Seting the range on a log axis

Hello Rooters,

as the title implies, I would like to know, how I can change the range of a log axis. The problem is this:
I have data ranging from 0 to approx. 100k and I need it on a log y-axis. To set the log axis I called c1->SetLogy() and later called t->Draw(“AL”), where t is of class TGraph. Unfortunately the Graph which is displayed only shows an y-axis ranging from 10^1 to 10^5. Thus everthing between 0-10 is not shown. I messed around wih several calls to the Tpad and the TAxis but none had the desired effect. I just now discovered in the example gerrors2 that it might be done defining a 2d histogramm, which sets the range but I wondered if there isn’t a more direct method to do this using TAxis or TPad.

Best regards,
Johannes

Could you send the shortest possible script showing this problem?
and indicate which version of ROOT? which machine?

Rene

Here is the short excerpt from my script. (c_)omega and (c_)count are arrays containing values from 0 to 100000.
Using Root Version 3.05/07, CINT 5.15.94 running under Linux/Debian 2.4.25-SMP (gcc 2.95.4)

[quote]
gROOT->Reset();

    c1 = new TCanvas("c1", "Diffraktion", 0,0,500,500);
    c1->SetGridx();
    c1->SetGridy();
    c1->SetLogy();
 
    graph = new TGraph(n, omega, count);
           
    calc = new TGraph(o, c_omega, c_count);
    calc->Draw("AL");
    graph->Draw("L");
    
    c1->Update();
    c1->Print();[/quote]

Thanks

Please send a running script, not an exceprt

Rene

ok sorry.
Here’s the short script plus the data files.

Thanks again,
Johannes
Calc.txt (714 Bytes)
A1.txt (15.9 KB)
logaxis.C (1.15 KB)

There at least two problems with your script
-you should never call gROOT->Reset() inside a named script. This resets all the previous variables definitions!
-you should replace
calc = new TGraph(o, c_omega, c_count);//Graph for cal
by
calc = new TGraph(f, c_omega, c_count);//Graph for cal

In your case o=122, but c_omega[121] is null, forcing an autorecomputaion of the Y scale in case of log y axis.
After these two corrections, you get the picture in attachement

Rene

Ok thank you very much, I obviously didn’t check the array boundaries close enought.
Johannes