[R-390] Y2K Reprinting

[Barry Hauser]

Hi Barry

Barry Williams wrote:
> Barry,
>
> TIFFs can be huge. I wasn't saying to have them in that format for the 
> manual. PDF is the way to go. I was referring to getting them into the 
> computer and ready for output to whatever format.
Sorry -- I was reading all sorts of ideas and jumped to a conclusion.  
However, as far as I know, any new stuff is going in fresh or whatever 
format it's already in -- either photos or text, etc.  I don't think 
there would be any scanned input -- where TIFF would apply -- but it's 
been a while.
> No problem forgetting about that. Already forgot about it after 
> offering to help in the beginning of the project.
>
I'm curious to know which beginning?  The very first or the first or 
second (unfinished) revision?  The latest one seems to be the most 
problematical in getting done.  As far as I know, most all the 
components are ready -- new next from Perry, 12 new photos from Pete 
Wokoun with new callouts, one or two new big sections from Perry, 
derived from Wei Li's Pearls, etc.  May be some other stuff -- he 
mentioned 1.5 gigs?

Matt Parkinson and I shot the new photos, I cropped and enhanced and 
forwarded them to Pete and I think he was done with them a long time 
ago. (like a year or two)  Otherwise, I've been on the periphery of this 
rendition.  Sometimes more "cooks" are needed, and at some point less, 
but it appears that the latest, greatest has stalled, but it's not clear 
that more hands would help.  I emailed Perry a couple of days ago to 
lend a hand, but haven't heard back as yet. 

<sigh>

Barry

>
> Barry
>
>
>> Barry & Gang:
>>
>>
>> Whoooooaaaaa!
>>
>> TIFF's can be very large depending on content and would be a colossal 
>> throw-back as far as the Y2K manual is concerned.
>>
>> Way back, there were several army manuals that were scanned as 
>> images, text included and set up as pdf's but the pages were all 
>> images.  Some run in excess of 30 megs and much of the detail is 
>> grainy.   If you want 'em, they're still available on the usual web 
>> sites.
>>
>> When a few of us started off the Y2K back around the turn of the 
>> century (always wanted to write that ;-), I OCR-ed the entire '86 
>> Navlex manual to start it off.  The Navlex manual was apparently 
>> created in some wordprocessing software and set up as a single column 
>> and the text was fairly crisp so it OCR'ed relatively well.  (Yes, 
>> many edits were needed.)  I included the original B&W line drawings 
>> and photos, mostly as place-holders for Pete Wokoun and Al Tirevold 
>> to work with.  Pete recreated both the line drawings (from scratch) 
>> and we shot new photos and he added fresh callouts and annotations.  
>> Al pulled it all together in Acrobat with Adobe's authoring version.  
>> The first version, complete with real (searchable) text, photos 
>> (mostly color) and drawings, was 4.3 MB's.  The first (and last) 
>> revision wasn't expanded by much, mostly for corrections, somehow 
>> grew to about 14 or 17 MB's and that seemed to have something to do 
>> with the newer version of Acrobat that Al used to generate it.
>>
>> Regardless, pdf is the format of choice, considering that it's a 
>> standard and is generally very efficient with mixed media -- text as 
>> text and graphics as graphics.  It has it's own compression logic.
>>
>> There is no need to clean up any schematics -- they were fully 
>> recreated by Pete Wokoun in a professional drawing package he uses.
>> The currently distributed version of the Y2K was being updated and 
>> refined by Perry and a few others of us a while back, but seemed to 
>> have gotten stalled.  However, it isn't necessary to reinvent any 
>> wheels.  One thing in the wings were the remaining 12 or so photos 
>> that were completely replaced with color and with newly created 
>> callouts done by Pete.  I'm not sure where that's all at.  Perry may 
>> have most of it.
>> Overall, it would be best if Al could put some time into it again.  
>> Whether or not he can, it should retain the work that was done thus 
>> far and the format should remain pdf.  Another consideration with pdf 
>> files -- they seem to be more reliable in downloading.  Some formats, 
>> when files are complex, may partially disassemble when downloaded, 
>> such as Word, etc.  where the user's own settings may re paginate and 
>> rearrange things when pulled up on the user's computer.
>>
>> Forget about TIFF.  We're way past that.
>> Barry
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> R-390 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
> Post: mailto:R-390 at mailman.qth.net
> Unsubscribe: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/options/r-390
>