Ron, KC4YOY wrote:
Optimizing for one browser only usually implies that it might not work

with others.

On Homestead you either optimize for Nutscape or I.E..
I use I.E., which do you think I'm going to pick.

Ron

Thats all well and good but the fact that you use IE doesn't restrict
you to webpage creation software that only works correctly for IE.
Its really a generic thing, not a matter of optimizing for one or the
other. Out of the 3 or 4 billion pages showing on Google only a small
fraction are "only works properly with IE". I've never seen a page that
"only works with Netscape".
Generic is best or we wouldn't be dragging out this thread.

-Bill M

In article , Alan Douglas
adouglasatgis.net writes:

From here it looks like a page cut into a dozen parts with scissors
and pasted back together in random order.

I can see where you might get that idea -- one of the pages is a "collage" of
various photos (gear shots, CCC station pix, catalog snippets, etc.). But the
background framing makes it clear that's what you're seeing. Yes, the photos
do take a while to load, but the final result is excellent. FWIW, I'm running
IE and 1024 pixel screen.

As for GIF format, I DLed the blown-up copy of the transmitter schematic (wow,
a separate driver-multiplier stage back in those MOPA days). As a JPG it was
110 KB. I converted it to GIF and it went down to 13KB! Almost 10 to 1.

As for the gear -- I got a kick out of the TX with the plate caps on the output
coils for changing band taps. Neat idea. Luckily the power interlock switch
is also very clearly shown :-)

Now Ibelieve I owe some test eqpt shots -- Mike K.



Oscar loves trash, but hates Spam! Delete him to reply to me.

Here's the same image after some tinkering....50k file size instead of
298k and it looks better to me.
http://www.sparkbench.com/CBtext1revised.gif


Bill, I used it, looks great, thanks a bunch.
I've also added some more stuff, check it out.
http://radioheaven.homestead.com/CloughBrengle.html

Ron

Ron, KC4YOY wrote:

Bill, I used it, looks great, thanks a bunch.
I've also added some more stuff, check it out.
http://radioheaven.homestead.com/CloughBrengle.html

Ron

Glad it helped.

-Bill

Here's the same image after some tinkering....50k file size instead of
298k and it looks better to me.
http://www.sparkbench.com/CBtext1revised.gif


Bill, explain to me what you did to get it so small.
I'm sure I'll need to do again for some future page.
I have some Clough-Brengle catalog pages that
I'd like to put on, but the scans are more than 2 meg.
and still are hard to read the small text.

Thanks,

Ron
http://radioheaven.homestead.com/CloughBrengle.html

Ron, KC4YOY wrote:
Here's the same image after some tinkering....50k file size instead of

298k and it looks better to me.

http://www.sparkbench.com/CBtext1revised.gif



Bill, explain to me what you did to get it so small.
I'm sure I'll need to do again for some future page.
I have some Clough-Brengle catalog pages that
I'd like to put on, but the scans are more than 2 meg.
and still are hard to read the small text.

Thanks,

Ron

I resized it to 500 pixels wide - it was 1083 wide so that alone reduced
the file size to about 25% of original. No point in having a 1083 pixel
wide image that has to scrunch into the box provided on the page. That
causes it to compress and may look 'funny' depending on a guys browser,
video card, monitor, etc. At 500 pixels maybe it still compresses (or
expands) a little bit. I can't tell from the script what the size of
the rectangle is supposed to be but on my browser it appears to be about
500 wide.

Next I took it down from 8-bit/256 colors to 4-bit/16 colors. As
mentioned before, thats a no brainer for a black and white image. That
reduces the file size even further. Then just for looks I changed some
of the 'almost' white or 'almost' black pixels to true black and white
leaving the greys in the middle of the range.

For your 2 MB scans try something along the same lines. If they are 2MB
it sounds as if they were scanned as color??. Get them into black and
white for starters and gradually step down to 256 and then to 16 color
black and white and see how they look. Old yellowed pages are sometime
difficult to handle but there's ways.
After you get it looking good, resize it down to whatever width is
appropriate for the page. If there's a lot of fine print you might not
be able to get it as small as you'd like. The alternative here is to
put a reduced size clickable link on the main page that can carry an
interested surfer to a full size version. That way the main info page
doesn't get bogged down.
Crop the edges appropriately. You can often knock off a bunch of the
file size just with simple cropping.
And if its a fine text page, don't try to put it in a box like the
letter on the home page because thats gonna really scrunch down the fine
print.

Hope this helps, drop me an email if you'd like to discuss it further.

-Bill
exray at coqui dot net

Hope this helps, drop me an email if you'd like to discuss it further.



-Bill, I scanned a Clough-Brengle model 110 catalog page,
it was in grayscale 300 dpi. The original scan was over
3 meg. I used Photoshop7 to reduce the from more
than 5K pixels wide to just 1000 wide. The file size was
reduced to about 125K and still looks great on the
web page. I may try going even smaller.

Thanks again.

Ron
--
-------------------------------------------------
C.R."Ron"Lawrence
Antique Radio Collector & Historian

POBox 3015
Matthews, NC 28106-3015
704-289-1166 (home)

Radio Collection Web Page,
http://www.radioheaven.homestead.com
Clough-Brengle equipment web page
http://radioheaven.homestead.com/CloughBrengle.html
CC-AWA Web Page,
http://www.cc-awa.org

Ron, KC4YOY wrote:
Hope this helps, drop me an email if you'd like to discuss it further.




-Bill, I scanned a Clough-Brengle model 110 catalog page,
it was in grayscale 300 dpi. The original scan was over
3 meg. I used Photoshop7 to reduce the from more
than 5K pixels wide to just 1000 wide. The file size was
reduced to about 125K and still looks great on the
web page. I may try going even smaller.

Thanks again.

Ron

Sounds like you've got it!

-Bill M

In article , - - ex - -
writes:

Next I took it down from 8-bit/256 colors to 4-bit/16 colors. As
mentioned before, thats a no brainer for a black and white image. That
reduces the file size even further. Then just for looks I changed some
of the 'almost' white or 'almost' black pixels to true black and white
leaving the greys in the middle of the range.

If you had taken it all the way to 2 colors (B & W) the GIF compression would
really have been something. FWIW, the enlarged schematic of the 4581 TX
compressed instantly to 12K, though still 841x411. Although the original was a
full-color JPG, there were apparently only black and white pixels in it.

When converting to GIF, GIF has to figure out ahead of time how many unique
colors re in the image, and it quickly found there were only two, so it went to
B&W GIF, which is very efficient. --MikeK.

Oscar loves trash, but hates Spam! Delete him to reply to me.

Mike Knudsen wrote:
In article , - - ex - -
writes:


Next I took it down from 8-bit/256 colors to 4-bit/16 colors. As
mentioned before, thats a no brainer for a black and white image. That
reduces the file size even further. Then just for looks I changed some
of the 'almost' white or 'almost' black pixels to true black and white
leaving the greys in the middle of the range.


If you had taken it all the way to 2 colors (B & W) the GIF compression would
really have been something.

I tried. It started looking crappier rather than better. Thats why I
went after the 16 grey colors one at a time. Couldn't pull it off.

-BM