technical problems, but actually it is crucial to get this aesthetic feeling which visualizations with GEPHI 0.6 really had, and to which the viewers are very sensible.
Best,
Clement
Statistics:Posted by seinecle — 09 Feb 2010 13:36
]]>
You can change the antialiasing status in menu > Tools > Visualization > OpenGL.
AA is at 4x by default, and runs to 16x. You have to restart Gephi to take these changes into account.
Statistics:Posted by admin — 09 Feb 2010 12:34
]]>
The visualizations I get with 0.7 are less appealing than in 0.6. I attach two screenshots for comparison.
I am not an expert of these issues, but has it to do with aliasing, or else?
Are there parameters I should change in 0.7 to arrive at visualizations as beautiful as in 0.6?
Looking forward an answer!
Clement
http://www.clementlevallois.net
Statistics:Posted by seinecle — 09 Feb 2010 11:40
]]>