1
00:00:02,781 --> 00:00:04,280
This week we're
going to take a look

2
00:00:04,280 --> 00:00:06,820
at exactly what you DO
with the photographs

3
00:00:06,820 --> 00:00:08,280
after you've made them.

4
00:00:08,280 --> 00:00:12,030
And, once again, frankly we
could devote a full six week

5
00:00:12,030 --> 00:00:15,540
course to just this idea
alone--presenting your work.

6
00:00:15,540 --> 00:00:18,550
But we'll try to cover
this topic as best we can

7
00:00:18,550 --> 00:00:21,760
in just a couple of tutorials
for you for this week.

8
00:00:21,760 --> 00:00:23,700
So let's start
with a few figures

9
00:00:23,700 --> 00:00:27,600
just to dissect them and get
you to think more about how

10
00:00:27,600 --> 00:00:30,730
you create figures
with your images.

11
00:00:30,730 --> 00:00:32,509
Let's first take
a look at a figure

12
00:00:32,509 --> 00:00:35,050
that the researchers made
for a grant submission.

13
00:00:35,050 --> 00:00:37,840
And here we see a
host of the pieces

14
00:00:37,840 --> 00:00:41,420
of devices, and the full
devices, all labeled.

15
00:00:41,420 --> 00:00:45,120
They wanted to show what they
were capable of creating--of

16
00:00:45,120 --> 00:00:47,470
course which is important.

17
00:00:47,470 --> 00:00:50,250
But there's so much
going on, the question

18
00:00:50,250 --> 00:00:53,670
is whether we want to
bother looking anywhere.

19
00:00:53,670 --> 00:00:55,110
By the way, just
a note, I didn't

20
00:00:55,110 --> 00:00:57,310
make any of these
images of the research,

21
00:00:57,310 --> 00:01:01,530
but I knew that a few of the
original images were in color.

22
00:01:01,530 --> 00:01:03,980
So first of all, why
not use the color

23
00:01:03,980 --> 00:01:06,410
renditions if you have them.

24
00:01:06,410 --> 00:01:09,690
Now, let's concentrate on the
composition of the figure.

25
00:01:09,690 --> 00:01:13,170
Why not somehow find a
way that makes some sort

26
00:01:13,170 --> 00:01:15,140
of compositional sense?

27
00:01:15,140 --> 00:01:20,750
So here, we re-ordered all these
devices according to scale,

28
00:01:20,750 --> 00:01:22,840
so we're giving the
readers some idea

29
00:01:22,840 --> 00:01:26,370
of how to look at
this very busy figure.

30
00:01:26,370 --> 00:01:29,620
In addition, we removed
most of the labeling

31
00:01:29,620 --> 00:01:32,310
and we created a
key to the images.

32
00:01:32,310 --> 00:01:35,280
And that key would be
labelled with letters,

33
00:01:35,280 --> 00:01:38,280
so that if you wanted more
information about this

34
00:01:38,280 --> 00:01:42,620
particular image within the
figure, for example its scale,

35
00:01:42,620 --> 00:01:46,400
like this one, you would then
find that letter in the caption

36
00:01:46,400 --> 00:01:48,240
and get more information.

37
00:01:48,240 --> 00:01:51,340
So, you might not agree (but
I hope you do) if you look

38
00:01:51,340 --> 00:01:55,229
at them side-by-side, I hope
you see that, once again:

39
00:01:55,229 --> 00:01:59,590
by simplifying, editing down
your figures to the essential

40
00:01:59,590 --> 00:02:03,960
pieces, and organize
them to tell your story,

41
00:02:03,960 --> 00:02:08,169
that the reader--and in this
case grant reviewer--enjoys

42
00:02:08,169 --> 00:02:11,940
looking at your figure and
understands the contents

43
00:02:11,940 --> 00:02:13,320
of your figure.

44
00:02:13,320 --> 00:02:17,190
If you're using up space in
your article, your presentation,

45
00:02:17,190 --> 00:02:19,250
or your grant
submission, why not

46
00:02:19,250 --> 00:02:23,440
use that space so that the
viewers actually want to look.

47
00:02:23,440 --> 00:02:27,060
In this example, you are
seeing two photographs

48
00:02:27,060 --> 00:02:29,550
that I made quite a
while ago, depicting

49
00:02:29,550 --> 00:02:31,910
two ends of a long device.

50
00:02:31,910 --> 00:02:34,990
The device was too long
to get into one frame.

51
00:02:34,990 --> 00:02:39,380
So the researcher used these
two photographs in one figure.

52
00:02:39,380 --> 00:02:41,600
The left and the right
side of the device

53
00:02:41,600 --> 00:02:44,930
are combined, indicating
that it's much longer,

54
00:02:44,930 --> 00:02:47,340
as you can see
with this notation.

55
00:02:47,340 --> 00:02:52,730
And we see all sorts of labels
and arrows and SEM inserts.

56
00:02:52,730 --> 00:02:56,760
What I suggested first from
the very beginning is--please,

57
00:02:56,760 --> 00:02:59,680
give us a little more
space to breathe!

58
00:02:59,680 --> 00:03:03,570
So many figures are packed
so tightly with stuff,

59
00:03:03,570 --> 00:03:07,030
and we actually don't know how
to even start looking at it.

60
00:03:07,030 --> 00:03:10,190
So for example, adding
space around the perimeter,

61
00:03:10,190 --> 00:03:14,320
is what I did here by inserting
the whole figure into an area

62
00:03:14,320 --> 00:03:16,930
with a larger canvas size.

63
00:03:16,930 --> 00:03:19,430
And then, I questioned
the labeling.

64
00:03:19,430 --> 00:03:22,180
If you are labeling
within an image,

65
00:03:22,180 --> 00:03:25,120
it's imperative to
simplify your labeling

66
00:03:25,120 --> 00:03:28,310
and clean it up and
make it nice and neat.

67
00:03:28,310 --> 00:03:30,100
And here's what mean by that.

68
00:03:30,100 --> 00:03:34,550
Try to put all your labels
lined up as best you you can,

69
00:03:34,550 --> 00:03:38,710
either vertically and
/ or horizontally.

70
00:03:38,710 --> 00:03:40,579
Next, question
whether you really

71
00:03:40,579 --> 00:03:44,840
have to use a combination of
upper- and lower-case letters.

72
00:03:44,840 --> 00:03:48,410
Why not make all of
your labels lower-case.

73
00:03:48,410 --> 00:03:50,430
Get rid of your arrows.

74
00:03:50,430 --> 00:03:54,770
Arrows with arrowheads are
completely unnecessary.

75
00:03:54,770 --> 00:03:57,270
They are distractions as labels.

76
00:03:57,270 --> 00:04:01,880
Lines without the arrow
heads are much better to use.

77
00:04:01,880 --> 00:04:03,850
They're just more refined.

78
00:04:03,850 --> 00:04:05,500
Rethink your colors.

79
00:04:05,500 --> 00:04:08,750
How about using blue
instead of fuscia?

80
00:04:08,750 --> 00:04:10,830
Please?

81
00:04:10,830 --> 00:04:14,000
So, I hope you agree that this
is cleaner way of labelling

82
00:04:14,000 --> 00:04:15,080
your figures.

83
00:04:15,080 --> 00:04:17,740
And, in the end, I also
questioned the need

84
00:04:17,740 --> 00:04:19,740
for the SEM inserts.

85
00:04:19,740 --> 00:04:23,360
I'm not sure we are really
see more information

86
00:04:23,360 --> 00:04:25,810
about the structure
of the device

87
00:04:25,810 --> 00:04:28,250
with these additional SEMs.

88
00:04:28,250 --> 00:04:31,980
The optical image says
all that we want to say.

89
00:04:31,980 --> 00:04:34,620
And so I would have
deleted the SEMs.

90
00:04:34,620 --> 00:04:39,140
But if you insist on including
inserts (maybe because, you

91
00:04:39,140 --> 00:04:42,070
just wanted to show that you
were capable of making them,

92
00:04:42,070 --> 00:04:43,070
which is fine)...

93
00:04:43,070 --> 00:04:47,159
At the very least, orient
the inserts in the way

94
00:04:47,159 --> 00:04:50,370
that the rest of the
optical image is oriented.

95
00:04:50,370 --> 00:04:54,880
Here we're rotating these
SEM inserts 90 degrees

96
00:04:54,880 --> 00:04:58,310
to make them more relevant
to the full image.

97
00:04:58,310 --> 00:05:00,470
And now let's look
at them side by side.

98
00:05:00,470 --> 00:05:03,940
Once again, I hope
that you agree

99
00:05:03,940 --> 00:05:08,630
that the re-do is a much cleaner
and simplified figure, which

100
00:05:08,630 --> 00:05:10,230
makes it much more accessible.

101
00:05:10,230 --> 00:05:13,140
Let's look at another figure.

102
00:05:13,140 --> 00:05:16,330
This photograph up here,
made by the researcher,

103
00:05:16,330 --> 00:05:18,000
shows the device.

104
00:05:18,000 --> 00:05:19,750
And here you see
yet another point

105
00:05:19,750 --> 00:05:21,860
of view of that same device.

106
00:05:21,860 --> 00:05:25,810
Down here we have a CAD drawing
to represent an important part

107
00:05:25,810 --> 00:05:29,700
of the device where E. coli
or traveling from one chamber

108
00:05:29,700 --> 00:05:30,770
to another.

109
00:05:30,770 --> 00:05:33,480
And this other final
piece of the figure

110
00:05:33,480 --> 00:05:36,680
is a micrograph of that very
same important connection

111
00:05:36,680 --> 00:05:39,250
between the two chambers.

112
00:05:39,250 --> 00:05:42,420
The question is, number
one, are these photographs

113
00:05:42,420 --> 00:05:43,880
more than "good enough"?

114
00:05:43,880 --> 00:05:46,190
I know that we talk
about this a lot,

115
00:05:46,190 --> 00:05:48,490
but it's really important
to think about it.

116
00:05:48,490 --> 00:05:52,500
It's pretty clear when you put
a photograph in your figure,

117
00:05:52,500 --> 00:05:55,940
it's important to have the
best photograph you can make.

118
00:05:55,940 --> 00:05:58,980
I wasn't convinced
that these images were

119
00:05:58,980 --> 00:06:01,350
the best they could
be, and so I offered

120
00:06:01,350 --> 00:06:04,290
to make another
representation of the device.

121
00:06:04,290 --> 00:06:08,370
And so, here, this is
the image that I made,

122
00:06:08,370 --> 00:06:10,520
which, I hope you
agree, looks better.

123
00:06:10,520 --> 00:06:14,970
We decided to replace the
first picture in the graphic.

124
00:06:14,970 --> 00:06:17,880
The next question
is something I feel

125
00:06:17,880 --> 00:06:19,480
pretty important to consider.

126
00:06:19,480 --> 00:06:22,780
In this next photograph,
ask ourselves:

127
00:06:22,780 --> 00:06:25,230
are we really giving
more information,

128
00:06:25,230 --> 00:06:28,040
or, frankly, is
it just redundant.

129
00:06:28,040 --> 00:06:30,690
So we collaboratively
decided that it's not

130
00:06:30,690 --> 00:06:32,520
an important piece
in the figure.

131
00:06:32,520 --> 00:06:35,909
It's not saying anything that
we are not already saying.

132
00:06:35,909 --> 00:06:37,400
So we deleted it.

133
00:06:37,400 --> 00:06:40,860
We're simplifying, we're
editing down the figure

134
00:06:40,860 --> 00:06:43,500
to the essential pieces.

135
00:06:43,500 --> 00:06:46,730
After I looked at other images
that they made in the lab,

136
00:06:46,730 --> 00:06:50,250
I suggested that we
include a fluorescing image

137
00:06:50,250 --> 00:06:53,750
from their files of E.
coli going from one chamber

138
00:06:53,750 --> 00:06:57,460
to the next, to sort of
match the lower right

139
00:06:57,460 --> 00:06:59,250
SEM of the same area.

140
00:06:59,250 --> 00:07:00,230
And they agreed.

141
00:07:00,230 --> 00:07:05,110
And what I also suggested was
to invert the fluorescing image

142
00:07:05,110 --> 00:07:08,370
so that it would work well
with the rest of the pieces.

143
00:07:08,370 --> 00:07:11,930
After all remember
fluorescence in this situation

144
00:07:11,930 --> 00:07:14,520
is basically a
tagging technique,

145
00:07:14,520 --> 00:07:17,310
telling us evidence
of the presence

146
00:07:17,310 --> 00:07:20,710
of a particular structure,
in this case E.coli.

147
00:07:20,710 --> 00:07:24,820
We are not measuring or
quantifying florescence--and

148
00:07:24,820 --> 00:07:28,400
we'll talk about that later when
we discuss image manipulation.

149
00:07:28,400 --> 00:07:30,900
So in this case
it's perfectly fine

150
00:07:30,900 --> 00:07:34,830
to reverse the grayscale
image, making this piece easier

151
00:07:34,830 --> 00:07:35,530
to read.

152
00:07:35,530 --> 00:07:37,890
So we replaced the
image we deleted,

153
00:07:37,890 --> 00:07:40,310
with this fluorescing image.

154
00:07:40,310 --> 00:07:43,310
The researchers then decided
they preferred another CAD

155
00:07:43,310 --> 00:07:47,170
drawing to replace the
first one, which is fine.

156
00:07:47,170 --> 00:07:51,320
And finally, we aligned
and resized all the images

157
00:07:51,320 --> 00:07:53,470
to give us equal framing.

158
00:07:53,470 --> 00:07:57,730
So we finally came up with we
believed was a clearer figure.

159
00:07:57,730 --> 00:07:59,000
Less redundant.

160
00:07:59,000 --> 00:08:01,090
And it worked quite
well, as you can

161
00:08:01,090 --> 00:08:03,000
see, in the published paper.

162
00:08:03,000 --> 00:08:05,650
So we should compare
them side-by-side,

163
00:08:05,650 --> 00:08:08,640
and once again, I hope you
can see that second one is

164
00:08:08,640 --> 00:08:10,580
a marked improvement.

165
00:08:10,580 --> 00:08:12,010
This is what we do on campus.

166
00:08:12,010 --> 00:08:14,780
We work together in
groups to dissect

167
00:08:14,780 --> 00:08:16,640
all sorts of draft submissions.

168
00:08:16,640 --> 00:08:20,330
It really works very
well, I encourage

169
00:08:20,330 --> 00:08:23,820
you to do the same
on your own campuses.

170
00:08:23,820 --> 00:08:26,430
Here's another figure that
another group of researchers

171
00:08:26,430 --> 00:08:27,360
put together.

172
00:08:27,360 --> 00:08:31,550
The tin sulphide powder which
yields some information,

173
00:08:31,550 --> 00:08:35,770
then becomes deposited--and
we see that somehow in an SEM

174
00:08:35,770 --> 00:08:39,630
of that layer--and ultimately
the idea is to show how

175
00:08:39,630 --> 00:08:42,909
the researchers fabricated
this solar cell.

176
00:08:42,909 --> 00:08:45,140
It's about process.

177
00:08:45,140 --> 00:08:47,370
So we went through
a whole series

178
00:08:47,370 --> 00:08:49,520
of iterations and questions.

179
00:08:49,520 --> 00:08:51,700
I've edited them
down here so you

180
00:08:51,700 --> 00:08:55,210
can see a number of the
attempts by the researchers.

181
00:08:55,210 --> 00:08:57,590
So when I came into
the picture, I first

182
00:08:57,590 --> 00:09:00,000
questioned whether
the graph really had

183
00:09:00,000 --> 00:09:02,210
to be included in this figure.

184
00:09:02,210 --> 00:09:04,830
Perhaps it could be have
been placed elsewhere

185
00:09:04,830 --> 00:09:05,910
in the article.

186
00:09:05,910 --> 00:09:08,080
And then we discussed
whether it was

187
00:09:08,080 --> 00:09:10,480
important to show the powder.

188
00:09:10,480 --> 00:09:13,130
They asked that i come
up with another way

189
00:09:13,130 --> 00:09:15,610
of portraying the tin sulphide.

190
00:09:15,610 --> 00:09:17,640
I tried it in vials.

191
00:09:17,640 --> 00:09:22,100
I then suggested putting the
SEM within an illustration,

192
00:09:22,100 --> 00:09:24,200
showing the various layers.

193
00:09:24,200 --> 00:09:28,870
And then I made a photograph of
the solar cell, which I think

194
00:09:28,870 --> 00:09:32,250
is better from their
rendition, I hope you agree.

195
00:09:32,250 --> 00:09:36,900
And we eventually evolved
the final figure into this.

196
00:09:36,900 --> 00:09:40,440
We concentrated on the
picture of the solar cell.

197
00:09:40,440 --> 00:09:42,880
Did not need the
vials of powder,

198
00:09:42,880 --> 00:09:46,310
just showing the
layers of the material.

199
00:09:46,310 --> 00:09:49,940
Much easier for the reader
to see and understand what

200
00:09:49,940 --> 00:09:51,570
is going on in this figure.

201
00:09:51,570 --> 00:09:54,810
Again, editing and simplifying.