6

Is there a way to arrange the subfigures in the following way in LATEX?

enter image description here

2 Answers 2

6

The final choice of parameters may depend on the proportions of the images.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{graphicx}

\begin{document}

\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering

\sbox{0}{\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{example-image}}% The big figure

\begin{tabular}{@{}c@{\hspace{0.05\textwidth}}c@{}}
\usebox{0} &
  \parbox[b][\ht0][s]{0.3\textwidth}{
    \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{example-image}
    \vfill
    \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{example-image}
  }
\\[0.03\textwidth]
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{example-image}
\hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{example-image} &
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{example-image}
\end{tabular}

\end{figure}

\end{document}

The right column is made of two parts: the top one is a \parbox as high as the big figure, so the alignments are precise.

enter image description here

6

Welcome to TeX.SE! There are numerous possibilities to achieve something of this sort, here is one.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\begin{document}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{*{3}{@{\hspace*{1mm}}c}}
\multicolumn{2}{@{\hspace*{1mm}}c}{\raisebox{1.5cm}{\multirow{2}{*}{\includegraphics[width=6.2cm]{example-image-duck}}}}
&\includegraphics[width=3cm]{example-image-duck}\\[1mm]
& &\includegraphics[width=3cm]{example-image-duck}\\[1mm]
\includegraphics[width=3cm]{example-image-duck}
& \includegraphics[width=3cm]{example-image-duck} &
\includegraphics[width=3cm]{example-image-duck}
\end{tabular}
\end{figure}
\end{document}

enter image description here

4
  • 1
    No tikz solution? I'm very disappointed (+1) ;)
    – TeXnician
    Dec 24, 2018 at 17:32
  • 1
    @TeXnician TikZ was used to draw the cute duck. ;-)
    – user121799
    Dec 24, 2018 at 17:36
  • the two ducks on the side seem to be taller together than the big image.
    – hkBst
    Dec 25, 2018 at 10:53
  • @hkBst This impression is because in this answer the horizontal and vertical gaps are the same, let's call the distance g. Now call the ratio between height and width of the graphics r, r=h/w. If the vertical dimensions match, this means that the width of the larger figure is given by W=2*w+g. But then the vertical distance is off because r*W \ne 2*r*w+g. It can only match up if the vertical distance is r*g, which I personally find less appealing than having the gaps universal.
    – user121799
    Dec 25, 2018 at 14:40

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .