View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
CAPTAIN LES Registered User
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 Posts: 21 Location: Dewsbury
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:44 am Post subject: POSTING PICTURES ON THE FORUM |
|
|
WOW - it worked. If anyone else needs the information to post pictures, it's
1. Get the image on FLICKR or similar (regardless of the few days they speak of, this took 3 weeks before mine showed up after registering. But it's free)
2. Load your image in FLICKR, using the ALL SIZES button for a large image. Right-click (ctrl-click MAC) on your image and then Copy Image to your forum message.
3. Return to forum and press the Img button before pasting the image.
4. Hope the forum hasn't timed out on you before you SUBMIT. I've taken to pasting this into a word processor first for safety.
Confusing for us simple souls 'cos it doesn't show your image until you have posted it. I'll try for the suspension pics tomorrow. Hope they don't take 3 weeks to show like my first set!
[img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3147/3095473565_afa6c525bc_b.jpg |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rodsmith Registered User
Joined: 16 Jun 2008 Posts: 187 Location: Pembrokeshire, West Wales
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
I found that Photobucket was more immediate. If I have taken too long to post , I then press the "preview" button, then the "submit" button so I don't get that weird message!
Rod _________________ " Stay lucky " |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TonyS Registered User
Joined: 17 Jan 2006 Posts: 230 Location: Worcestershire
|
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Les,
The reason I said place a photo of CTO 289B on to http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=rochdale+olympic&s=rec
was because there were a lot of Olympic photos already on there, I did not realise how long it took for the photos to appear? (I am still waiting after 3 weeks for one I sent), but it is still a good site to sent an Olympic photo to for the general public to see.
But if you wish to send photos to Website forum’s register with http://photobucket.com
Photos load up instantly and there is a greater range of options. I.e. Picture size. Donot send a large photo to a forum as it uses a lot of Web space and makes the post to large,
Ideal size is 640 x 480.
OK, so youve uploaded photos to photobucket? If you want to show us a pic have the ROC site and photobucket open at same time, start a new thread or post, and when you get to the point of wanting to include a photo start a new line. Then go to the photo on photobucket and put curser on photo. Underneath will be 4 lines of code, the bottom one being IMG. Left click on the actual code and it turns blue which means you have copied it. Go back to ROC post and make sure curser is in correct place, in your post, then right click, go to paste in the command box and click on it. The code of the image should appear as a line of text where you had the curser. To see if it is successful click on preview rather than submit- if it is wrong or out of position you can sort it before posting.
Good luck,
Tony |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul Narramore Registered User
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 181 Location: Aylesford, Kent.
|
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been using Photobucket for about a year or so now and it's pretty good but not without it's faults. It's great for creating mini-albums for instance. When I built the new(ish) timber workshop, I took pics as I went along, so they appeared in chronological order. Now I can send a single link to the min-album and the recipient can see it in entirity.
One fault is loading (say) holiday snaps. If I have to load (say) 100 pics, it often seizes up after fifteen or so, so I then have to do it in batches of twelve at a time which can take ages. I contacted the Photobucket forum to ask advice, but the advice received was in 'puter jargon and completely unintelligable to someone like me, as is most thinks 'puter TBO. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CAPTAIN LES Registered User
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 Posts: 21 Location: Dewsbury
|
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks guys. I had hoped pictures on flickr would be quicker after the first lot, but apparently not. I've now put some on PHOTOBUCKET as you suggest Tony. Trouble is, these don't respond to general searches at present, so are they on? Unfortunately, the PREVIEW you suggest doesn't work on my Apple - I don't use I.E. and both Safari and Firefox don't respond. So I hope you'll bear with me if I "suck it and see" with a picture I put on photobucket yesterday -
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul Narramore Registered User
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 181 Location: Aylesford, Kent.
|
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They say 'A picture tells a thousand words' and that pic certainly does. It may sound odd but I've never seen a restored and painted rear axle and suspension in a photo before. Thanks Les. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CAPTAIN LES Registered User
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 Posts: 21 Location: Dewsbury
|
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hooray - seems they're on after all. Here's some more while it's in a good mood
I had intended the general suspension pics to go with the magazine article, but I think I rambled enough as it was! I had always admired those little square brackets for spreading the load, but if they havn't been aligned with care...
The Panhard rod connections are tricky - the original was at least 1/4" longer, which pushed the axle out of line by that amount - hence (some of) the clearance problems I had had with the alloy ET20 wheels.
The shockers - it occurred before I sold them, perhaps Woodheads, SPAX and AVOs won't have been compared together. Sorry, I've never had a front AVO but they are otherwise laid in the order listed at full compression and full extension. The most significant thing about these pictures, to me, is that they show little physical difference between any. The AVOs use a smaller dia spring, which is odd because I had to enlarge the (Woodhead-sized) hole in my arms to accomodate them. Also, there was a suggestion from AVOs technical department that the bigger dia should be used in view of the direct-to-body mounting at the top (rear) but I think the real problems are all down to poor alignment.
Les
PS - would you believe - its actually previewed this time! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calex_fr Registered User
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 408 Location: Champagne (France)
|
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CAPTAIN LES wrote: |
The Panhard rod connections are tricky - the original was at least 1/4" longer, which pushed the axle out of line by that amount - hence (some of) the clearance problems I had had with the alloy ET20 wheels. |
The first is the original, and the second the good ?
Where is it in this picture ?
_________________ Alexandre Contat
from France |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CAPTAIN LES Registered User
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 Posts: 21 Location: Dewsbury
|
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wish I knew! It all depends on the length of your panhard rod (I'm putting one on eBay in the next few days). The top one was better on CTO289. It was at the (rear) axle end of the rod - top right in the picture. If, like mine, your axle sits off to one side, this could be a good (and easy) way of pulling it back into line. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
zefarelly Registered User
Joined: 26 Nov 2007 Posts: 91
|
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
this might be a daft question, but could you mount the rear damper units upside down and then be able to adjust them from the top ?, it seems like a rediculous set up however I look at it . . . |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rodsmith Registered User
Joined: 16 Jun 2008 Posts: 187 Location: Pembrokeshire, West Wales
|
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I know that Bilsteins are designed to be able to go upside down and that helps reduce the unsprung weight, it being just the rod and eye. I am not sure whether other manufacturers have caught up with them, but Bilstein were able, with the use of gas, to be able to stop the oil foaming and thus retain their resistance. This allowed upside down mounting.
Rod |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul Narramore Registered User
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 181 Location: Aylesford, Kent.
|
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In my opinion, one of the nicest Olympics. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul Narramore Registered User
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 181 Location: Aylesford, Kent.
|
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just look at that paintwork! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calex_fr Registered User
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 408 Location: Champagne (France)
|
Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Paul Narramore wrote: |
In my opinion, one of the nicest Olympics. |
and same lights :
_________________ Alexandre Contat
from France |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|