• beefbot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Be nice to have the y axis start at zero so we could get a realistic sense of the fluctuations.

    Yes yes this is pedantic for a chart about movie posters, but we’re all pretty desensitised to disinformation; feels useful to train myself to recognise it & speak out about it. The y axis isn’t visible, so the chart is misleading 🤷‍♂️

    • filcuk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The values changed so little compared to the full spectrum it wouldn’t make sense.
      You’re not comparing to zero, but relative to values over time.
      I agree with how it’s presented.

  • friendly_ghost@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I’d love to see this for luminance. I know my vision is getting worse, but I cannot see the goddamn Batman or anything else made in the last five years

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      yeah that part of the graph is completely useless to people who haven’t memorised the exact degrees of the scale, which is most people, even most artists

      • bob_lemon@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 hours ago

        The problem is that averaging hue makes no sense at all because hue is not a longest scale.

        If you take a red poster (0) and a blue poster (240), it averages to green. Or take red (0) and red (359), averaging to cyan (180).

            • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Not if there is a clear trend. If most movie posters are blue, three average will be blue.

              But i agree, it is useless if there is no clear trend.