What in tarnations happened to this board?

[webenda]

Could Google AI be wrong yet again?

Or did I not understand one of the steps outlined by Google AI?

Here's what the rest of us see:

Thank you for showing that.

This has nothing to do with the antiquity of the software the forum runs on, for I get this page off-forum. Even if it does work, it's still only a link rather than a posted photo, so hardly on equal footing with any of dozens of other hosts out there.

Agree, much better to see the image in the forum.

As hard as you are pushing Google, are you really the google bot that I see signed in all the time and not good ol' Wayne at all? What have you done with Wayne?

How would I know?

In all seriousness, my guess is you might have to go in and change something in the privacy settings to allow outside viewing.

See comment 1.

[bob turner]

At least there is activity here - even if there are no pictures to go along with it.

You guys should try Shutterfly. You can create your own book, for free, and every 18 months you can buy $5 worth of prints from your digital photos, and Shutterfly will be deliriously happy to let you store hundreds of easily accessible photos to post here.

[bob turner]

Here is next year's book. I can take as long as I like to create it, and am trying to rope Maroon into being a co-author. Again, you can look for free, and you can create your own book with no obligation to buy. I gotta tell you, if Carey did a book with annotated photos, I might be tempted to spring for one during a 50% sale (read: all the time, and sometimes free shipping to boot).

https://www.shutterfly.com/share-produc ... DWEBMPRLNK

[up148]

Bob, every time I see that photo, it puts a HUGE smile on my face. First, because it reminds me that we were all that young and cocky at one time and second, the Piper Cheyenne II's were the first flying turbo prop aircraft I every dismantled for parts at White Industries in the mid to late 80's. Lot's of memories.

[sleepmac]

Bob, very nice book!

Dan Weinhold

[R.K. Maroon]

I feel Greg's pain regarding yet another thread on posting photos. But, as Martin intimated, if it helps get more people posting photos, it's well worth it. Note that I have changed the subject in my reply to reflect the real subject of this thread. It's not retroactive, but if Texas and Pacific (Bill?) edited his original post to change the title, then the thread might serve as an easy-to-find reference in the future.

Here, for the record, is how to post a photo full size. I learned how to do this when some forum members (Apple users, maybe?) reported that photos posted from Dropbox using the "raw=1" method (see my last post) did not show up. What I didn't know, in looking for an alternate method of posting, is that this second method would actually display images that are larger than what you otherwise get here on the forum. Here is how to do it:

As an example, we'll use this photo of a Mac Shops Pacific-series 10-6 sleeper currently awaiting couplers and diaphragms:



Here is what the posted link looks like in edit mode. Note the bracketed image tags and the "raw=1" at the end :



To show the image full size, use the URL button (next to the IMG button at the top of the edit window) and repaste the link. Then again erase the "dl=0", but go one character further and delete the ampersand as well (so delete "&dl=0"). Then click near the front of the link and replace the "www" with "dl". In edit mode, you wind up with this:



Which, when posted, looks like this:

https://dl.dropbox.com/scl/fi/yw07svujzclui4nlkunm2/Mac-Shops-10-6-Pullman-UP-Pacific-Ocean.jpg?rlkey=z64vdlgpr83p1y98gy4duiyym

OK, so it doesn't show the photo full size by itself. You have to click on the link. But what a difference (at least on my computer). Having the browser in full-screen mode (as large as possible) will give you the biggest image. Note that this method of posting images only makes a difference if the image is large (high resolution). It makes no difference on small images.

Normally I post the image using the standard method (so it shows without having to click a link) and then put the link to the full-size image immediately below that. I didn't do that here as I figured it might confuse things.

Jim

[webenda]

Normally I post the image using the standard method (so it shows without having to click a link) and then put the link to the full-size image immediately below that. I didn't do that here as I figured it might confuse things.
Jim

I appreciate the link to the big picture. It allows examining the model close-up.

[up148]

Nice car Jim. Looks like Kemtron trucks, but whose kit is it? The paint and decal work is excellent.....nice job.

[bob turner]

Mac Shops. Mac sold me enough extrusions to last the rest of my life - they were the best available before 3rd Rail came out with slightly better - Mac had a couple of barely discernible flaws in the roof pattern.

I was thinking Wasatch, but you are right, they appear to be Kemtron trucks.

Mine is not quite as well detailed, and I may have shortened it too much - but here it is. Tempting to slam a set of Wasatch trucks under it for the photo, but these old bronze sand cast relics will have to do. They seem to run better on my sleazeball tracks.

[R.K. Maroon]

Bob is correct -- the car is a Mac Shops product. I purchased the car built and painted but without trucks, couplers, or diaphragms. To my surprise, it arrived with Haynes McDaniel's autograph on the bottom of the car:



There is something a bit quizzical to me about painting any stainless steel passenger car, but I have to admit I do like the UP scheme on these.

And, yes, the trucks are Kemtron. As best I can tell, they are the correct 41-CUDO-11 trucks for the car, but perhaps others may wish to comment.

Jim

[up148]

I have a pair of Kemtron UP passenger trucks new in the package......at one time I had a lot more. For some reason I thought they were very close to the 41 CUDO trucks, but not quite right. I've had both Mfg's trucks, but I can't remember the difference now. But, the Kemtron trucks are fabulous models and before the advent of the Wasatch trucks they were the only game in town.

[bob turner]

Butch tells me that now to post on OGR you have to subscribe to their magazine - at least the digital version. I note that since Butch's last post there, nobody has posted. Four days so far. That happens here, too, but lately we have been averaging one or two posts a day.

I have no idea what goes on with the Facebook O Scalers - my brief glimpses into that world leave me either horrified, disgusted, or uninterested.

So this is all I have - after having participating in 48/ft, attempting to keep 2-rail content in OGR, and getting rather unceremoniously kicked off their forum, this is it.

So - hang in there. Figure out how to get somebody to host your photos, and share with me (us). Stick comments in here. We love comments.

If you are having trouble signing in, see if you can get in touch with forum folks who can get you in. I have a g-account that starts with bob444w, so if you can figure that out, it is possible I could route you to someone who can help. If you do figure it out, please do not broadcast it - I keep my e-mail accounts clean, and try to discourage shotgun e-mails (you know, the kind that share jokes with a hundred of their best friends, who then answer with a "send to all" comment).

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Butch tells me that now to post on OGR you have to subscribe to their magazine - at least the digital version.

This has been true there for well over a year and why I abruptly ceased posting anything there.

I note that since Butch's last post there, nobody has posted. Four days so far. That happens here, too, but lately we have been averaging one or two posts a day.

Maybe it's taken them time to purge the non-subscribers; however, there do seem to be a number of 2 rail modelers that are subscribers.
Their claims of wanting to be inclusive of and to promote/publish 2 rail content ring hollow at best.

I have no idea what goes on with the Facebook O Scalers

Same. And, I'll be happier to keep it that way.

If you are having trouble signing in, see if you can get in touch with forum folks who can get you in.

What we really need are more members here that contribute........anything!

[brownillini]

I too was locked out for not subscribing late last year. I was told that the 'algorithm' had selected me, and I must either pay or go. I rather watch this board and the various FB 2R groups that I subscribe to.

[up148]

Pretty much what I was told. They've slowly been going through the membership and putting into operation what Martin says has been there for awhile. Members can still view, but you have to be a subscriber to post or sell or view libraries of old OGR magazines.

I understand there is an inherent cost to operating a forum and websites, so I guess it's okay. Bottom line if you want to post, you have to become a subscriber. I was pleasantly surprised by the number of members who participated in some threads I started and with the knowledgeable suggestions I received. There is more going on there than just 3R.

So, to be totally transparent I subscribed. We'll see how that works out.