9 Sep
2001
9 Sep
'01
11:55 p.m.
Jerome Fine wrote:
I could probably use the TU58 manuals, however, I
would
rather see them
sent to someone who will scan them and make them available to
everyone.
I've already scanned the TU58 user manual
and if it's not already on its way to DFWCUG
it soon will be (for some suitable value of
"soon").
Since I have only RT-11/PDP-11 hardware stuff, what
might help? What
about a set of out of print RT-11 DOCs? As far as I know, these are
allowed to be reproduced since they are no longer available?
I know someone was trying to get Mentec
to give permission for certain manuals
to be made available. If this has already
been done, then point me to something
from Mentec that says it's OK and
your wish
may be granted.
Can these be
scanned as well?
They can certainly be scanned. Can they
legally be made available?
Also, I hope to soon receive an 11/73 manual? Could
this
also be scanned?
Easily! In fact, as long as it's not
available from COMPAQ, years ago DEC
gave (almost) blanket permission for
anything pre-1985(?) to be made available.
I realize that it is great to have our own copies of
these
manuals, but I am
now hoping that they can all be scanned and thereby preserved
before that
is no longer possible.
You do know about the DFWCUG scanning project?
Pointers to them (and a bunch of other
individuals doing the same sort of thing)
can be found at http://www.decdocs.org .
Antonio
10 Sep
10 Sep
9:41 a.m.
At 01:55 AM 9/10/01, Antonio wrote:
I've already scanned the TU58 user manual
and if it's not already on its way to DFWCUG
it soon will be (for some suitable value of
"soon").
Antonio, I really think this is a great idea but maybe you could clear
something up for me. Where exactly has the DFWCUG ever indicated that scans
sent to them will be made available to others? If you go to their home page
<http://www.dfwcug.org> there is no mention of it, there are no links to
any scans in their "resources" section, there is nothing at all to indicate
such things will ever become available.
You do know about the DFWCUG scanning project?
Pointers to them (and a bunch of other
individuals doing the same sort of thing)
can be found at http://www.decdocs.org .
Actually a much better link is this one:
<http://208.190.133.201/decimages/moremanuals.htm>
However, someone decided to scan some of the manuals as low resolution 8
bit grey scale (what a waste of someone's scanning time!)
--Chuck
11:01 a.m.
However, someone decided to scan some of the manuals
as low
resolution 8 bit grey scale (what a waste of someone's scanning time!)
Do you mean low or high resolution? There's no need for 48 or even 16
bit for anything not continuous tone. I got three manuals from DFWCUG
and am very happy with the quality. Perhaps they could look into more
efficient compression, though.
John A.
12:16 p.m.
New subject: Scanning (was Re: recent acquisitions for the House of VAX
This topic has gone over the list a few times, from experience, the "best"
scans are 600 DPI black and white compressed into PDF files. This achieves
exactly what is needed, get the data without a lot of excess. The KA655 TM
that is on the DFWCUG site appears from the PDF to be 100 DPI/8 bit (note
that's 800 bits per inch net and the result is harder to read) I'll add
scanning this manual to my list. They don't appear to have come up with a
'standard' for their scans. That would help too.
--Chuck
At 01:01 PM 9/10/01, you wrote:
However,
someone decided to scan some of the manuals as low
resolution 8 bit grey scale (what a waste of someone's scanning time!)
Do you mean low or high resolution? There's no need for 48 or even 16
bit for anything not continuous tone. I got three manuals from DFWCUG
and am very happy with the quality. Perhaps they could look into more
efficient compression, though.
John A. 
1:07 p.m.
New subject: Scanning (was Re: recent acquisitions for the House of VAX
I started looking for an 11x17 scanner (also called A3 or tabloid, from what
I can gather). They are hard to find and I was wondering if you have
suggestions
for a quality flat bed scanner which can handle the larger format, but is not
to pricey. The ones which I have found also appear to be SCSI, is OK, but
would not be my first choice.
--tom
At 02:16 PM 9/10/01 -0700, you wrote:
This topic has gone over the list a few times, from
experience, the "best"
scans are 600 DPI black and white compressed into PDF files. This achieves
exactly what is needed, get the data without a lot of excess. The KA655 TM
that is on the DFWCUG site appears from the PDF to be 100 DPI/8 bit (note
that's 800 bits per inch net and the result is harder to read) I'll add
scanning this manual to my list. They don't appear to have come up with a
'standard' for their scans. That would help too.
--Chuck
At 01:01 PM 9/10/01, you wrote:
However,
someone decided to scan some of the manuals as low
resolution 8 bit grey scale (what a waste of someone's scanning time!)
Do you mean low or high resolution? There's no need for 48 or even 16
bit for anything not continuous tone. I got three manuals from DFWCUG
and am very happy with the quality. Perhaps they could look into more
efficient compression, though.
John A. 
13 Sep
13 Sep
3:55 p.m.
New subject: Scanning (was Re: recent acquisitions for the House of VAX
Hi Tom,
I have a Bell&Howell 500FB 11x17 scanner with ADF that I a pretty
happy with. It'll do 400DPI native, and 600DPI interpolated, up
to 256 grayscale (no color). I've used it to scan a small number
of 11x17 schematics, and the results are reasonable, the main
problem is page skew. I've been working on a program to automatically
deskew pages (which works ok), and recenter the image in the page
(which doesn't). IIRC, I paid ~$1200US for it.
I also have a Microtek MRS-800AJ which is 11x17 color (i forget the
resolution) but flatbed only. This scanner is too slow to use for
any sort of document scanning. You will die of boredem waiting to
switch pages and start the next scan. I'm happy with the color
reproduction however. Lots cheaper, ~$600US.
Both are SCSI, which I consider to be a requirement because of the
amount of time required to transfer an image across USB. A zippy
machine to drive it (600MHZ/PIII) is also very desirable...
Clint
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Tom Uban wrote:
I started looking for an 11x17 scanner (also called A3
or tabloid, from what
I can gather). They are hard to find and I was wondering if you have
suggestions
for a quality flat bed scanner which can handle the larger format, but is not
to pricey. The ones which I have found also appear to be SCSI, is OK, but
would not be my first choice.
--tom
At 02:16 PM 9/10/01 -0700, you wrote:
This topic has gone over the list a few times,
from experience, the "best"
scans are 600 DPI black and white compressed into PDF files. This achieves
exactly what is needed, get the data without a lot of excess. The KA655 TM
that is on the DFWCUG site appears from the PDF to be 100 DPI/8 bit (note
that's 800 bits per inch net and the result is harder to read) I'll add
scanning this manual to my list. They don't appear to have come up with a
'standard' for their scans. That would help too.
--Chuck
At 01:01 PM 9/10/01, you wrote:
However,
someone decided to scan some of the manuals as low
resolution 8 bit grey scale (what a waste of someone's scanning time!)
Do you mean low or high resolution? There's no need for 48 or even 16
bit for anything not continuous tone. I got three manuals from DFWCUG
and am very happy with the quality. Perhaps they could look into more
efficient compression, though.
John A.
14 Sep
14 Sep
5:16 a.m.
New subject: Scanning (was Re: recent acquisitions for the House of VAX
Hi Clint,
Thanks for the info. The 500FB sounds like a good choice, but I've
only been able to find one company selling them (doing a web search)
and it was for about $2500...
--tom
At 06:55 PM 9/13/01 -0600, you wrote:
Hi Tom,
I have a Bell&Howell 500FB 11x17 scanner with ADF that I a pretty
happy with. It'll do 400DPI native, and 600DPI interpolated, up
to 256 grayscale (no color). I've used it to scan a small number
of 11x17 schematics, and the results are reasonable, the main
problem is page skew. I've been working on a program to automatically
deskew pages (which works ok), and recenter the image in the page
(which doesn't). IIRC, I paid ~$1200US for it.
I also have a Microtek MRS-800AJ which is 11x17 color (i forget the
resolution) but flatbed only. This scanner is too slow to use for
any sort of document scanning. You will die of boredem waiting to
switch pages and start the next scan. I'm happy with the color
reproduction however. Lots cheaper, ~$600US.
Both are SCSI, which I consider to be a requirement because of the
amount of time required to transfer an image across USB. A zippy
machine to drive it (600MHZ/PIII) is also very desirable...
Clint
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Tom Uban wrote:
> I started looking for an 11x17 scanner (also called A3 or tabloid, from
what
> I can gather). They are hard to find and I was
wondering if you have
> suggestions
> for a quality flat bed scanner which can handle the larger format, but
is not
> to pricey. The ones which I have found also appear
to be SCSI, is OK, but
> would not be my first choice.
>
> --tom
>
> At 02:16 PM 9/10/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >This topic has gone over the list a few times, from experience, the
"best"
> >scans are 600 DPI black and white compressed
into PDF files. This
achieves
> >exactly what is needed, get the data without a
lot of excess. The KA655
TM
that is on the DFWCUG site appears from the PDF to be
100 DPI/8 bit (note
that's 800 bits per inch net and the result is harder to read) I'll add
scanning this manual to my list. They don't appear to have come up with a
'standard' for their scans. That would help too.
--Chuck
At 01:01 PM 9/10/01, you wrote:
> However, someone decided to scan some of the
manuals as low
> resolution 8 bit grey scale (what a waste of someone's scanning time!)
Do you mean low or high resolution? There's no need for 48 or even 16
bit for anything not continuous tone. I got three manuals from DFWCUG
and am very happy with the quality. Perhaps they could look into more
efficient compression, though.
John A.
11 Sep
11 Sep
12:05 a.m.
New subject: Scanning (was Re: recent acquisitions for the House of VAX
At 02:16 PM 9/10/01 -0700, you wrote:
This topic has gone over the list a few times, from
experience, the "best"
scans are 600 DPI black and white compressed into PDF files. This achieves
exactly what is needed, get the data without a lot of excess. The KA655 TM
that is on the DFWCUG site appears from the PDF to be 100 DPI/8 bit (note
that's 800 bits per inch net and the result is harder to read) I'll add
scanning this manual to my list. They don't appear to have come up with a
'standard' for their scans. That would help too.
--Chuck
I agree that 300 dpi @ 1bpp is superior for text and line art than 100 dpi
@ 8bpp, but I think your math is askew. You need to compare the # of bits
per sq in, not inch. So 100 dpi @ 8bpp is 10KB/in^2, while 300 dpi @ 1bpp
is 11.25 KB/in^2. For text and line art, though, the 1bpp image will
compress a lot better.
And if, for some reason, you want to scan line art and text in gray scale,
4bpp is plenty enough. Use 8bpp only for continuous-tone images.
-----
Jim Battle == frustum(a)pacbell.net
8389
days inactive
8393
days old
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
allain＠panix.com -
Antonio.Carlini＠riverstonenet.com -
cmcmanis＠netapp.com -
frustum＠pacbell.net -
uban＠ubanproductions.com -
vaxman＠qwest.net