Richard J. wrote:

Re your comment in another post about 10 megapixel images: They do
have their uses. For example, in this case you can see from the shape
of the dot over the 'i' in 'capacity' that it's in New Johnston Book
at a large size, contrary to the TfL design rules. (The dot is about
20 x 20 pixels, at which size it's possible to see that it has
concave sides to the diamond, a feature of New Johnston Book that is
not supposed to be readily visible. The rules say that NJ Book should
not be used at larger sizes than 12-point. New Johnston Light should
be used instead.)

But that's for signs. This is not a sign, it's part of a small photo, and
was not supposed to be looked at IRL. Use of New Johnston Book was IMO
correct.

On 15 Mar, 20:02, "Paul Scott" wrote:
"MIG" wrote in message

...

On 14 Mar, 22:22, Paul Corfield wrote:
It would seem there has been a press launch for the new DLR stock.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/7723.aspx

Some piccies here

Has anyone got a shot of the interior layout? *I hope they follow the
sensible version in the refurbished existing units and never again
consider the disaster that was tried out in twenty units a few years
ago.

http://www.therailwaycentre.com/News...40308_DLR.html

Second picture seems what you need...

Aha yes, that's good.

Why can't the good sense and awareness of the shape of the human body,
subdivision of personal space etc, that has been applied to the more
recent DLR layouts and the SWT 455 refurbishment, be applied to the
Jubilee line, the 376s and (probably) the 378s?

John Rowland wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

Re your comment in another post about 10 megapixel images: They do
have their uses. For example, in this case you can see from the shape
of the dot over the 'i' in 'capacity' that it's in New Johnston Book
at a large size, contrary to the TfL design rules. (The dot is about
20 x 20 pixels, at which size it's possible to see that it has
concave sides to the diamond, a feature of New Johnston Book that is
not supposed to be readily visible. The rules say that NJ Book should
not be used at larger sizes than 12-point. New Johnston Light should
be used instead.)

But that's for signs. This is not a sign, it's part of a small photo,
and was not supposed to be looked at IRL. Use of New Johnston Book
was IMO correct.

What's "in real life" for a photo? Arguably it's displayed at full
resolution (10Mpixels, not "small") on a computer screen, and the curved
sides of the diamond are then clearly visible. Even reduced to fit my
laptop screen, the word 'capacity' appears at about 16-point, whereas NJ
Book is restricted throughout TfL to 12-point and below. This is because it
has features like the curved diamond that are slight distortions of the
original design to make it easier to read body text in documents.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008, Mr Thant wrote:

On 15 Mar, 23:36, Tom Anderson wrote:

Well hang on, what? So a 10 MPx camera not only captures more
information than a 5 MPx one, but in fact so much more that when you
reduce the images to 5 MPx they still look better? This is a rum
proposition, most rum. How could this possibly be the case?

Google "Bayer filter", for one thing.

There is that. I knew about Bayer filters, but i'd sort of assumed that a
5 MPx camera had 20 million monochrome sensors with the filter over the
top, producing 5 million colour pixels. Which is not the case.

You're also assuming CCDs are perfect devices, without noise between
adjacent pixels, which absolutely is not the case.

I assume you mean that by downsampling, you average neighbouring pixels,
and so reduce the amount of noise. That would be true if it weren't for
the fact that CCD signal to noise ratio scales proportionally to the size
of the pixel (or its square root?); smaller pixels will suffer more noise
in the first place.

tom

--
All London roads are part of MY London Cycle Network. I'd like to see
some of them removed from the London Motor Network! -- Ben Jefferys

On 16 Mar, 13:37, Tom Anderson wrote:
I assume you mean that by downsampling, you average neighbouring pixels,
and so reduce the amount of noise.

The idea is that by downsampling you're no longer seeing the raw
noise, and the end result is more pleasing, even if technically the
image is numerically no less noisy.

That would be true if it weren't for
the fact that CCD signal to noise ratio scales proportionally to the size
of the pixel (or its square root?); smaller pixels will suffer more noise
in the first place.

I doubt there's such a simple mathematical formula in terms of
production sensors, because there are other factors beside pixel size
that influence noise levels (pre-amp and signal path design,
especially). It really depends whether this a theoretical or a
practical discussion.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

On Mar 15, 5:05 pm, MIG wrote:
Has anyone got a shot of the interior layout? I hope they follow the
sensible version in the refurbished existing units and never again
consider the disaster that was tried out in twenty units a few years
ago.

Lets hope the ride quality has improved and passengers at the front
wont be thrown from side to side as soon as the thing hits 30mph like
the current ones do with their death wobble.

B2003

On Mar 17, 5:14*pm, Boltar wrote:
On Mar 15, 5:05 pm, MIG wrote:

Has anyone got a shot of the interior layout? *I hope they follow the
sensible version in the refurbished existing units and never again
consider the disaster that was tried out in twenty units a few years
ago.

Lets hope the ride quality has improved and passengers at the front
wont be thrown from side to side as soon as the thing hits 30mph like
the current ones do with their death wobble.

I think it was reported that they won't work in multiple, so there's
no risk of a wobbly and non-wobbly unit fighting it out in the same
train.

Maybe the new ones will be introduced before lengthening to allow for
the old ones to be taken out and fixed before one of them falls off
(as seems more and more likely every time I travel on them).

On Mar 17, 11:09 pm, MIG wrote:
I think it was reported that they won't work in multiple, so there's
no risk of a wobbly and non-wobbly unit fighting it out in the same
train.

I guess you mean they won't work in multiple with the old units , not
each other. Otherwise a rather expensive white elephant!


Maybe the new ones will be introduced before lengthening to allow for
the old ones to be taken out and fixed before one of them falls off
(as seems more and more likely every time I travel on them).

I have the feeling that its a design flaw otherwise I'm sure they'd
have fixed it by now. I've never been on any other train or tram that
does anything similar and I don't remember the first generation of DLR
trains doing it either.

B2003

On 17 Mar, 17:14, Boltar wrote:
On Mar 15, 5:05 pm, MIG wrote:

Has anyone got a shot of the interior layout? �I hope they follow the
sensible version in the refurbished existing units and never again
consider the disaster that was tried out in twenty units a few years
ago.

Lets hope the ride quality has improved and passengers at the front
wont be thrown from side to side as soon as the thing hits 30mph like
the current ones do with their death wobble.

B2003

Do they really do that? I feel travel sick on just about anything that
moves including the lifts at Hampstead tube station but I've never had
a problem on the DLR. But I'll be keeping away from the front from now
on and yes I hope the new DLR trains and also the new Victoria Line
trains are smoother than the current ones

The new DLR trains look great, I don't know why I get excited over
trains but it's like I can't wait to try them out

On 18 Mar, 16:48, Sophie wrote:
On 17 Mar, 17:14, Boltar wrote:

On Mar 15, 5:05 pm, MIG wrote:

Has anyone got a shot of the interior layout? �I hope they follow the
sensible version in the refurbished existing units and never again
consider the disaster that was tried out in twenty units a few years
ago.

Lets hope the ride quality has improved and passengers at the front
wont be thrown from side to side as soon as the thing hits 30mph like
the current ones do with their death wobble.

B2003

Do they really do that? I feel travel sick on just about anything that
moves including the lifts at Hampstead tube station but I've never had
a problem on the DLR. But I'll be keeping away from the front from now
on and yes I hope the new DLR trains and also the new Victoria Line
trains are smoother than the current ones

The new DLR trains look great, I don't know why I get excited over
trains but it's like I can't wait to try them out

Travel north between Mudchute and Crossharbour, sitting at the front,
and you'll experience the full horror. It can't be due to speed,
which is not high at that point.