Make EBSDMasterPattern.get_patterns() allow a 2D navigation shape + minor improvements

[hakonanes]

Description of the change

Several changes to the EBSDMasterPattern class:

• Rename "spherical" projection to "stereographic" projection in class and IO.
• Add a progressbar to EBSDMasterPattern.get_patterns(). The progressbar is dask's own ProgressBar().
• Make EBSDMasterPattern.get_patterns() accept a Rotation with a 2D navigation shape, i.e. of shape (ny, nx, 4), and return an EBSD signal with a (ny, nx) navigation shape.

Other changes:

• Remove warning in pattern matching notebook about get_patterns() only working for cubic crystals.

Closes #270 and #265.

Progress of the PR

• Add progressbar
• Allow 2D navigation shape
• Take another look at the axes logic when deciding how to slice the master pattern data in get_patterns()
• Docstrings for all functions
• Unit tests with pytest for all lines
• Clean code style by running black via pre-commit

Minimal example of the bug fix or new feature

>>> from orix import sampling
>>> import kikuchipy as kp

# Spherical -> stereographic

>>> mp = kp.data.nickel_ebsd_master_pattern_small(projection="stereographic")
>>> mp.projection
stereographic

# Progressbar showing ouput navigation shape

>>> mp = kp.data.nickel_ebsd_master_pattern_small(projection="lambert")
>>> r = sampling.get_sample_fundamental(resolution=5, space_group=225)
>>> detector = kp.detectors.EBSDDetector(
    shape=s.axes_manager.signal_shape[::-1],
    pc=[0.421, 0.7794, 0.5049],
    sample_tilt=70,
    convention="tsl",
)
>>> sim = mp.get_patterns(rotations=r, detector=detector, energy=20, compute=True)
Creating a dictionary of (7467,) simulated patterns:
[########################################] | 100% Completed |  8.8s

# 2D navigation shape allowed via shape of rotations object. A finer control of chunk size,
# via number of patterns in each chunk, `chunk_size`, or number of bytes in each chunk,
# `chunk_bytes`, is possible via a new `kikuchipy.signals.util.get_chunking` function.

>>> r2 = r[:6000].reshape(60, 100)
>>> sim2 = mp.get_patterns(rotations=r2, detector=detector, energy=20, chunk_size=10)
>>> sim2
<LazyEBSD, title: , dimensions: (100, 60|60, 60)>
>>> sim2.data.chunksize
(10, 10, 60, 60)

Will add more examples as stuff is done.

For reviewers

• Check that the PR title is short, concise, and will make sense 1 year
  later.
• Check that new functions are imported in corresponding __init__.py.
• Check that new features, API changes, and deprecations are mentioned in
  the unreleased section in doc/changelog.rst.

[hakonanes]

@friedkitteh I would appreciate it if you could take a look at the changes made to the ebsd_master_pattern.py and test_ebsd_master_pattern.py files. You don't have to review the other files (large PR...).

[friedkitteh]

Logical improvements in ebsd_master_pattern.py (and the following tests)!

In the docstrings we now refer to the "Lambert projection" in 3 different ways:

1. Lambert projection
2. (modified) Lambert projection
3. Rosca-Lambert projection

it would probably be beneficial to refer to them with the same name?

[hakonanes]

1. Lambert projection

2. (modified) Lambert projection

3. Rosca-Lambert projection

Since we map 3D vectors on parts of the northern or southern hemisphere of the Kikuchi sphere (our detector) onto a 2D square grid, and Callahan and De Graef call this the modified Lambert projection, I think we should as well. I'll therefore go with "Modified Lambert projection". What do you think of this, @friedkitteh?

[friedkitteh]

1. Lambert projection

2. (modified) Lambert projection

3. Rosca-Lambert projection

Since we map 3D vectors on parts of the northern or southern hemisphere of the Kikuchi sphere (our detector) onto a 2D square grid, and Callahan and De Graef call this the modified Lambert projection, I think we should as well. I'll therefore go with "Modified Lambert projection". What do you think of this, @friedkitteh?

Yep - That sounds reasonable.

[hakonanes]

Or, you know what, we could provide some more information in the naming by calling it the "square Lambert projection" instead.

[hakonanes]

I'm glad you asked that question... I actually think we should rename the LambertProjection() to SquareLambertProjection() as well, to separate it from the Lambert equal-area projection to a 2D circle. What do you think, @friedkitteh?

[friedkitteh]

I think it is much clearer now!

[friedkitteh]

I'm glad you asked that question... I actually think we should rename the LambertProjection() to SquareLambertProjection() as well, to separate it from the Lambert equal-area projection to a 2D circle. What do you think, @friedkitteh?

It probably wouldn't hurt..