Bug Report: tight_layout should be applied after figsize

[smjure]

First of all thank you for awesome work... tight_layout and figsize features work smoothly when one only is applied. But when applied together, e.g. mpf.plot(data,type='candle',figsize=(16*2, 8*2),tight_layout=True) lots of white space 'reappear'. I assume that first tight_layout is applied and then figsize (which brings back lots of white space), but should be vice versa.

[DanielGoldfarb]

Please print(mpf.__version__) so I can look into this. Thank you.

[smjure]

Version is: 0.12.6a3. Thank you as well.

[DanielGoldfarb]

Please also do:

import matplotlib
print(matplotlib.get_backend())

[smjure]

Qt5Agg

[DanielGoldfarb]

I have been playing around with this for a while now, and I am unable to reproduce what you say you are seeing.

When I set both figsize and tight_layout, there is still significantly less padding (what you call whitespace) in the Figure around the Axes. Furthermore, the code is exactly as you suggest that "tight_layout should be applied after figsize".

Note that tight_layout will always leave some padding around the Figure (particularly on the left side to leave room for the y-axis labels).

Also note that the amount of padding is not an absolute amount, but is rather a percentage, or fraction, of the entire Figure (and is, of course, a much smaller percentage when tight_layout=True). This means that the absolute amount of padding will of course be more when the figsize is larger, however the percentage will always be the same, and tight_layout=True gives less padding (a smaller percentage) surrounding the Axes regardless of whether figsize is set or not. This is the way it is coded and this is what I am seeing.

If you still think there is an issue, so that I can reproduce, and compare my results to yours, please provide:

• data
• code
• images of resulting plots

Thank you. --Daniel

[smjure]

Thank you for looking into it. Please see the following pic created based on mpf on my monitor:

I had similar problem with matplotlib, which was simply solved. Since mpf is based on it, I supposed that the problem is similar. Please see the following code with a simple example:

import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np

#%% --- 1.set fig size  &  2.applty tight_layout
fig,ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(16*2,9*2)) # initi
y = np.random.normal(0,1,[100,1])
x = range(len(y))

ax.plot(x,y,'-.')
ax.set_title("1.set fig size  &  2.applty tight_layout") 
fig.tight_layout()
plt.show()

#%% --- 1.applty tight_layout  & 2.set fig size
fig1,ax1 = plt.subplots()#,figsize=(16,9)) # initi

ax1.plot(x,y,'-.') 
ax1.set_title("1.applty tight_layout  &  2.set fig size") 
fig1.tight_layout()

fig1.set_size_inches(16*2,9*2) # enlarge current fig
plt.show()

I hope it helps a bit in clarification of what I mean.

[DanielGoldfarb]

As I said, the code is setting tight_layout after figsize, as you suggest. And your image appears to me as if tight_layout is indeed applied as I would expect. If you would also show an image with the same figsize but with no tight_layout, you should see a lot more white space without tight_layout; but please definitely include such an image if that is not the case..

There are a couple items to keep in mind here. Using the underlying matplotlib Figure.tight_layout() does not work for the type of Axes that mplfinance creates (i.e. using Figure.add_axes(); if you try it, matplotlib will complain). Therefore mplfinance has to do its own tight_layout implementation. As part of that implementation, as I mentioned, mplfinance leaves perhaps a little more space on the left side of the plot than is necessary, and I may improve this in the future. But even as is, mplfinance's tight_layout implementation results in significantly less space than when tight_layout is not set to True, regardless of whether or not you set figsize.

So I honestly do not see any "white space 'reappear'" If you have data or evidence otherwise, please show it.

Now, if you are not satisfied with mplfinance's implementation of tight_layout, there is a kwarg that allows you scale the amount of padding (both with, or without, tight_layout). Please see this comment for information on how to do that.

• Please let me know if you have any concrete evidence to show "white space 'reappear'". I am happy to fix any bug in the code, but presently I don't see any evidence that figsize is somehow disabling or diminishing tight_layout, as I believe you are suggesting.

• Please also let me know whether or not the scale_padding kwarg helps you to accomplish what you want.

All the best. --Daniel

[smjure]

The scale_padding solves the problem, thank you very much!

[fxhuhn]

Thank you for looking into it. Please see the following pic created based on mpf on my monitor:

Please see the following code with a simple example:

How do you placed the numbers in the chart?

[petric3]

See: #231.

[DanielGoldfarb]

@fxhuhn
Markus,
In addition to #231 , there is also an example of adding text here.