Support Board
Support Board
Search Board
Control Panel
View My Posts / Threads
Direct MessagesDate/Time: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 18:47:01 +0000
depth question on new update 1911
View Count: 4309
| [2019-04-26 11:57:55] |
| zippyzip - Posts: 293 |
|
since the change of the depth i notice what ever i set the % too i get white areas but have no white color selected , how can this be , 92 is white , 88 is dark and 127 is in between , please advise , thanks
|
Private File |
| [2019-04-26 11:59:04] |
| zippyzip - Posts: 293 |
|
there all diff unless i set to zero
|
| [2019-04-26 15:36:51] |
| John - SC Support - Posts: 31187 |
|
You need to understand how the new coloring works. The numbers that fall into a particular Range are going to be colored from the given color at the highest to the background color at the lowest. Therefore, the value of 92 must be at the low end of one of the Ranges which is why it is coloring white, the same as your background. You will find the documentation for how the coloring works here: Market Depth Historical Graph: Block Coloring Logic For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2019-04-26 15:38:19] |
| John - SC Support - Posts: 31187 |
|
Also, if you want to just have a single color going from the setting to the background color, then just set your percentages to 0,0,0 and it will use the Range 3 colors only and will shade from the given color to the background color (depending on your setting for the Minimum Volume Intensity Percent.
For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2019-04-26 16:14:46] |
| |
|
since the change of the depth There has been no change of market depth. If you are referring to the extended market depth levels with the Sierra Chart Exchange Data Feed you are not using that data feed.
Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2019-04-26 16:39:25] |
| User20450 - Posts: 330 |
|
i was talking on the new coloring change , the whole point of this should be so we can highlight bigger size on the map with a diff color and we cant
|
| [2019-04-27 00:57:03] |
| |
|
There are percentage thresholds already supported. Are you saying you want to work with absolute depth quantity numbers to control coloring?
Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2019-04-27 13:19:18] |
| User20450 - Posts: 330 |
|
yes that how a heat map should work , size is colored to specific color option like in the picture , example is the numbers how its takes the lower % to green mid % to yellow and then anything over higher % is red and then colored darker or lighter from there . so in the options you provide i should be able to set heat map up to do this but i cant |
Private File |
| [2019-04-27 13:39:43] |
| User138602 - Posts: 169 |
|
Greetings, just in case i actually do understand your problem: Every color range starts from the background color and NOT from the previous color. At some point SC will consider a rework. But just not right now. So in my setup with a blue background orange starts out brown. Its just a detail. ALL important information is there, its just not as polished as in bookmap which costs you ALONE $99/month. In the attached file you see shades of blue, white, yellow and orange, all based on a blue chart background. To me it looks like a damn solid heatmap. Where exactly is your problem? Regards Date Time Of Last Edit: 2019-04-27 13:42:19
|
 SC_Heatmap.png / V - Attached On 2019-04-27 13:38:49 UTC - Size: 105.15 KB - 390 views |
| [2019-04-27 13:52:25] |
| User20450 - Posts: 330 |
|
if thats not a problem to u then u obviously have little idea what you looking at . and thats ok i understand that and thats probably how it got this way to begin with. if you had show quantity on you would see what i mean |
| [2019-04-27 14:05:32] |
| User20450 - Posts: 330 |
|
the right way to do it is to either have a max value and % colors from this number or to have the study read the doms relative size and get a % from that so if biggest order on the dom is 200 then 0123 % coloring will be based off this number so 10% of 200 colors numbers under 20 from 0-20 coloration fade , then 20-100 are colored diff with there own fade from 20-100 and then 100 -200 coloration and so on with max size the darkest shade and lightest shade to the lower number in that % cause this is not acceptable way to look at this ( pic below ) 16 darker then 15 then 17 goes white then 35 is same color as 15 , thats no good Date Time Of Last Edit: 2019-04-27 14:06:20
|
| [2019-04-27 14:30:39] |
| User666 - Posts: 9 |
|
Completely agree with user 20450. The new configuration make no sense at all. Have same issue with new version. Please modify this. Thanks
|
| [2019-04-27 14:56:23] |
| User729038 - Posts: 4 |
|
+1 to User 20450 This is an issue I am having too. Big problem if you actually use the depth. |
| [2019-04-27 15:32:51] |
| User138602 - Posts: 169 |
|
now i am curious. i freely admit, that i am quite new to orderbook liquidity and i ONLY use it for confirmation or backup for a more advanced trading system, as it is supposed to be. But user20450, pls enlighten me, i am serious. What am i actually looking at other then a historical footprint of liquidity pulling/stacking which in most cases is totally useless as a signal for entering a trade? edit: i agree, 17 contracts shouldnt look like 48 contracts. The coloring is off. So in the meantime, find a better setting. I already adressed that: Market Depth Historical Graph and WIDE!!! price ranges | Post: 175403 answer: Market Depth Historical Graph and WIDE!!! price ranges | Post: 175429 Date Time Of Last Edit: 2019-04-27 15:52:41
|
| [2019-04-27 17:19:37] |
| User20450 - Posts: 330 |
|
the depth is whole reason price moves , so it gives you an area to buy and sell from #1 and then if you know how manipulation works it shows u when to buy and sell as well , example if price is hit aggressive into bid and then they offer above it gives selling intent to buy into the bid to get back into the offer , so its the most important reason prices moves other then aggressive volume , and thats all there is to price movement is the 4 things , aggressive bid ask and passive bid ask , so if ur new to this tool that makes alot of sense but for those of us that use this tool to pay the bills we want it to plot correctly , thats all .
|
| [2019-04-27 19:33:12] |
| User138602 - Posts: 169 |
|
Wouldnt it help to use more differentiated colors then just different shades of red and/or increase the value for the Minimum Volume Intensity Percent? Regarding orderbook reading: "if price is hit aggressive into bid and then they offer above it gives selling intent" - this is clear. "to buy into the bid to get back into the offer" - i dont get it. Regards |
| [2019-04-27 21:26:25] |
| User20450 - Posts: 330 |
|
thats the point im trying to get to , diff colors for diff size percentages like i said 0-25 size would be in the lower size and they would be blue from light blue to darkest at 25 , then size 25-50 light to dark yellow 50-100 light to dark orange then 100-200 light to dark red - examples so this is similar to how it was before but i used to put 3 different studies on to get those colors , now they added the color options so just like the number bars it should work similar , thats all cause some one flashes a bid 25 ticks away and they pull the offer , i want in , but i want to know what size diff that is based on colors |
| [2019-04-27 22:45:48] |
| User20450 - Posts: 330 |
|
ok so i took the orders and put them into excel and this is what i came up with as an example of the size based on % and color , pic 2 is SC heatmap blue and red and other pic is excel heatmap in a blue/yellow/red heatmap based on % of the size with 3 diff colors
Date Time Of Last Edit: 2019-04-27 22:47:12
|
| schp333.jpg / V - Attached On 2019-04-27 22:45:37 UTC - Size: 123.94 KB - 387 views schm22.jpg / V - Attached On 2019-04-27 22:46:14 UTC - Size: 103.59 KB - 340 views |
| [2019-04-28 01:42:43] |
| User136422 - Posts: 33 |
|
Had the same issue, never been able to set the new coloring options for the hist.market depth working properly if not by using only the range 3 color and setting to 0 the percent color threshold. I hope SC team will address this, becouse the feature by itself is a nice one to have, but as is, it doesen't seems to working properly. Sometimes communication between end users and developers can be misleading, if SC team need some more info/help to address/understand this, please let the community know, as User20450 said SC is the tool we use daily to pay our bills, if we can provide any help to y developers..let us know.
Date Time Of Last Edit: 2019-04-28 01:51:57
|
| [2019-04-28 15:52:44] |
| HKC01 - Posts: 6 |
|
Dear Sierra Chart support engineers: First, I would like to say thank you for creating such a solid all-in-one trading and charting platform - what you offer vs. the competition is really quite impressive. I was going to submit a new post for this request, but found this thread and decided to add my suggested enhancement to the others commenting here in hopes of getting to a solution... Below follows my enhancement request for the Market Depth Historical Graph (hereafter referred to as "MDHG"). BACKGROUND: The MDHG's main value is being able to see liquidity at different price levels and times, and as such, the expectation would be that the user is able to visually discern higher levels of liquidity as they increase on the order book (this is ESSENTIAL for me to be able to accomplish as a day trader, as it is a core part of my decision making process for trade entry and management). The expectation would essentially be that of a heatmap, where higher liquidity is either shown brighter(hot) than low liquidity (dark/cool) (or vice versa, depending on the chart background and needs of an individual). Unfortunately, with the current implementation, this is not possible by means of using only one MDHG. One can get *close* using multiple MDHG studies on the same chart, but still cannot accomplish a true heatmap. Including multiple studies is also an inefficient use of computational cycles and very tedious to set up. I believe the inability of creating a liquidity heatmap with the MDHG is due to one main factor: fading into each level from the background color (per your documentation here: Market Depth Historical Graph: Block Coloring Logic "Each color range is also treated as a percentage range from 0% to 100% (color percentage). A depth value is then converted to a percentage within the range of values within a specific Color range. The final color that is used is determined by a linear interpolation from the Input color to the Background color based on this color percentage, where 100% is the entered Input color ***and 0% is the Background color***." [asterisk emphasis mine]) EXAMPLES: To illustrate this, I have included several examples and attached them here. In each example, I have outlined certain areas on the chart and point out the problems due to fading in from the background color at each level. Example1 (http://www.sierrachart.com/image.php?Image=1556465947623.png) and Example2 (http://www.sierrachart.com/image.php?Image=1556466003224.png): default MDHG settings (MDHGDefaultSettings.png - attached), black background (similar to example posted in the MDHG study reference), Example1 has the default Minimum Volume Intensity Percent = 20, whereas Example2 has the Minimum Volume Intensity Percent = 90. If you toggle back and forth between the two images (both are matched pixel to pixel), you can see where dark areas on the MDHG in Example1 become bright areas in Example2 due to the background being essentially ignored from the higher Minimum Volume Intensity Percent setting. Turning up the Minimum Volume Intensity Percent is undesirable due to the loss of granularity in market depth colors. Example3.png (attached) and Example4.png (attached) have the same settings as Example1, but are zoomed in and have Show Quantity Numbers set to "In Bars". These zoomed in examples point out areas of concern where higher depth numbers/liquidity has darker colors. Unfortunately, this makes it impossible to see what I am trying to identify in the MDHG - higher levels of liquidity. Example5 (http://www.sierrachart.com/image.php?Image=155646613774.png) is closer to what I would like to be able to accomplish (not necessarily with these colors, but this better shows where high liquidity appears), but this took 5 separate MDHG studies because of needing to work around fading in from the background color (which is still an issue even with 5 separate MDHG studies). Example6 (http://www.sierrachart.com/image.php?Image=1556391203569.png) is included as a zoomed-out view. PROPOSED SOLUTION: As a solution, I propose what should be a fairly straightforward change to address this problem: allow the user to input the 0% min color for each level instead of using the background color. Use the same linear interpolation from the 0% to 100% that you do with the current background color, just with the user-selected min colors as the starting point for each level. This would accommodate any particular user's needs due to chart background preferences, colorblindness needs, etc., and would save Sierra Chart spending time doing something more complex at this stage. If Sierra Chart could create a new toggle to use a specified color instead of the background as the 0%/min color for each level, and then allow the user to choose that color, it would have the following options in the Study Settings: Toggle: Use Background As Min Color; Use Specified Min Colors (Minimum Volume Intensity Percent would not be considered if using Min/Max) Double the color settings: Range 3 Max Ask Color Range 3 Min Ask Color Range 2 Max Ask Color Range 2 Min Ask Color Range 1 Max Ask Color Range 1 Min Ask Color Range 0 Max Ask Color Range 0 Min Ask Color Range 0 Min Bid Color Range 0 Max Bid Color Range 1 Max Bid Color Range 1 Min Bid Color Range 2 Max Bid Color Range 2 Min Bid Color Range 3 Max Bid Color Range 3 Min Bid Color Please let me know if you have any questions, and thank you very much for considering my proposed enhancement. |
| Example3.png / V - Attached On 2019-04-28 15:52:23 UTC - Size: 45.55 KB - 469 views Example4.png / V - Attached On 2019-04-28 15:52:25 UTC - Size: 99.23 KB - 476 views MDHGDefaultSettings.png / V - Attached On 2019-04-28 15:52:28 UTC - Size: 31.22 KB - 435 views |
| [2019-04-28 16:08:20] |
| User833286 - Posts: 14 |
|
+1
|
| [2019-04-28 16:44:19] |
| Sundowned - Posts: 7 |
|
I would really appreciate if what HKC01 posted be taken seriously and implemented, I have been forced to use older versions of sc since this has been changed!
|
| [2019-04-28 16:57:43] |
| eslavio - Posts: 5 |
|
Same here, Sundowned. Stumbled onto this thread and I see user HKC01 did an excellent write up of the issue. Please look into this, SC peeps.
|
| [2019-04-28 17:13:22] |
| User350936 - Posts: 2 |
|
I would like for you guys to implement this.
Date Time Of Last Edit: 2019-04-28 17:14:32
|
| [2019-04-28 17:29:02] |
| User209218 - Posts: 34 |
|
Like Sundownded and Eslavio, I have been using an older version to better use this feature. At this time, I am unable to update to the current version to correct some disconnect issues I have been having that I understand have been dealt with starting with ver 1906. You have a very complete and usable product, please seriously consider the changes suggested by HKC 01. Thanks
|
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: