OT FOAK: Getting a plan printed to a different scale

[Pete Fisher]

Sanity check.

I have a digitised file of an old imperial paper plan which was drawn at
a scale of 40 feet to 1 inch in 1913.

I need a printout of part of it at a scale of 1:76 (you guessed it - OO
scale.)

So the 1: 480 plan needs to be resized by 631 % yes?

Except what effect has the scanning process had on the image size?
Fortunately the plan has some other building drawings at larger scale
with dimensions shown.

Irfanview reports:

300 DPI
Size 15392 x 9134 Pixels (140.59 MPixels) (1.68)
Print Size from DPI 130.3 x 77.3 cm; 51.31 x 30.45 inches

The image has large borders each side and small top and bottom so the
original was presumably on some kind of imperial sized architectural
plan sized paper - antiquarian?


So resize a small selection the original image by 631 % (x 6.31) and
then print a selection at actual size on A4, measure a printed building
I have a dimension for in inches and it should be the annotated
dimension given feet / 480 ?

Or do I have to resize by 68/76 x 6.31 to allow for the scanning process?

Or to put it another way, a building shown as 30 feet long should be
120mm in OO on the printout.

I could convert to PDF and tile print on A4 but one big sheet would be
more wieldy so I want to upload a selection from the .jpg I have that
will print out at 1:76 on an A0 sheet.

So, I then have to cut out a selection of the resized image of a printed
width in mm that will fit landscape on an 1190mm A0 sheet and then it
should be effectively 1:76 on the paper?

Doing my head in.
Could ask on a railway modelling forum but they will all be anoraks
about GWR livery but possibly not digital image manipulation gurus.

-
Moto Morini 2C/375
Gilera 175 Sport, Husqvarna 401 Svartpilen
Honda CB250RS (Not Waynetta!)
"Do not adjust your mind, there is a fault in the reality"

[Turby]

On 11/12/2023 11:00 AM, Pete Fisher wrote:
> Sanity check.
>
> I have a digitised file of an old imperial paper plan which was drawn at
> a scale of 40 feet to 1 inch in 1913.
>
> I need a printout of part of it at a scale of 1:76 (you guessed it - OO
> scale.)

> ...

>
> So resize a small selection the original image by 631 % (x 6.31) and
> then print a selection at actual size on A4,  measure a printed building
> I have a  dimension for in inches and it should be the annotated
> dimension given feet / 480 ?
>

Presumably, the original has a scale somewhere on the drawing. (Or use a
simple wall dimension.) Just plot that out and do the arithmetic to make
the plot right.

> -
> Moto Morini 2C/375
> Gilera 175 Sport, Husqvarna 401 Svartpilen
> Honda CB250RS (Not Waynetta!)
> "Do not adjust your mind, there is a fault in the reality"

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS & ST1100 (in memoriam)

[GeoffC]

I worked in a drawing office in the '80s. Back then the origionals were
drawn on a sort of plastic tracing paper and then printed on a contact
print machine that stank of ammonia.
One thing that was impressed upon me at the time was that only the
original is accurate, every print thereof or copy will be distorted in
one axis, especially any copy or print machine that uses rollers.
Copies of copies will change gradually each time and not necessarily
the same in both axes. This makes it very difficult to measure
acurately from an old drawing that has been re copied or scanned many
times.


--

Geoff
NTV650

[Pete Fisher]

On 12/11/2023 20:05, Turby wrote:
> On 11/12/2023 11:00 AM, Pete Fisher wrote:
>> Sanity check.
>>
>> I have a digitised file of an old imperial paper plan which was drawn
>> at a scale of 40 feet to 1 inch in 1913.
>>
>> I need a printout of part of it at a scale of 1:76 (you guessed it -
>> OO scale.)
>> ...
>>
>> So resize a small selection the original image by 631 % (x 6.31) and
>> then print a selection at actual size on A4,  measure a printed
>> building I have a  dimension for in inches and it should be the
>> annotated dimension given feet / 480 ?
>>
> Presumably, the original has a scale somewhere on the drawing. (Or use a
> simple wall dimension.) Just plot that out and do the arithmetic to make
> the plot right.

I should have remembered your credentials in this area.

There are lots of wall dimensions to choose from on very detailed
elevations and sections of building drawings. The 'General plan' in one
corner is annotated "Scale 40 feet to one inch" and shows two of those
buildings at that scale.

So I've been playing about with Irfanview and printing an A4 sheet with
a wall showing a dimension and measuring that. Getting close using the
back of an envelope calcs I posted.

The other issue is that this high quality scan (from the National
Archives) is a 17 Mb file at the 'scale' it is now (1:68 as far as I can
tell). Just the 'General Plan' area, resized to 'OO' creates a 100Mb
file. Probably got to upload to an online services as a PDF though so
not an issue. In any case for this initial purpose fine detail isn't
required. So doing the resize at the printing stage using a percentage
would do,

I stuck a general plan selection through a DXF convertor and loaded it
in to LibreCAD but the learning curve is steep just to use the
measurement tool.

I still have my late uncles beam compass and drawing instruments so I
ought to be just drawing it out on a roll of wallpaper lining paper.


--

[Pete Fisher]

This original is held by the National Archives so no idea how they do
the scanning or how many times this one may have been requested.

Super accuracy isn't essential, just reasonably accurate positions at
4mm to 1 foot. Probably going to have to 'compress' the track features
in length in any case to fit in what I want in the space available.

--

[GeoffC]

If it is scanned from the original then it should be reasonably
accurate, I take it the National Archives use good kit.
It all sounds very interesting, what is it?

--

Geoff
NTV650

[Pete Fisher]

Model railway layout in OO fine (code 75 track[1]) scale of a not far
away GWR station on a long defunct line (opened 1925) that is now a
traffic free cycle route. The station building is still there and is now
a cafe. Not a complex layout, but the single line went double through
the station and there was a goods loop and goods yard with a couple of
sidings and a shunting arm.

Needs quite a long set of baseboards to model all the track from the
first set of points 'Up' to the last set of points 'Down'. I have a
large loft space available so already 4m of surface erected but allowing
for 'fiddle yards' would need about twice that. So the goods loop and
platform length as modelled may have to be shorter than it was in 1933
when passenger services finished. Goods carried on until 1965, so I can
run a variety of locos and rolling stock in virtual scenarios from
1920's steam railcar, to Hall class 4-6-0 locomotives pulling numerous
tanker waggons.

The plan is in colour and the detail on the building drawings is
fantastic. If I am prepared to pay for it, a laser cut plywood model of
the station building could be produced to a very fine detail.

Also going to get a wall poster made (for my own personal enjoyment) as
it's a wonderful example of GWR drawing office work from exactly 100
years ago.



[1] Not 'bullhead' track though as points for that are HFM x n ?

[PipL]

On 12/11/2023 22:39, GeoffC wrote:
> Pete Fisher wrote:
>>

>> Doing my head in.
>> Could ask on a railway modelling forum but they will all be anoraks
>> about GWR livery but possibly not digital image manipulation gurus.
>>
>
> I worked in a drawing office in the '80s. Back then the origionals were
> drawn on a sort of plastic tracing paper and then printed on a contact
> print machine that stank of ammonia.
> One thing that was impressed upon me at the time was that only the
> original is accurate, every print thereof or copy will be distorted in
> one axis, especially any copy or print machine that uses rollers.
> Copies of copies will change gradually each time and not necessarily
> the same in both axes. This makes it very difficult to measure
> acurately from an old drawing that has been re copied or scanned many
> times.
>

I remember those. We used them in my first ever job for duplicating
circuit diagrams etc. Lemon yellow paper that went white under UV and
after fixing with the ammonia, the shaded bits went a sort of purplish.

--
Pip

CHUMP #1

[Turby]

On 11/13/2023 2:23 AM, Pete Fisher wrote:
> On 13/11/2023 09:30, GeoffC wrote:
>>
>> It all sounds very interesting, what is it?
>>
>
> Model railway layout in OO fine (code 75 track[1]) scale of a not far
> away GWR station on a long defunct line (opened 1925) that is now a
> traffic free cycle route. The station building is still there and is now
> a cafe. Not a complex layout, but the single line went double through
> the station and there was a goods loop and goods yard with a couple of
> sidings and a shunting arm.
>

Excellent. Too bad you're so far away. The San Diego Model Railroad
Museum probably has some excellent resources.
https://www.sdmrm.org/

[Simon Wilson]

<back online again>

You really must come and have a rummage through all the stuff - there's
loads and loads of modelling material which I 'm sure you can make
better use of than I.

--
/Simon

[Pete Fisher]

On 15/11/2023 16:58, Simon Wilson wrote:
> On 13/11/2023 10:23, Pete Fisher wrote:


>> Model railway layout in OO fine (code 75 track[1]) scale of a not far
>> away GWR station on a long defunct line (opened 1925) that is now a
>> traffic free cycle route. The station building is still there and is
>> now a cafe. Not a complex layout, but the single line went double
>> through the station and there was a goods loop and goods yard with a
>> couple of sidings and a shunting arm.
>>

>> [1] Not 'bullhead' track though as points for that are HFM x n ?
>>
>>
>
> <back online again>
>
> You really must come and have a rummage through all the stuff - there's
> loads and loads of modelling material which I 'm sure you can make
> better use of than I.
>

I must.

What you have is most likely code 100 track if 'Peco', or possibly
Hornby or Peco 'setrack' , but with a conversion joiner I could make use
of it in the fiddle yards. The locos and rolling stock may, however,
have wheel flanges that are too deep for code 75. I already fell foul of
that buying a couple of old 0-6-0 pannier tanks off Ebay. A Bachman
version runs fine over the code 75 points but a Hornby one derails if
running backwards.

If you could get your vernier calipers out and check some wheels,
apparently 0.045" flange is the max that will work OK through my points.
< 1970's stuff may be deeper.

The materials might be handy. Are there transformers, controllers,
switches etc. too?

Having sussed out how to tile print the most important bit of the plan
on to loads of A4 sheets, I can now start actually laying out the layout.

Modelling the platforms will be fun. It seems half of each one was
timber not brickwork construction. Might have to build that part from
matchsticks!

[Simon Wilson]

I honestly don't know the detail of everything I've got, but it's
several tens of boatloads. It's unlikely there are any super modern
digital contollers but even that I'm not sure about. He sure did like to
play with as many things as possible. Like father like son of course.

--
/Simon

[wessie]

Pete Fisher <pe...@ps-fisher.demon.co.uk> wrote in news:krkfk9F3st1U1
@mid.individual.net:

> Modelling the platforms will be fun. It seems half of each one was
> timber not brickwork construction. Might have to build that part from
> matchsticks!
>

can't you repurpose the Contiplas? [1]


[1] had to look up that, we always refer to it as melamine

[GeoffC]

You mean "Formica" ?

--

Geoff
NTV650

[Pete Fisher]

Ah, the fitted wardrobe demolition I mentioned in another place.


The timber platforms were supported by an open framework of 14" x 7"
sleepers (unsurprising choice for a railway). So half a matchstick width
at OO scale. Think I'll settle for a printed facing. The board may
indeed be about the right thickness for a base finished with scenic
materials.

Armed with my circular saw, I might also knock up a storage unit for the
garage or shed with those plastic block joint things. Cutting the board
if necessary outside wearing an N99 mask though, as the dust can be
literally lethal (long term),

Not cheap to buy new in wardrobe door size I see. I might bung them on
Freegle, though I'm increasingly disenchanted with our local one.
People say they will have something, then when they check how far away
they are never turn up. I did deliver something to a deserving cause
once, but there are limits to public spiritedness.

[Pete Fisher]

I shan't be going down the DCC route. Not a complex enough layout. Only
needs a few isolated sections to DC control locos standing on loops
while others move.

The DCC approach appeals to my coding habit but I'm hoping to use mostly
pre-loved locos [1] without DCC capability. The whole project is
starting to make restoring SOBs look like a cheap pastime.

[1] In a realistic scenario there would be a very few occasions when
more than three were in the station/goods yard at the same time.

[Pete Fisher]

<Googles>
Apparently a question of the laminate fusing 'pressure'.

Generically, MDF with a plastic laminate surface.

[chr...@privacy.net]

On 16/11/2023 07:12, GeoffC wrote:

Formica - always the superior product!
I still have a folding coffee table my mother made around 1960 with a
Formica top when the stuff was new in the market.
The whole thing is still like new!

Chris

[wessie]

"GeoffC" <m...@invalid.nl> wrote in news:uj4fca$25pj3$1...@dont-email.me:

No, that term was reserved for thin sheets of laminate with a plastic
surface that were stuck to existing surfaces to make them look new.

Melamine was either completed furniture maybe white outside and a fake wood
inside as used in wardrobes etc, or it was sheets of the same used to make
kitchen worktops in fake marble or beige if it was my mother using it.

[GeoffC]

Local terminology aside, I was under the impression that melamine was a
chemical compound used to make table ware and also as a thermosetting
plastic in the manufacture of various laminates such as Formica (trade
name).
Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)


--

Geoff
NTV650

[Andy Burns]

GeoffC wrote:

> I was under the impression that melamine was a
> chemical compound used to make table ware and also as a thermosetting
> plastic in the manufacture of various laminates

Also (as a foam) to make magic erasers

[Stephen Packer]

On Friday, 17 November 2023 at 11:23:42 UTC, GeoffC wrote:

> Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)

Don't bother, they're shite; over priced bits of bling built by a company owned
by a tax-dodging wanker.

[Mark Olson]

One wonders if they erase magic or magically erase?

--
FJR1300A, GL1000, KLR650A6F, EX250J9A, DR200SE, Vespa Ciao

[GeoffC]

It was a figure of speech, we bought one actually about 5 years ago.
It's OK, does the job, bit noisy, radically different design.Expensive
too.
With you on the owner though.

--

Geoff
NTV650

[Bruce Horrocks]

At least you weren't under the impression that it was a protein supplement.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_pet_food_recalls>

--
Bruce Horrocks
FJR1300AS

[Boots]

On 17/11/2023 19:23 GeoffC penned these words:

>
>
> Local terminology aside, I was under the impression that melamine was a
> chemical compound used to make table ware and also as a thermosetting
> plastic in the manufacture of various laminates such as Formica (trade
> name).
> Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)
>
>

Also an additive in baby milk to make it look like the protein content is higher.
--
Ian

"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of
the last priest"

[GeoffC]

Boots wrote:

> On 17/11/2023 19:23 GeoffC penned these words:
> >
> >
> > Local terminology aside, I was under the impression that melamine
> > was a chemical compound used to make table ware and also as a
> > thermosetting plastic in the manufacture of various laminates such
> > as Formica (trade name).
> > Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)
> >
> >
>
> Also an additive in baby milk to make it look like the protein
> content is higher.

Yes, I remember that, it caused a huge increase in baby milk prices. I
was working at the time for a company transporting high-value loads,
IPhones, pharma, hard drives and such. Suddenly we found ourselves
driving milk powder to the airport to be airfreighted to China.


--

Geoff
NTV650

[GeoffC]

Absolutely offal!
In my Wiki wanderings I did come across the fact that when burned,
melamine releases nitrogen which in turn acts as a fire suppressant.



--

Geoff
NTV650

[Champ]

...is the right answer

Buy a Henry
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

[Ace]

On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 11:53:41 +0000, Champ <ne...@champ.org.uk> wrote:

>On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:45:07 -0800 (PST), Stephen Packer
><stephen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Friday, 17 November 2023 at 11:23:42 UTC, GeoffC wrote:
>>
>>> Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)
>
>>Don't bother, they're shite; over priced bits of bling built by a company owned
>>by a tax-dodging wanker.
>
>...is the right answer

I love our Dysons. All handheld, really easy to store and use,
particularly for small spills and for carrying from one apartment to
another.

Henrys are thos big round ones on wheels, right? Bulky, heavy,
unwieldy.

--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

[Ace]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:23:39 -0000 (UTC), "GeoffC" <m...@invalid.nl>
wrote:

>Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)

Heh. Pretty sure I've got a Brita thermos jug in the kitchen drawer.
--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

[Stephen Packer]

On Sunday, 19 November 2023 at 11:53:44 UTC, Champ wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:45:07 -0800 (PST), Stephen Packer
> <stephen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, 17 November 2023 at 11:23:42 UTC, GeoffC wrote:
> >
> >> Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)
>
> >Don't bother, they're shite; over priced bits of bling built by a company owned
> >by a tax-dodging wanker.
> ...is the right answer
>
> Buy a Henry

Not really very portable. I've got something similar for garage duties.

Battery powered stuff for in the house.

[Simon Wilson]

On 19/11/2023 11:53, Champ wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:45:07 -0800 (PST), Stephen Packer
> <stephen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, 17 November 2023 at 11:23:42 UTC, GeoffC wrote:
>>
>>> Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)
>
>> Don't bother, they're shite; over priced bits of bling built by a company owned
>> by a tax-dodging wanker.
>
> ...is the right answer
>
> Buy a Henry

+1

--
/Simon

[YTC#1]

On 19/11/2023 11:53, Champ wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:45:07 -0800 (PST), Stephen Packer
> <stephen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, 17 November 2023 at 11:23:42 UTC, GeoffC wrote:
>>
>>> Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)
>
>> Don't bother, they're shite; over priced bits of bling built by a company owned
>> by a tax-dodging wanker.
>
> ...is the right answer
>
> Buy a Henry

Or a Harriet


--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

[Pete Fisher]

Reasonably pleased with our Shark cordless. Except that it is impossible
to get in to the power roller brush head if the roller gets jammed. Mea
culpa for letting a length of fishing line drop on to the spare room
carpet and letting the Shark pick it up.

[Turby]

On 11/22/2023 2:24 AM, Pete Fisher wrote:
> On 21/11/2023 21:34, Simon Wilson wrote:
>> On 19/11/2023 11:53, Champ wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:45:07 -0800 (PST), Stephen Packer
>>> <stephen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, 17 November 2023 at 11:23:42 UTC, GeoffC wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)
>>>

>>> Buy a Henry

>>
>
> Reasonably pleased with our Shark cordless.

My Shark corded works OK.

(Are electric shavers next on the list? My Wahl is OK, too.)

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS & ST1100 (in memoriam)

[Bruce Horrocks]

On 22/11/2023 10:24, Pete Fisher wrote:
> On 21/11/2023 21:34, Simon Wilson wrote:
>> On 19/11/2023 11:53, Champ wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:45:07 -0800 (PST), Stephen Packer
>>> <stephen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, 17 November 2023 at 11:23:42 UTC, GeoffC wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ho-Hum, thinking of buying a Dyson hoover next week :-)
>>>
>>>> Don't bother, they're shite; over priced bits of bling built by a
>>>> company owned
>>>> by a tax-dodging wanker.
>>>
>>> ...is the right answer
>>>
>>> Buy a Henry
>>
>> +1
>>
>
> Reasonably pleased with our Shark cordless. Except that it is impossible
> to get in to the power roller brush head if the roller gets jammed. Mea
> culpa for letting a length of fishing line drop on to the spare room
> carpet and letting the Shark pick it up.

If only you'd bought a bargain Black Friday replacement, it would have
made the perfect headline:

Fisher snags Shark on line, snags Shark online!

--
Bruce Horrocks
FJR1300AS

[Turby]

"Shark gets Fisher to bite!"

[geoffC]

On 22/11/2023 16:33, Turby wrote:
>
>(Are electric shavers next on the list? My Wahl is OK, too.)

I have a Wahl clipper, a very nice, shiny, solid tool it is too. Above all,
it makes a very satisfying "clack" when you switch it on.


--
Geoff
NTV 650