Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Where users can chronicle their builds. Start one thread and continue to add on to it.

Moderator: Harold_V

Odyknuck
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:21 pm
Location: Chardon, Ohio

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Odyknuck »

Picture test. I resized to a lower resolution
Attachments
ChassisR.jpg
ChassisR.jpg (60.11 KiB) Viewed 980 times
Last edited by Odyknuck on Tue Jan 31, 2023 8:53 am, edited 6 times in total.
User avatar
Harold_V
Posts: 20231
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 11:02 pm
Location: Onalaska, WA USA

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Harold_V »

Perhaps you now understand what I've been trying to say. Well done!

H
Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.
Odyknuck
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:21 pm
Location: Chardon, Ohio

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Odyknuck »

Yes, I understood however just now got the opportunity to experiment.
The above pic was originally at 4032 X 3024 3.7MB

So, either the original software resized the pics during upload or had a higher max Megabyte.
Odyknuck
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:21 pm
Location: Chardon, Ohio

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Odyknuck »

So, In the above Pic the chassis is upright for hopefully the last time. I completed the Brake system that now has plenty of clearance below the Linkage, Cylinder and Fulcrum pivot. 3/4" on both, so I am pleased.
Attachments
CylinderPaintedandMountedR.jpg
CylinderPaintedandMountedR.jpg (158.37 KiB) Viewed 979 times
FulcrumAllenClearenceR.jpg
FulcrumAllenClearenceR.jpg (97.24 KiB) Viewed 978 times
PilotyTruckPivotLatchR.jpg
PilotyTruckPivotLatchR.jpg (132.84 KiB) Viewed 977 times
Last edited by Odyknuck on Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:02 am, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
Harold_V
Posts: 20231
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 11:02 pm
Location: Onalaska, WA USA

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Harold_V »

I do NOT manage the software, although through the kindness of the owner, I certainly could. He trusts that I don't, and I do NOTHING to betray that trust.

That said, yes, the old software appeared to accept images that were larger than the board displayed, in spite of the fact that we made it clear that images larger than 1024 x 768 should NOT be uploaded. I suspect that that is no longer the case. If for no other reason, those large files eat up storage space unnecessarily, which would lead to increased cost for the owner. It is important that you, and all readers, understand that this board is a gift to you from him. He foots all costs and asks nothing in return (although he is grateful for those who make contributions).

It is incumbent upon all of us to ensure that we do not make him sorry for his generosity by ignoring rules that help control his expenses.

Newer monitors are far more forgiving of oversized images, but in the old days, any image posted that was larger than 1024 pixels in width caused the text to spread. All posts in any given thread that contained such an oversized image suffered the same fate. Imagine how much spread there would be if an image the width you described (4032 pixels) was allowed. I recall one that was just over 3,000 pixels and it was a total disaster until I resized the image. That's when we started enforcing image limits, and they should still be upheld.

Here's the hard facts on this matter.

With rare exception, an image sized to 1024 (in width) is large enough to display critical detail. Any larger is simply not needed.
File size of as little as 100 kb will display unreasonably good detail, although a larger file size may improve detail somewhat. A top limit of 500 kb is NOT unreasonable, and, certainly, 200 kb is generally more than would be required for a good image. Please think accordingly when posting images so we can all keep this incredibly valuable venue open for us without advertising or other expense.

H
Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.
Odyknuck
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:21 pm
Location: Chardon, Ohio

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Odyknuck »

I worked on the Pilot Truck after getting it painted up. I had to clean up the face of the Pivot point where I welded it up awhile back. I used a boring bar upside down and ran the Lathe in reverse to get it done. Unfortunately, I broke a bolt and the assembly got put on hold until tomorrow.
Attachments
PilotTruckPaintedR.jpg
PilotTruckPaintedR.jpg (177.11 KiB) Viewed 976 times
PilotTruckPivotFacingR.jpg
PilotTruckPivotFacingR.jpg (103.78 KiB) Viewed 975 times
Last edited by Odyknuck on Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:06 am, edited 2 times in total.
Odyknuck
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:21 pm
Location: Chardon, Ohio

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Odyknuck »

With the Frame Upright I wanted to start on the Cylinders however I discovered only 6 of 7 Mounting holes were drilled on one side. The OP apparently broke a drill bit off in a hole he started and moved on. I was able to get the drill bit out and finish the hole from the outside. He also did not drill the hole in the Cylinder center section, so I used a 1/4 - 20 Screw in transfer punch to locate the hole. These things have come in handle many times over the years.
Attachments
CylinderTGrabnsferPunchResized.jpg
CylinderTGrabnsferPunchResized.jpg (384.45 KiB) Viewed 1065 times
CylinderPunchedResized.jpg
CylinderPunchedResized.jpg (288.29 KiB) Viewed 1065 times
FraneDrillingResized.jpg
FraneDrillingResized.jpg (397.93 KiB) Viewed 1065 times
CylinderBoltsResized.jpg
CylinderBoltsResized.jpg (270.57 KiB) Viewed 1064 times
Odyknuck
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:21 pm
Location: Chardon, Ohio

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Odyknuck »

Harold,
I totally understand and will observe the Pic size in the future and keep them on the smaller size. In all honestly when the pics loaded, I assumed everything was Ok and did not give it much thought, for that I apologize.
Odyknuck
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:21 pm
Location: Chardon, Ohio

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Odyknuck »

Harold, I went back thru all of the Pics in my Build Log and the average size is 125 KB up until I tried to upload Pics yesterday.
User avatar
Bill Shields
Posts: 10459
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:57 am
Location: 39.367, -75.765
Contact:

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Bill Shields »

If I seem to remember, there used to be a pixel limit, irrespective of file size. I think it was 800 x 600

Is that the way it is now?

I am a bit confused as to current limits ..file size or pixels?
Too many things going on to bother listing them.
User avatar
Bill Shields
Posts: 10459
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:57 am
Location: 39.367, -75.765
Contact:

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Bill Shields »

Odyknuck

You have certainly stepped up your game regarding clearance improvement. You do nice work.

I cannot say that given my personal choice, I would not use E clips on pins since I have seen cases where they have disappeared from where they were intended to be located.

When I was young, we used to call them "Jesus clips"
Too many things going on to bother listing them.
User avatar
Harold_V
Posts: 20231
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 11:02 pm
Location: Onalaska, WA USA

Re: Railroad Warehouse 2.8.2 Mikado Logger Build

Post by Harold_V »

Bill Shields wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 11:30 pm If I seem to remember, there used to be a pixel limit, irrespective of file size. I think it was 800 x 600

Is that the way it is now?
It's been years since such small pictures were required. The advent of faster modems made that possible.
I am a bit confused as to current limits ..file size or pixels?
Both, really, although if you observe the maximum of 1024 x 768 (the 768 can also be 1024---that doesn't spread text). Large pictures (pixel count) spread text and cause readers to have to scroll to read the contents of every post on the page on which oversized pictures are displayed. Oversized file sizes eat up valuable server space and will cause the owner to have to buy greater space on a server, raising his costs of maintaining the board. When large file sizes are not required, don't post 'em that way. You'll come to discover that a 1024 x 768 image recorded @ 200 kb or less offers incredibly good definition, assuming it's taken in focus.

If you're looking for high detail for a specific reason and a larger image recorded with more information may be required, but when a reader posts a nonsense image of something irrelevant and doesn't pay attention to those features, it's only a matter of time until we either start paying for this venue, or it is loaded with advertising (have any of the readers taken notice that this board is free of advertising?) Worst case scenario, the board is simply taken away.

We all need to do our part in keeping this venue reasonable for the owner.

H
Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.
Post Reply