[R-390] Y2K Reprinting

[Tom Norris]

Many of the manual reprints way back when were fairly poor as well.   
The last good manuals I've seen were from the mid seventies, after  
than they apparently no longer printed them as they no longer had  
nice presentable halftone pics inthem -- but grainy things that  
looked photocopied and text that was half crooked.  None of that was  
helped by some of the early scanners with fairly lower resolution.

I remember KA4RKT scanned an R390A manual back in the 90's in pdf  
format and did a pretty good job, though, given what was available.   
He'd have used the Navy manual if he'd had access.

No TIFF, please.  Or Word, for that matter as not all folks may have  
it.  Heck, I didn't on my Mac until this past year.

73

Tom NU4G
ex KA4RKT

On Jun 22, 2007, at 12:30 PM, Barry Hauser wrote:
> .
>
> 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.
>
> 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
>>>>