Paul,

can you tell me how you got a gif out of Autocad?  I am using Acad 2000 and
would love a way of get drawings to a bitmap format at 600 dpi (300 dpi)...

I have a fairly longwinded process which works to some extent: export from
Acad as wmf, load into PSP 5 at high resolution, save as whatever bitmapped
format after reducing colour depth.  The problem with this is that Paint
Shop Pro is unable to load the image at a resolution higher that around 250
dpi due to its memory management (says 'out of memory', although I have 256
MB, which is more than enough).

Roland

----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas McGahee <tom_mcgahee@SIGMAIS.COM>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 2:57 PM
Subject: [OT] PDF versus GIF


> Paul,
>
> The AutoCad drawing file was 8k in size.
> Many people have no way to read DWG files.
>
> The PDF file at 600 dpi was 18k in size.
> The PDF file at 150 dpi was 17k in size.
> There are free readers available for all platforms.
>
> The GIF file came to 181k. I was able to reduce it to
> 57k monochrome.
>
> I also prefer the PDF files because the PDF writer
> is accessible the same as a printer, and so I can
> produce PDF files from ANY of my applications.
>
> I find the quality of the PDF files superior. I
> normally produce 600 dpi PDF files, as they
> reproduce excellently on laser printers, and the
> increase in file size is very small.
>
> I might be able to get something readable from
> an 18k GIF, but that same 18k of file space
> in PDF format gives me a MUCH better result
> when printed out on paper.
>
> In general I have found the PDF files to be
> smaller than the comparable quality GIF files,
> plus I can incorporate word processor elements,
> and in that case people can extract the text
> if they desire.
>
> I was initially suprised to find that if I
> include a GIF file into a PDF document, the
> resulting PDF document is often actually smaller!
>
> Fr. Tom McGahee
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul B. Webster VK2BZC <paulb@MIDCOAST.COM.AU>
> To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> Date: Thursday, April 06, 2000 5:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [OT] Constant-current cap charging
>
>
> >Thomas McGahee wrote:
> >
> >> See the attached PDF file for a very simple constant current source
> >> that might work for you.
> >
> >  That or the two-transistor version beat the pants off the LM317 or
> >constant-current diode suggestions (the latter if only as they are hens
> >teeth at higher currents, though minimum voltage drop is also higher).
> >
> >  Tom, why must you post PDFs?  GIFs inline into the mail much easier so
> >we can see them straight off in the navigator.  Your PDFs appear to
> >incorporate GIFs, including text, anyway.
> >
> >  Your other suggestion of the transformer - would be far better off
> >to use the second transformer to power the PIC as well I should think.
> >I would think though that the space needed to add *any* second
> >transformer would be better utilised fitting a decent transformer in the
> >first place - possibly a C-core or toroidal.
> >--
> >  Cheers,
> >        Paul B.
> >
>