Searching \ for '[OT] RE: 50MHZ Frequency Counter' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/timers.htm?key=count
Search entire site for: 'RE: 50MHZ Frequency Counter'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] RE: 50MHZ Frequency Counter'
1998\02\18@201957 by Miller, Steve

flavicon
face
I have scanned in the schematic from the magazine article. (Popular Electronics
Nov 1994)  The BMP file is about 1/2 MEG.

I can e-mail this to any one who doe not have access to the magazine.  Please
respond to the e-mail address below.  Do not send requests to the list.  Thank
you.

   spam_OUTstevemTakeThisOuTspamtanisys.com

1998\02\19@060315 by Harijs Melders

flavicon
face
Can you send me one ?

Thanks,
Harijs.       .....harisKILLspamspam@spam@lnt.lv

Miller, Steve wrote:

> I have scanned in the schematic from the magazine article. (Popular
Electronics
> Nov 1994)  The BMP file is about 1/2 MEG.
>
> I can e-mail this to any one who doe not have access to the magazine.  Please
> respond to the e-mail address below.  Do not send requests to the list.  Thank
> you.
>
>     stevemspamKILLspamtanisys.com

1998\02\19@090258 by Frank A. Vorstenbosch

flavicon
face
Steve Miller has sent me is BMP file, which I converted to GIF (about
70k) and put on my PIC resources page.  Look here:

  http://www.falstaff.demon.co.uk/picres.html
or
  http://www.falstaff.demon.co.uk/picfreq.gif

Note that the picture is copyright someone, probably.

Frank
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank A. Vorstenbosch     <UCE_ACCEPT="NONE">     Phone: 0181 - 636 3000
Electronics and Software Engineer                 Mobile: 0976 - 430 569
Eidos Technologies Ltd., Wimbledon, London        Email: .....favKILLspamspam.....eidos.co.uk

1998\02\19@162751 by Tom Mariner

flavicon
face
Hello Steve,

Why don't you convert the BMP to JPG or something smaller? (You can use
shareware Paint Shop Pro or a bunch of other packages.)

Tom

On Wednesday, February 18, 1998 7:32 PM, Miller, Steve [SMTP:EraseMEstevemspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTTANISYS.COM]
wrote:
> I have scanned in the schematic from the magazine article. (Popular
Electronics
> Nov 1994)  The BMP file is about 1/2 MEG.
>
> I can e-mail this to any one who doe not have access to the magazine.  Please
> respond to the e-mail address below.  Do not send requests to the list.  Thank
> you.
>
>     stevemspamspam_OUTtanisys.com

1998\02\19@164719 by Herbert Graf
picon face
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pic microcontroller discussion list
> [@spam@PICLISTKILLspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Tom Mariner
> Sent: February 19, 1998 15:41
> To: KILLspamPICLISTKILLspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: [OT] RE: 50MHZ Frequency Counter
>
>
> Hello Steve,
>
> Why don't you convert the BMP to JPG or something smaller? (You can use
>  shareware Paint Shop Pro or a bunch of other packages.)

       Please never JPEG for something like a schematic, GIF is much better for
that kind of stuff. Just a personal preference. TTYL

1998\02\19@165352 by Sean Breheny

face picon face
At 04:37 PM 2/19/98 -0500, you wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pic microcontroller discussion list
>> [RemoveMEPICLISTTakeThisOuTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Tom Mariner
>> Sent: February 19, 1998 15:41
>> To: spamBeGonePICLISTspamBeGonespamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
>> Subject: Re: [OT] RE: 50MHZ Frequency Counter
>>
>>
>> Hello Steve,
>>
>> Why don't you convert the BMP to JPG or something smaller? (You can use
>>  shareware Paint Shop Pro or a bunch of other packages.)
>
>        Please never JPEG for something like a schematic, GIF is much
better for
>that kind of stuff. Just a personal preference. TTYL
>

I used to think that JPEG was really bad for schematics, too, but as long
as the schematic isn't really cluttered, the JPEG schematics that I have
seen have been good. Then again, I'm not sure how much jpegs differ in
image quality.

Sean




+--------------------------------+
| Sean Breheny                   |
| Amateur Radio Callsign: KA3YXM |
| Electrical Engineering Student |
+--------------------------------+
Fight injustice, please look at
http://homepages.enterprise.net/toolan/joanandrews/

Personal page: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/shb7
TakeThisOuTshb7EraseMEspamspam_OUTcornell.edu
Phone(USA): (607) 253-0315

1998\02\19@173319 by Martin R. Green

flavicon
face
There is no need to use JPG for schematics.  Excellent compression can
be obtained with just GIF or PNG, and even using RLE BMP is very good
since a schematic is only 2 colour.  GIF, PNG and RLE are all lossless
compression, resulting in excellent expansion, whereas JPC is lossy,
resulting in fuzzy images.  JPG is really only required (and useful)
for full colour or other graduated tone images.

CIAO - Martin.

On Thu, 19 Feb 1998 16:52:34 -0500, Sean Breheny <RemoveMEshb7spamTakeThisOuTCORNELL.EDU>
wrote:

>At 04:37 PM 2/19/98 -0500, you wrote:
>>> {Original Message removed}

1998\02\19@173908 by Herbert Graf

picon face
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pic microcontroller discussion list
> [PICLISTEraseMEspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Sean Breheny
> Sent: February 19, 1998 16:53
> To: EraseMEPICLISTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: [OT] RE: 50MHZ Frequency Counter
> >> Why don't you convert the BMP to JPG or something smaller? (You can use
> >>  shareware Paint Shop Pro or a bunch of other packages.)
> >
> >        Please never JPEG for something like a schematic, GIF is much
> better for
> >that kind of stuff. Just a personal preference. TTYL
> >
>
> I used to think that JPEG was really bad for schematics, too, but as long
> as the schematic isn't really cluttered, the JPEG schematics that I have
> seen have been good. Then again, I'm not sure how much jpegs differ in
> image quality.

       I agree, I have seen some good JPEG schematics, but I've seen alot more
bad
ones, Jpegs seems to blur things too much, with a GIF, you can zoom in
really nicely and see the finest detail, with JPEGs my experience has shown
that it tends to blur, contrast suffers and details are sometimes lost. And
I guess aside from all that, JPEGs open more slowly on older machines than
GIFs. Just my personal preference. TTYL

1998\02\20@095239 by Tom Mariner

flavicon
face
Yup!

Funny, but when I sent the message it had "or something smaller" after the
"JPG".

Tom

On Thursday, February 19, 1998 5:15 PM, Martin R. Green
[SMTP:RemoveMEelimarEraseMEspamEraseMENOSPAMBIGFOOT.COM] wrote:
> There is no need to use JPG for schematics.  Excellent compression can
> be obtained with just GIF or PNG, and even using RLE BMP is very good
> since a schematic is only 2 colour.  GIF, PNG and RLE are all lossless
> compression, resulting in excellent expansion, whereas JPC is lossy,
> resulting in fuzzy images.  JPG is really only required (and useful)
> for full colour or other graduated tone images.
>
> CIAO - Martin.
>
>


'[OT] RE: 50MHZ Frequency Counter'
1998\03\04@180906 by Larry G. Nelson Sr.
flavicon
face
At 04:52 PM 2/19/98 -0500, you wrote:
JPEG can be ok but watch how much compression you use as higher compression
degrades image quality.


>>        Please never JPEG for something like a schematic, GIF is much
>better for
>>that kind of stuff. Just a personal preference. TTYL
>>
>
>I used to think that JPEG was really bad for schematics, too, but as long
>as the schematic isn't really cluttered, the JPEG schematics that I have
>seen have been good. Then again, I'm not sure how much jpegs differ in
>image quality.
>
Larry G. Nelson Sr.
RemoveMEL.Nelsonspam_OUTspamKILLspamieee.org
http://www.ultranet.com/~nr

1998\03\05@064045 by Morgan Olsson

picon face
At 17:56 1998-03-04 -0500, Larry G. Nelson Sr. wrote:
>At 04:52 PM 2/19/98 -0500, you wrote:
>JPEG can be ok but watch how much compression you use as higher compression
>degrades image quality.
>
>
>>>        Please never JPEG for something like a schematic, GIF is much
>>better for
>>>that kind of stuff. Just a personal preference. TTYL
>>>
>>
>>I used to think that JPEG was really bad for schematics, too, but as long
>>as the schematic isn't really cluttered, the JPEG schematics that I have
>>seen have been good. Then again, I'm not sure how much jpegs differ in
>>image quality.
>>
For internal use we use pcx, because it is accurate, compact (two-color
mode), and compatible also with elder programs.  For external use gif is
the best for schematics and such, because it«s wide compatibility and
accuracy.

Trying to further process a jpg schematic can cause problems, like when
printing the blur often increases, and take much time as my inkjet printer
switch to color mode...

/Morgan
/  Morgan Olsson, MORGANS REGLERTEKNIK, SE-277 35 KIVIK, Sweden \
\  RemoveMEmrtTakeThisOuTspamspaminame.com, ph: +46 (0)414 70741; fax +46 (0)414 70331    /

1998\03\05@071158 by Syd Kahn

flavicon
face
Actually the best format for image size and accuracy (especially for 2
colors, is TIFF (packbits).  a GIF works the same way - it just compresses
the like colors for each line. If you have Win95 the built in Xerox (now
Kodak) imaging controls deal with TIFF quite well. JPEG tries to compress
areas, and does a lousy job with straight lines and text, and because it is
a lossy compression will actually mess up the image if the compression is to
high.

so IMHO use GIFF if you want everybody to be able to deal with it (pcx is a
very good second choice for compatibility), But for the best storage of a
LOT of schematics and engineering drawings in general use TIFF (packbits).

my $.02
Syd

> {Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1998 , 1999 only
- Today
- New search...