You know it's a bad (Excel) chart when …
March 8, 2010 • JP • 2 Comments • Rate This Article
• Links to this article
- the layout distracts from the data.
- the colors make you want to look away.
- you need a PhD in engineering, statistics or economics (or possibly all three) to understand what is being presented.
If you want to see what I mean, check out Most Ugly & Useless Infographic Competition for a few examples. Or just create a chart in Excel 2003 using default settings.
Are you guilty?
You know you've created a bad chart when …
- you need to explain what the chart is "obviously" showing.
- the chart contains dozens (or even hundreds) of data points organized into "bubbles", "blocks" or "spider webs".
- at least two people who see the chart ask you why you didn't use a line or bar chart instead.
- "damned with faint praise" — nobody says anything bad, but nobody says anything good either.
- it looks like the default chart settings for Excel 2003.
Let it be known (if it wasn't obvious) that I'm not a "charting guy." I'm not a chart buster, chart pornographer or junk charter. I couldn't recognize Stephen Few in a lineup. I'm just an Excel user who makes the occasional chart (under protest). But I read Monthly And Cumulative Spending Charts on the PTS Blog (especially the comments) and felt the irresistable urge to add my own comment.
My belief is that anything other than line or column/bar charts (flat, not 3D) is excessive and distracting. Simple charts are like art; very easy to screw up (just look at the Excel defaults), hard to prettify. I am very much a minimalist in this area.
But for some reason, there are people who feel the need to go overboard with their charts. The basic forms aren't enough; they need to be different. They create eye candy charts, using as many software features as possible. But if you like using ink, you should be in the printing business, not a chart maker. I haven't been keeping track, but subjectively it feels like I see these types of "infographics" in newspapers more than anywhere else.
When I see a chart like the one being criticized on the PTS blog, I tune out. I don't care whether its the most appropriate means for displaying the data. My eyes don't go where they're supposed to. It is simply too difficult for an average guy like me to understand. I guess I'm not "hip" enough.
Your thoughts.
Excel ·
Rate This Article:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...What now?
Subscribe To The Blog
Email This Article
Follow Me On Twitter
My Facebook Page
Or just keep reading:
I'm just an average guy who writes VBA code for a living. This is my personal blog. Excel and Outlook are my thing, with a sprinkle of Access and Word here and there. Follow this space if you want to learn more about VBA. Keep Reading »
Previous Post: Office links for February-March
Next Post: Ships and flags
Sticking to 2D bar and line charts isn't enough. These need to be drawn properly. You know it's a bad (Excel) chart when equally spaced tick marks represent different quantities. This happens all the time with line charts in Excel since users don't realize that Excel assumes that the variable on the horizontal axis is categorical. The solution is to use an XY plot with connected points to draw a line chart when you have a quantitative variable or even a date that is not formatted as a date.
I'm concerned that my last comment might suggest agreement with your statement, " My belief is that anything other than line or column/bar charts (flat, not 3D) is excessive and distracting." I don't. There are dot plots, box plots, cycle plots, and many other useful graph forms that belong in your toolkit. Unfortunately, these do not appear on Excel's menus although the PTS blog and other Web sites tell you how to create them using Excel.