If the data is 3d, no objection. If the data is 2d then a 3d plot is redundant, usually ugly and prone to mislead (see "How to lie with statistics" and anything by Tufte).
back
1 comments
Could you explain "if the data is 3D"?
Isn't it about how a presenter carves out the data for the presentation?
To explain my pov, I see that even if a multi-dimensional dataset is available, people still prefer to present a 2-Dimensional analysis of it.
And this is what I don't get. Is it due to the the lack of tooling or is it the fact that 2D graphs are just easier to grasp?
I mean: the independent variable is 2d and the dependent is 1d, like f(x, y), that's 3d data. By 2d I mean a pie-chart, which you _can_ display in 3d (by making a "thick pie"), but it is superfluous and detracts from the data.
I think 2d graphs are easier to graphs _are_ easier to grasp, and easier to make. Not sure tooling is the main issue, there's plenty of tools around to make 3d plots.