just my vacation on the KATY trail with a couple other bent riders.

Discussion in 'Recumbent bicycles' started by Randy N., May 19, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Randy N.

    Randy N. Guest

    Tags:


  2. Cletus Lee

    Cletus Lee Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    > http://65.64.114.185/KATY-2003-1.htm
    >
    > It was a great time, but the weather was a bit too persistently hairy for us in the end.

    Some constructive criticism (I make web pages for a living). Your HREFs and the images do not
    resolve quickly in the world outside of your computer. I almost gave up thinking that there were no
    pictures at all or that the links were broken. I get lots of coffee colored background (bad choice
    for eye relief) and yellow text. Take a look at some commercial sites ask yourself some questions as
    to why they appeal to you and why you want to explore them further.

    Pages full of 1600X1200 jpegs that have to be resized by my browser to 300X??? are a waste of
    bandwidth (Which I think you need more of). I would suggest that you use thumbnails of each picture
    on the home page and provide a back button on the page that displayes the full size picture.

    Looking forward to version 2.0

    --

    Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager http://www.clee.org
    - Bellaire, TX USA -
     
  3. Rob Rudeski

    Rob Rudeski Guest

    Hi Cletus,

    Couple a points:

    1. You make web pages for a living, but you have a dial up connection? I've got DSL and the pics
    popped in pretty quick.
    2. You make web pages for a living, and you use a tiny monitor? The largest pic was 648 x 545, and
    the rest were, on average, half that size. I was able to see all the pics without them being
    resized. Then again I've got a 21 inch monitor with 1600 x 1200 resolution.
    3. The background was black on the first page, and a dark green on succeeding pages, not coffee.

    I'm not trying to start an argument or pick a fight with you Cletus, I've got way too much
    respect for your experience and opinions to do that, and think you offer great advice on most
    matters. I just think this was misplaced. I hope this doesn't make you an enemy, I'd like to ride
    with you sometime.

    Main point is, take it easy on the folks who are just sharing their experiences with the rest of us.
    They don't need to look like commercial websites, because they aren't commercial websites. They are
    the personal journals of folks who want to share their experiences. If you want to read it, then
    you'll have to accept that their lack of web design skills.

    For anyone who is planning on publishing an online journal of their bike adventures, you can go to
    http://www.crazyguyonabike.com and create a FREE online journal, complete with pictures, as many as
    you want. And since it's a template based service, the look and feel of your journal will be pretty
    nice. If you want to read some great journals, check out the site.

    BTW, I'm not affiliated with them in any way, other than I like to read journals of bike adventures.
    --
    Rob Rudeski Trenton, GA RANS V2

    "Cletus Lee" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    > > http://65.64.114.185/KATY-2003-1.htm
    > >
    > > It was a great time, but the weather was a bit too persistently hairy for us in the end.
    >
    > Some constructive criticism (I make web pages for a living). Your HREFs and the images do not
    > resolve quickly in the world outside of
    your computer. I
    > almost gave up thinking that there were no pictures at all or that the
    links were broken. I
    > get lots of coffee colored background (bad choice for eye relief) and
    yellow text. Take a look
    > at some commercial sites ask yourself some questions as to why they appeal
    to you and why you
    > want to explore them further.
    >
    > Pages full of 1600X1200 jpegs that have to be resized by my browser to
    300X??? are a waste of
    > bandwidth (Which I think you need more of). I would suggest that you use
    thumbnails of each
    > picture on the home page and provide a back button on the page that
    displayes the full size
    > picture.
    >
    >
    > Looking forward to version 2.0
    >
    > --
    >
    > Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager http://www.clee.org
    > - Bellaire, TX USA -
     
  4. Bill B

    Bill B Guest

  5. Cletus Lee

    Cletus Lee Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    > Hi Cletus,
    >
    > Couple a points:
    >
    > 1. You make web pages for a living, but you have a dial up connection? I've got DSL and the pics
    > popped in pretty quick.

    Actually, I was trying to view the page on a T-1 at work this AM. I almost gave up and drifted bact
    to the page a few minutes later and discoverey that pictures were slowly showing up. I have DSL at
    home and it will actually be a little faster than the work connection since I don't have as many
    shields in place as the University.

    > 2. You make web pages for a living, and you use a tiny monitor? The largest pic was 648 x 545, and
    > the rest were, on average, half that size. I was able to see all the pics without them being
    > resized. Then again I've got a 21 inch monitor with 1600 x 1200 resolution.

    This is the code I was refering to: <br><a href="MOBIKEFED/APR2003/DSCF2488-fltr1b.jpg"><img
    src="MOBIKEFED/APR2003/tn_DSCF2488- fltr1b.jpg" width="398" height="254" alt="" border="0"
    align=""></a> <br>

    The actual image size is 1531X977 pixels and 320KB being displayed in an image tag and resized by
    every browser to 398X254 pixels. Count the number of jpegs on the page and you get some idea of the
    wasted bandwidth. No one with a dial-up will stay around for the page load.

    That was a 'couple of points'. What's this? :)
    > 3. The background was black on the first page, and a dark green on succeeding pages, not coffee.

    Actually that was an oblique reference to the HTML editor used: <html> <!-- Created with the
    CoffeeCup HTML Editor --> <!-- http://www.coffeecup.com/ --> <!-- Brewed on 4/21/2003 9:25:59 AM -->
    <head> </head> <body bgcolor="#000000"

    You are correct, the bgcolor is black. (just like I like my morning coffee).
    >
    > I'm not trying to start an argument or pick a fight with you Cletus

    Neither am I, I'm just trying to make the internet 'safe for democracy'.

    > Main point is, take it easy on the folks who are just sharing their experiences with the rest of
    > us. They don't need to look like commercial websites, because they aren't commercial websites.
    > They are the personal journals of folks who want to share their experiences. If you want to read
    > it, then you'll have to accept that their lack of web design skills.

    I thought I was pretty easy on the guy. If my viewing experience on a T-1 was awful, I figured that
    poor soul in smalltown, USA on a dial up to AOL wouldn't even see the page. And as a kindness, I
    thought I'd share that with the author. My web site at the moment is crappy with lots of broken
    linkssinc it is undergoing a major revision (as time permits). Personal journals don't have to be
    fancy but if you want someone to read it, you need to make it accessable and pleasant.

    --

    Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager http://www.clee.org
    - Bellaire, TX USA -
     
  6. Larry Varney

    Larry Varney Guest

    Cletus Lee wrote: <snip>
    > I thought I was pretty easy on the guy. If my viewing experience on a T-1 was awful, I figured
    > that poor soul in smalltown, USA on a dial up to AOL wouldn't even see the page. And as a
    > kindness, I thought I'd share that with the author. My web site at the moment is crappy with lots
    > of broken linkssinc it is undergoing a major revision (as time permits). Personal journals don't
    > have to be fancy but if you want someone to read it, you need to make it accessable and pleasant.
    >
    >

    Hey, that's me! I am literally within sight of the cable, but they won't run it down my road -
    they claim not enough people live on it to make it pay. And as for the telephone company, we're
    too far from some phone equipment to utilize their high-speed networks, though they claim they're
    working on it, RSN. So I'm stuck with phone lines that are crummy enough that I can't even expect
    to reliably get beyond 28.8. If a picture takes too long to load, I start pressing the "g" key
    (on Opera, that starts telling it, no more graphics, please). Which probably helps explain why I
    scale my website pictures to average around 100k most of the time, just because it takes me so
    long to upload them!

    --
    Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney
     
  7. M..Leuck

    M..Leuck Guest

  8. Bill B

    Bill B Guest

    I've got dial up and the pics loaded up with out to much of a wait. The print wasn't yellow and the
    background seem fine to me.

    Cletus Lee <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    > > http://65.64.114.185/KATY-2003-1.htm
    > >
    > > It was a great time, but the weather was a bit too persistently hairy for us in the end.
    >
    > Some constructive criticism (I make web pages for a living). Your HREFs and the images do not
    > resolve quickly in the world outside of your computer. I almost gave up thinking that there were
    > no pictures at all or that the links were broken. I get lots of coffee colored background (bad
    > choice for eye relief) and yellow text. Take a look at some commercial sites ask yourself some
    > questions as to why they appeal to you and why you want to explore them further.
    >
    > Pages full of 1600X1200 jpegs that have to be resized by my browser to 300X??? are a waste of
    > bandwidth (Which I think you need more of). I would suggest that you use thumbnails of each
    > picture on the home page and provide a back button on the page that displayes the full size
    > picture.
    >
    >
    > Looking forward to version 2.0
     
  9. Randy N.

    Randy N. Guest

    Cletus Lee wrote:
    >
    > Some constructive criticism (I make web pages for a living). Your HREFs and the images do not
    > resolve quickly in the world outside of your computer. I almost gave up thinking that there were
    > no pictures at all or that the links were broken. I get lots of coffee colored background (bad
    > choice for eye relief) and yellow text. Take a look at some commercial sites ask yourself some
    > questions as to why they appeal to you and why you want to explore them further.
    >
    > Pages full of 1600X1200 jpegs that have to be resized by my browser to 300X??? are a waste of
    > bandwidth (Which I think you need more of). I would suggest that you use thumbnails of each
    > picture on the home page and provide a back button on the page that displayes the full size
    > picture.
    >
    >
    > Looking forward to version 2.0
    >

    Thank you Cletus,

    First, I like dark backgrounds and light text. It is possibly affected looking, but I despise the
    format of commercial sites. I have always been kinda a green screen guy.

    That will not change in Version 2.0

    Second, I do write bad html. Before the stroke I wrote beautiful HTML .. JAVA,IDL,XML, SQL, Pascal
    and C-- now I do not. I have to live with it, so do you. I will try to fix the really malformed
    stuff for V2.

    I have ADSL, so when a dozen or more users all hit my server at once, yeah, it drags. The server
    itself is pretty much a veteran as well.

    You are probably right about the size of the target pics, but I would rather sin on the side of
    giving someone who clicks to enlarge a picture too much content, than not enough.

    I will consider maybe reducing the target pic sizes, though that will be a pain in the ass.

    I appreciate that you are good at HTML, and have your standards and preferences. My mileage varies.
    I do as much html as I need to, and screw the rest.

    I do not expect to satisfy fans of stylish HTML, fortunately, that is not what I set out to do. If I
    wanted that, I am sure that I could get front page to make a site that looked just like every other
    front page site in that template.

    I would make cookie cutter style sheets and adhere to them. But I don't foresee that anytime soon.
    For me the actual content is the photo and the narrative.

    I am painting and writing and photo-journaling a moving target-- my life as lived after a pretty
    traumatic series of changes.

    Resist the tendency to tightly bind the medium with the message... I would be happy drawing my life
    in crayon on the sidewalk, if it came to that.

    I am not creating a unified site. Indeed, I do not have a unified life.

    I am not particularly low bandwith friendly, nor am I concerned with a market segment. I am
    something like an artist, and maybe a journalist of sorts.

    I am trying to express visual and verbal experiences I think others might enjoy or desire to
    recreate for themselves.

    Thanks though, for your time and criticism. I may not agree, but I appreciate the effort.

    Randy
     
  10. Cletus Lee

    Cletus Lee Guest

    In article <[email protected]bell.net>, [email protected] says...
    >
    >
    > Cletus Lee wrote:
    > >
    > > Some constructive criticism (I make web pages for a living). Your HREFs and the images do not
    > > resolve quickly in the world outside of your computer. I almost gave up thinking that there were
    > > no pictures at all or that the links were broken. I get lots of coffee colored background (bad
    > > choice for eye relief) and yellow text. Take a look at some commercial sites ask yourself some
    > > questions as to why they appeal to you and why you want to explore them further.
    > >
    > > Pages full of 1600X1200 jpegs that have to be resized by my browser to 300X??? are a waste of
    > > bandwidth (Which I think you need more of). I would suggest that you use thumbnails of each
    > > picture on the home page and provide a back button on the page that displayes the full size
    > > picture.
    > >
    > >
    > > Looking forward to version 2.0
    > >
    >
    > Thank you Cletus,
    >
    > First, I like dark backgrounds and light text. It is possibly affected looking, but I despise the
    > format of commercial sites. I have always been kinda a green screen guy.
    >
    > That will not change in Version 2.0
    >
    > Second, I do write bad html. Before the stroke I wrote beautiful HTML .. JAVA,IDL,XML, SQL, Pascal
    > and C-- now I do not. I have to live with it, so do you.

    I was not suggesting a fault with the HTML. just some opportunities to enhance the user experiences.

    > I will try to fix the really malformed stuff for V2.
    >
    > I have ADSL, so when a dozen or more users all hit my server at once, yeah, it drags. The server
    > itself is pretty much a veteran as well.

    Al the more important to sent only the minimum required for at page trip to the browser.

    > I will consider maybe reducing the target pic sizes, though that will be a pain in the ass.

    Freeware: http://www.fookes.com/ezthumbs/

    --

    Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager http://www.clee.org
    - Bellaire, TX USA -
     
  11. > Thank you Cletus,
    >
    > First, I like dark backgrounds and light text. It is possibly affected looking, but I despise the
    > format of commercial sites. I have always been kinda a green screen guy.
    >
    > That will not change in Version 2.0
    >
    > Second, I do write bad html. Before the stroke I wrote beautiful HTML .. JAVA,IDL,XML, SQL, Pascal
    > and C-- now I do not. I have to live with it, so do you. I will try to fix the really malformed
    > stuff for V2.
    >
    > I have ADSL, so when a dozen or more users all hit my server at once, yeah, it drags. The server
    > itself is pretty much a veteran as well.
    >
    > You are probably right about the size of the target pics, but I would rather sin on the side of
    > giving someone who clicks to enlarge a picture too much content, than not enough.
    >
    > I will consider maybe reducing the target pic sizes, though that will be a pain in the ass.
    >
    > I appreciate that you are good at HTML, and have your standards and preferences. My mileage
    > varies. I do as much html as I need to, and screw the rest.
    >
    > I do not expect to satisfy fans of stylish HTML, fortunately, that is not what I set out to do. If
    > I wanted that, I am sure that I could get front page to make a site that looked just like every
    > other front page site in that template.
    >
    > I would make cookie cutter style sheets and adhere to them. But I don't foresee that anytime soon.
    > For me the actual content is the photo and the narrative.
    >
    > I am painting and writing and photo-journaling a moving target-- my life as lived after a pretty
    > traumatic series of changes.
    >
    > Resist the tendency to tightly bind the medium with the message... I would be happy drawing my
    > life in crayon on the sidewalk, if it came to that.
    >
    > I am not creating a unified site. Indeed, I do not have a unified life.
    >
    > I am not particularly low bandwith friendly, nor am I concerned with a market segment. I am
    > something like an artist, and maybe a journalist of sorts.
    >
    > I am trying to express visual and verbal experiences I think others might enjoy or desire to
    > recreate for themselves.
    >
    > Thanks though, for your time and criticism. I may not agree, but I appreciate the effort.
    >
    > Randy
    >

    Randy, am I too old to be your acolyte?

    rich, hearing what you're saying
     
  12. Great story ! I, personally, could care less about the HTML issues. We need more articals like this
    here at arbr.

    One question... what would you do differently if you did it again ?

    Think I may do this ride. It's on my short list of 'things to do' .

    Coop
     
  13. Randy N.

    Randy N. Guest

    > One question... what would you do differently if you did it again ?
    >

    I would wear fewer clothes... that didn't quite come out right. I am just not able to wrap my mind
    around touring without lots of gear. I will come to grips with it, I am sure. I think I can sell it
    to Cat as more room for touristy stuff. Or maybe I will just surrender to the inevitable and go back
    to pulling the trailer, bivy sack, stove and all... and staying at a motel.

    I don't think I packed too many tools (the gerber mx tool was heavy, but provided a much needed
    service in Rocheport. Its can opener was the best tool for the job, when the job is reaming and
    scraping all traces of chrome from around the valve hole. Alas, it never touched a can. The Crank
    Bros 17 tool was good.

    I packed more clothes than I needed to, ironic as neither of the two rain resistent shells I packed
    managed to stay dry more than a half hour of steady rain.

    And I took a good book and did not begrudge it the weight or space. (Pendergast! by Larsen
    and Hulston)

    I would not combine it with a deadline, as getting where we needed to go on time was a drag on fun,
    like an underinflated tire, or a frozen link. Not enough trouble to kill the ride, but we rode past
    a lot of great places and photos. I am greedy. I want to see it all, and talk to someone everywhere
    the road widens.

    Amtrack worked for 3 SWB bents from Kansas City to Sedalia, 2 SWB's from Hermann to KC. It worked
    from St.L. to Jeff for our friend Bob Foster. It is a wonderful way to relax after a lengthy ride.
    Or the bike is a wonderful way to get to the train station, you decide. The combination of the two
    modes is a great way to travel.

    I am going to figure out a way to comfortably and safely harness the digital camera to be constantly
    available. With my cheaper old digital, I just dangled it from a wrist cord. The Fuji is shaped like
    an SLR, and does not give the impression of a camera that likes to be slammed around.

    I may take a second camera, as a snapshot and bad weather camera. I am toying with making a cut out
    in the fairing, so I can mount the camera to the fairing's stabilizer bar. This might work if I
    wanted to use the big lcd viewfinder in the back and batteries be damned.

    Again, the weather was difficult for parts of the trip. Perhaps I need to look toward a slightly
    later date in the year. But the weather problems we had can go well into June. Summer in
    Missouri river valley can be hot and humid but it is wonderfully lush. Fall is always quite
    beautiful in Missouri.

    One safety tip -- If it is a wet day on the trail, I would recommend using a wet rag or non-toxic
    weeds to wipe the excess mud off your tire before riding over pavement. The stuff is slick, and if
    you are using something like a comp pool, you will be in a very slippery situation. I discovered
    this riding over an expansion plate on the bridge into Jefferson City...

    Let me know if you decide to ride it, I want to hear what you are going to do.

    Be well, ride far, Randy
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...