Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematica Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Mathematica. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I edited my question and included the code:

here I make the general definitions for the parametric plots I have to do later (these are simply the definitions of the x and y coordinates of the points in the region, there are no problems here):

ClearAll["Global^*"];

ClearSystemCache[];

eU2[heU2_?NumericQ] = (Sin[heU2])^2/(2 *(1 - Cos[heU2])^2);

zU2[hzU2_?NumericQ] = Cos[hzU2]/(1 - Cos[hzU2]);

hU2end[cU2end_?NumericQ] = ArcCos[(2*cU2end^2 - 1)/(2*cU2end^2 + 1)];

hU2cmbt[cU2cmbt_?NumericQ, oU2cmbt_?NumericQ, eFU2cmbt_?NumericQ] = 
2*ArcCos[(Cos[oU2cmbt/2])*E^(-(eFU2cmbt/(2*cU2cmbt^2)))];

hU2cmb[cU2cmb_?NumericQ, eFU2cmb_?NumericQ] = 
hU2cmbt[cU2cmb, oU2cmb, eFU2cmb] /. oU2cmb -> hU2end[cU2cmb];

nsU2[cnsU2_?NumericQ, eFnsU2_?NumericQ] = 
1 + 2*cnsU2^(-2)*zU2[hU2cmb[cnsU2, eFnsU2]] - 
6*cnsU2^(-2)*eU2[hU2cmb[cnsU2, eFnsU2]];

rU2[crU2_?NumericQ, eFrU2_?NumericQ] = 
16*crU2^(-2)*eU2[hU2cmb[crU2, eFrU2]];

Having defined these functions, I define a color to be used later:

CoolColorU2 = ColorData["CMYKColors"];

Now I do the parametric plot:

 PlotU2Treh = 
 ParametricPlot[
 Evaluate[{nsU2[CCU2Treh, NNU2Treh], 
 rU2[CCU2Treh, NNU2Treh]}], {CCU2Treh, 5, 50}, {NNU2Treh, 49, 62}, 
 PlotRange -> {{944/1000, 969/1000}, {25/1000, 180/1000}}, 
 AspectRatio -> 1/GoldenRatio, 
 ColorFunction -> 
 Function[{x, y, CCU2Treh}, Opacity[1/3, CoolColorU2[CCU2Treh]]], 
 ColorFunctionScaling -> {True, True, True,
 BoundaryStyle -> None, Axes -> False, 
 LabelStyle -> Directive[11, FontFamily -> "Palatino"], 
 FrameLabel -> {"lll", 
 "hhh"}, WorkingPrecision -> 6, 
 PerformanceGoal -> "Quality"]

The problems here are the following:

1) when I export this Image in .pdf, I get the result shown in the figure below (.tiff conversion from Mac Preview, cannot upload .pdf)

enter image description here

that is there are some "lines" between the "rectangles" of the underlying mesh, that form a "strange tiling" on my surface.

2) when exporting to .pdf, Mathematica gives me a file of the order of MB (when it doesn't crash upon exporting, that is half of the time). Why so heavy (correction: this seems to be the case only when I add with "Legended" some legends I did with "BarLegend" and "SwatchLegend")?

3) when trying to "zoom" with "Show" and "PlotRange" i get the following image (again, converted to .tiff with Preview)

enter image description here

and the "problem" is that the plot seems to "leak out" when encountering the x axis. How can I avoid this?

So in the end there are two questions:

a) why if I plot the first parametric region with a "color gradient" that "strange tiling" appears?

b) why does the image "leak out" from the borders upon zooming in?

Thank you, hope to hear from you soon.

Giovanni

P.S.: Mathematica version: 9.0.0. Laptop: MacBook OS X 10.9.2 Mavericks, 2.2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4 GB DDR3

EDIT: solved two thirds of the question, last problem remains.

Ok I think I solved the "b)" problem. Going through the docs I saw that for PlotRange settings other than "All", "Full" and "Automatic", the "PlotRangePadding" option is set to none. If I set PlotRange to "All", "Full" or "Automatic", instead, there is a 4% padding. So I think that I just have to add the "PlotRangePadding" option myself.

So, there is only the problem "a)" left: I tried to use

Method->{"TransparentPolygonMesh"->True}

as was suggested in Removing unwanted appearance of underlying mesh and Using transparency in ContourPlot makes mesh visible but when I export the graphic to .pdf, the problem remains.

share|improve this question
3  
I don't know, are the links from this topic helpful: 27245? Wellcome to Mathematica.SE :) Please post a code instead of images, images are ok for the results but do you want others to rewrite your examples? ;) –  Kuba May 6 at 18:01
2  
This is an awful lot of code and pictures for people to process. I recommend creating a minimal working example which has the problem. This will encourage more answers, and in the process you can often discover the solution yourself. –  wxffles May 8 at 2:18
    
Thank you for editing your post, I hope you will get the answer :) –  Kuba May 8 at 5:09
    
I solved the second problem by changing the order of the Plots is "Show": I "showed" the two regions first and the dashed line next. Probably the problem lied in the fact that "Show" takes the options of the first plot. Whit this said, only the first problem remains (and a lot less code for people to process). Hope you can help, thanks. –  giova7_89 May 8 at 8:14
    
I tried using the command Method -> {"TransparentPolygonMesh" -> True} in ParametricPlot, as mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/20445 suggested, but it didn't change the exported .pdf file. –  giova7_89 May 8 at 13:11

1 Answer 1

You can apply a strategy I learned from @Jens.

Add the following to your notebook:

Map[SetOptions[#, 
    Prolog -> {{EdgeForm[], Texture[{{{0, 0, 0, 0}}}], 
       Polygon[#, VertexTextureCoordinates -> #] &[{{0, 0}, {1, 
          0}, {1, 1}}]}}] &, {ParametricPlot}];

Give your plot a name:

im1 = PlotU2Treh = 
  ParametricPlot[
   Evaluate[{nsU2[CCU2Treh, NNU2Treh], 
     rU2[CCU2Treh, NNU2Treh]}], {CCU2Treh, 5, 50}, {NNU2Treh, 49, 62},
    PlotRange -> {{944/1000, 969/1000}, {25/1000, 180/1000}}, 
   AspectRatio -> 1/GoldenRatio, 
   ColorFunction -> 
    Function[{x, y, CCU2Treh}, Opacity[1/3, CoolColorU2[CCU2Treh]]], 
   ColorFunctionScaling -> {True, True, True, BoundaryStyle -> None, 
     Axes -> False}, 
   LabelStyle -> Directive[11, FontFamily -> "Palatino"], 
   FrameLabel -> {"lll", "hhh"}, WorkingPrecision -> 6, 
   PerformanceGoal -> "Quality"]

And for export and tuning:

Export["myFig.pdf", im1, ImageResolution -> 288]

On my system (10.0 for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit) (June 29, 2014)) the pdf has about 50 KB and no more artifacts.

enter image description here

share|improve this answer
2  
I think you should do the second code block first. Lately I've been using that trick in the form of a function, see e.g. here. –  Jens Sep 15 at 20:44
    
@Jens Done, Thanks for the encouragement and support. –  Lou Sep 16 at 3:26
    
Thanks for doing the comparison of approaches in your answer here, which I strangely overlooked until now. –  Jens Sep 16 at 3:34

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.