New stuff posted at JimZ's

Advertise with us
madcow rocketry
SilicdyneTRF
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
kuririn

kuririn

BARGeezer
TRF Supporter
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
12,415
Reaction score
14,316
Location
Hawaii
I just noticed a couple of new plans posted at JimZ's in the Estes section: the Luna Bug and Green Eggs.
These are currently in production by Estes so, I guess Jim Zalewski got permission?
Also there are a few new "old" plans posted in the "Other Stuff" section.
Oddly these are not listed in the "New" section.
There may be other new stuff, I just briefly surveyed the site.
First update in like, years.
 
Good to see the site being updated. It is probably the most used resource of mine for my builds.
BTW I wasn't questioning the postings, just curious since usually only plans for OOP kits are posted.
Thank you Jim Zalewski!
 
kuririn said:
Good to see the site being updated. It is probably the most used resource of mine for my builds.
BTW I wasn't questioning the postings, just curious since usually only plans for OOP kits are posted.
Thank you Jim Zalewski!
Click to expand...
I'll double that one. Thank you so, SO much, Jim Z! So many plans and so much information I've gotten from your site!
 
kuririn said:
Good to see the site being updated. It is probably the most used resource of mine for my builds.
BTW I wasn't questioning the postings, just curious since usually only plans for OOP kits are posted.
Thank you Jim Zalewski!
Click to expand...

I welcomed JimZ's return a little while back on Facebook. And I've also taken full advantage of his sites archive of OOP kits in the past. However I did question the recent postings of current production kit information. If Estes is fine with it, of course, no problem. If not, IDK. Don't ask-Don't tell ? Easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission ? I have no vested interest in any model rocket vendor nor am I a copyright lawyer.
 
neil_w said:
Maybe, but in 2020 it is nowhere near the ideal choice for this application.
Click to expand...
The big advantage to TIFF is that it offers lossless compression of things like line-art. JPEG is the WORST possible format for anything with high frequency detail, like scanned plans, decals, or instructions. PNG, if done correctly, would be a good substitute for TIFF, but TIFF is still valid format for 2020.


Tony
 
Last edited:
I wrote to Jim Z in March but never heard from him. I found a bunch of directions and other memorabilia that I had from the 1970's and 80's that someone might be interested in. I believe I saw a few kits that Jim Z did not have on the web site.
 
cwbullet said:
Is he still posting plans?
Click to expand...
He had a long period of "LIFE" that got in the way of maintaining his site. Things have settled down now, and he's back at it. He's updating things, changing out of the .tif files, and accepting new materials.

I'd suggest that if anyone has resources for him, or me, use clear subject lines. For example... "I have plans for you" is totally useless (is it spam?). "Instructions, decals, and fin scans of the XXXXX" is a lot more useful.
 
Yeah, email with what you are actually sending him. I typically end up sending two emails as the higher res scans require it as they are huge for email.
 
I e-mailed Jim a download link (WeTransfer) for the Estes K-27 Honest John, including high resolution .PDF files of the instructions, decal sheet, and fin patterns. Also did a vector based .EPS file of the decals and fin pattern with a ruler included for reference.

Haven't gotten a response yet, but I hope they help others out in recreating this classic kit. Can't thank Jim enough for all his work.
 
kuririn said:
I just noticed a couple of new plans posted at JimZ's in the Estes section: the Luna Bug and Green Eggs.
These are currently in production by Estes so, I guess Jim Zalewski got permission?
Also there are a few new "old" plans posted in the "Other Stuff" section.
Oddly these are not listed in the "New" section.
There may be other new stuff, I just briefly surveyed the site.
First update in like, years.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the update, Jim's site is an invaluable storehouse of much needed plans and info, and I'm stoked to see it active again!
 
Just found this thread. Glad I did, I just went to the JimZ website and it is AMAZING! So much stuff so now I can build the things I never got the chance to.
 
Just a note, JPG is NOT higher quality than TIFF, especially for high frequency/high contrast black and white images. JPG is lossy and introduces image artifacts that were not in the original image. TIFF is lossless and produces a 'duplicate original'.

That being said, it looks like the amount of JPG compression (at least on the samples I looked at) is very low so the artifacts are not very noticeable. In the image below you can see the artifacts I am talking about. They have been 'enlarged to show texture'. (Actually, I just made the very light pixels much darker so they are easy to see.) The stair step pattern you see is caused by the macroblocks used in the JPG compression scheme.

The biggest issue with JPG is that it makes it very difficult to edit the file and re-save it without an additional loss of quality. If the image size is changed or a different compression ratio is used, additional artifacts can be introduced. Using TIFF or PNG eliminates these issues. For our images, 8 bit PNGs with lossless compression would probably be the best format.

Tony

first image is original JPG, second has been darkened to show artifacts (stair step blocky areas along lines/black areas):
 

Attachments

  • k-51c-sample-original.png
    k-51c-sample-original.png
    98.7 KB · Views: 39
  • k-51c-sample.png
    k-51c-sample.png
    73.6 KB · Views: 37
manixFan said:
Just a note, JPG is NOT higher quality than TIFF, especially for high frequency/high contrast black and white images. JPG is lossy and introduces image artifacts that were not in the original image. TIFF is lossless and produces a 'duplicate original'.

That being said, it looks like the amount of JPG compression (at least on the samples I looked at) is very low so the artifacts are not very noticeable. In the image below you can see the artifacts I am talking about. They have been 'enlarged to show texture'. (Actually, I just made the very light pixels much darker so they are easy to see.) The stair step pattern you see is caused by the macroblocks used in the JPG compression scheme.

The biggest issue with JPG is that it makes it very difficult to edit the file and re-save it without an additional loss of quality. If the image size is changed or a different compression ratio is used, additional artifacts can be introduced. Using TIFF or PNG eliminates these issues. For our images, 8 bit PNGs with lossless compression would probably be the best format.

Tony

first image is original JPG, second has been darkened to show artifacts (stair step blocky areas along lines/black areas):
Click to expand...
Umm....those aren't JPG, those are PNG...

Just sayin'
 
John Kemker said:
Umm....those aren't JPG, those are PNG...

Just sayin'
Click to expand...
The samples I uploaded are in PNG format to avoid any additional jpeg compression on top of what was already present in the original files. Here's what I did:
  • opened the original JimZ file in Photoshop
  • cropped the image (without resampling) to a manageable sample area
  • added a Levels adjustment layer to darken the lightest pixels and increase contrast to make the original JPG artifacts visible
  • saved the image using PNG format to avoid any additional JPG compression
It wouldn't make sense to save an image in JPG format if the point of the image is to show the JPG compression artifacts in the ORIGINAL image. Saving it a second time in JPG would just add additional artifacts that weren't in the original JimZ image and invalidate the image as an example.


Tony
 
Last edited:
I use the best, (highest), quality setting for JPGs.
TIF and GIF thumbnails were used to save memory and bandwidth. Most plans were relegated to bitmap. The new method is greyscale and RGB color.
Indeed, I found plans in my junk mail folder.
Some issues have been noticed where the old website pages have been cached and what you guys are seeing is bogus. Please clear your cache.
My old e-mail is no longer valid.
This is correct: [email protected]
Submissions have been coming in fast. I am working on the backlog.

JimZ
 
Howdy Folks,
I just went to JimZ's site for the 1st time and, yes, there is a lot of neat rockets, etc. on the sight, but the one that reached out and grabbed me by the throat, so to speak, is the rocket on the cover of the August 1968 issue. It looks challenging enough to be fun and not boring to build. I'm thinking that a C6-3 for the 1st flight and d class thereafter. What do the rest of the members think?
 
Vitruvius said:
Howdy Folks,
I just went to JimZ's site for the 1st time and, yes, there is a lot of neat rockets, etc. on the sight, but the one that reached out and grabbed me by the throat, so to speak, is the rocket on the cover of the August 1968 issue. It looks challenging enough to be fun and not boring to build. I'm thinking that a C6-3 for the 1st flight and d class thereafter. What do the rest of the members think?
Click to expand...
That is the Starship Excalibur. Plans are here:
https://www.spacemodeling.org/jimz/eirp/eirp_55.pdfOr if you prefer you can buy the retro-repro Semroc kit from erockets here:
https://www.erockets.biz/semroc-flying-model-rocket-kit-starship-excalibur-sem-kv-85/A C6-5 will take it to 750'.
Don't know what a Q-Jet D will do.
 
Not that anyone probably cares, but since I do this stuff for a living, I thought I would post this example below. The JPG file size is what is uploaded to the website. The PNG is the same file saved in 8-bit PNG format, which is lossless, and therefore avoids the issue of image artifacts discussed above. You can see that the higher quality PNG files are substantially smaller than the JPG files. This is true of nearly any file that is black and white line art, which comprises the vast majority of scanned instructions.

Just FYI.


Tony


Saved using 'File > Export > Export as... > PNG - Smaller File (8-bit). PNG 8-bit is a lossless, non-destructive format when used for line art.
image-size-comparison.png
 
kuririn said:
That is the Starship Excalibur. Plans are here:
https://www.spacemodeling.org/jimz/eirp/eirp_55.pdfOr if you prefer you can buy the retro-repro Semroc kit from erockets here:
https://www.erockets.biz/semroc-flying-model-rocket-kit-starship-excalibur-sem-kv-85/A C6-5 will take it to 750'.
Don't know what a Q-Jet D will do.
Click to expand...
Wow! Thanks! I don't live all that far from E-rockets. I'll have to go there at the beginning of next month when I get my Military disability and get it! Thanks again!
 

Similar threads

Wayco
First trip in our new trailer to a most excellent TRA/PHX launch
Replies
0
Views
326
Wayco
Wayco
N
Premature Drogue Chute Deployment Diagnosis
Replies
7
Views
308
cwbullet
cwbullet
Voyhager3
Gauging Interest in Edmonds Gliders
Replies
29
Views
2K
Voyhager3
Voyhager3
Onebadhawk
Onebadhawk Recovery Harnesses Annual Black Week Sale
Replies
6
Views
968
Onebadhawk
Onebadhawk
J
Need Suggestions for Rebuilding a Estes 1:100 Apollo Saturn V #1969 (Long)
Replies
8
Views
1K
JPalmer621
J

Latest posts

Back
Top