A1-AthulanVijayaraghavan
From CS294-10 Visualization Fa07
[edit] "Good" Visualization"
- Critique
For my "good" visualization, I have chosen this image from an article in a design magazine (@issue:, volume 5(1) ) on new products being launched by Tupperware. The visual is trying to convey the modularity and convenience from that in Tupperware's new range of containers. The visual captures this very viscerally by stacking containers of varying sizes and showing the modularity in action. From the article, it looked like this concept of modularity was relatively new at the time of publication (~1999) and seeing the stacked containers made clear not only the concept of modularity, but also how this eases things in practice. The text in the top-left explains how containers stack up, but its not really necessary to read this as the visual says it all (as an aside, this could be seen as redundant and the space could have been used more efficiently).
The line drawings in the top-margin gives the relative sizes of the various containers in the series and indicates the simple scale relationship between the containers. This hints to the viewer that some kind of stacking is possible, and this is confirmed in the large graphic which has convenient annotations that show this scale relationship. The repetition of the annotations in the margin drawings and the main graphic reinforce the modularity of the containers and shows, quite literally, how things stack up.
The line drawings in the bottom margin shows the cross-sections of the containers in the other plane (one not captured fully in the main graphic) and this tells the reader the variety of container shapes that are possible in this modular configuration. This indicates that choice in container selection is not compromised due to their modularity. Finally, the selection of food-items in the containers make the product very appealing and demonstrates the diverse things that can be stored in the containers. One of the innovations Tupperware was touting in this line of products was the use of clear plastics to make the containers. By using foods of different colors, sizes, and textures the advantage of the clear plastic is driven home. It also gives the entire visual a "feel good" appeal.
- Deconstruction
The primary aim of this visual is to accurately represent and compare the various different container models released by Tupperware. The data encoded in it are mainly length-scale data. As the visual mainly consists of a photograph of the containers, the size data is encoded in the image, and the x- and y-axes represent the size of the object in those directions (and encodes length information, which is Quantitative data). The depth of the containers are indicated by making it a perspective image, so in a sense the z-axis is also represented here and it encodes length information as well.
The line-drawing in top margin encodes size data as well, and the x- and y-axes here correspond to the x- and y-axes in the main image, and encode the length of the containers in the two dimensions. The line-drawing in the bottom margin also encodes size data (length), but the x-axis here corresponds to the z-axis in the main image, and the y-axis corresponds to the x-axis in the main image. All the encoded information is Quantitative (ratio) data. Annotations are provided in the different images which explicitly indicate the relative size. The colors used in the image do not encode any data, but they contribute to the visual appeal of the image and lend to the aesthetics.
[edit] "Bad" Visualization"
- Critique
For the "bad" visualization, I have chosen this image and schematic of a micro-fluidic device used in drug delivery from a research paper: "Microfluidic diagnostic technologies for global public health", by Yager et al, Nature 442, pp 412-418. At first glance, this looks like a clear visual, with the top photograph showing the actual device and the bottom graphic showing a schematic of its functioning. On closer inspection however, it becomes apparent that the layout of the entities in the schematic is very different from the layout in the photograph.
Firstly, it looks like the device has been rotated 90-degrees in the schematic compared to the photograph. The dotted-line in the schematic is actually representing the limit of the device itself (the "Pump", "Waste" etc., components are actually outside it!). At first glance (without reading the text), it seemed that the entire schematic represented the device, and not the boxed area alone (using a dotted-line increased the confusion). The interfaces for these external components are not shown explicitly in the photograph, which instead indicates plenty of other components inside the device which are not referenced to in the schematic. Hence to understand the functioning of the device, I need to first read the text below, and then actively switch between both images, making it a tedious process.
Perhaps what really made this a bad visual for me is how much potential this had in becoming a good visual. The schematic could have overlaid the photograph and the components and flows could have been identified in this composite image. Now, to see how a specific flow, I have to look at two images with non-matching entities making it tedious (especially for a neophyte in this field; but I would imagine visualizations are for the neophytes). With the combined approach, tracing the flow and the components it goes through would have been much easier. Color information is also not used very well in the schematic. Coloring could have been used in showing the different flow rates, either using a gradient or solid colors for specific rates. This would have also given a sense of the dynamics of the device, which would improve readers' understanding of its functioning. The suggested approach would also move some information from the text below to simple graphics like a scale or a legend, which would also improve the readability of the visual.
- Deconstruction
This visual consists of two images, one a photograph and the other a schematic. Both images encode positional information, as they are scale models of a physical device (the scales, however, are not indicated). The x- and y-axes of the photograph encodes the physical position of the components in the device. This is Quantitaive data.
The x- and y-axes of the schematic encodes the relative functional positions of the components in the device. When the schematic and device are compared, we can see that the physical position of the device components do not match with the functional position. The schematic clarifies the photograph by encoding the position of the components such that they appear functional. Manufacturing and other considerations probably limit the physical device from actually looking like this, which is why two images seem to have been used, and is also why they do not match up exactly. Although this seems like Quantitative positional data, I would argue that it is Nominal positional data. The positions of the components are not related to their physical position. They are so arranged to make it easy to read, which is more for aesthetics. The confusion between component locations in two figures is because they encode different data, the first one Quantitative and the second one Nominal.
- Redesign
As mentioned in the critique, for the redesign I created a composite image by overlaying the schematic with the device photograph. This way we can reconcile the interaction of the components (flow etc.,) with where they are physically positioned on the device. Only the valves from the schematic had to be transplanted into the photograph, as the physical components (holding well, mixer etc.,) were already indicated in the photograph. I have to admit that this makes reading a bit involved (it _is_ a high-density visual), but atleast we can see how the components interact and function in the device. The flow-rates in the various sections are indicated using colors. The color values are nominal and are indicated in a key. I chose to use nominal colors instead of a gradient as only 7 distinct flow-rates are seen. The labels for the various valves have been colored nominally as well, with orange indicating a flow out of the system and blue indicating a flow into the system. Given that a long description of the device is provided in the caption, this aggregated view should provide enough information to the reader. I was not able to add one annotation seen in the original image - the one indicating the 60/40 split between the flows out of the H-Filter, but this can be easily included in the caption (this is already referred to in the caption).
The redesign now shows only Quantitative positional data, and no Nominal positional data. It does, however, additional show Nominal color data for the flow-rates. The text annotations showing the various components has been retained from the original.
Note: I tried to obtain a clean photograph of the device without any text annotations, but I could not find any. Because of this, some of my new annotations (flow-rates and flows) overlap with the existing text annotations making the reading a bit unclear.
