A crowd-sourced Williams manual supplement scavenger hunt

[Duncan Brown]

As the current caretaker of the vast and still-disorganized Steve Kordek
historical archives, I've been working with IPDB to get important
documents and information to them. I'm also getting infected with
Steve's penchant for making lists. Lots and lots of lists he made! Now
I've made a list, and I need everyone's help to fill in the holes.

Starting in 1967, Williams issued Parts Catalog Supplements with each
game, designed to be dropped in your 3-ring binder behind the latest
master parts catalog, so you'd know all the part numbers of the
game-specific parts that were released with each game. The first one
was called Supplement A. Then B. Eventually they got to A-A and so on.
Then eventually to A-A-A and so on. Did they make it all the way to
Z-Z-Z? Maybe. They got close, at least! Then they started using the
game model number as the catalog name.

So I have created a list with all possible letter combinations in that
range, and filled in the names of the ones I can find proof of. I used
Steve's archives, then the IPDB, then a lot of googling. Then
consultation with Jay at IPDB. There are still a lot of holes! This is
where you come in - Jay and I want you to dig through your files, in the
bottom of your games, in the attic, wherever those ubiquitous brown
envelopes are hiding, with all of the leftover stuff nobody ever pays
attention to after grabbing the instruction manual and schematics, and
help us fill in the holes. A good number of the holes are likely to be
gun games, pitch and bat games, shuffle alleys, and various other
non-pinball devices, so dig deep when looking for these.

I have added dates to the list, just to help when trying to figure out
what era the missing titles might be from. Where the supplements had
dates printed on them I used that and noted that in the list; for all
the others I just used the commonly accepted release date for the game.

Some documents don't fit cleanly into this scheme, but I included
everything I could lay my hands on, just so we'd have them all in one place.

Jay and I will keep this list updated at the existing link, so send
either one of us your additional information and we'll add it to the
list. Let's find all these missing manuals!

Here is the list:

http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt

Duncan

[John Robertson]

Post by Duncan Brown
As the current caretaker of the vast and still-disorganized Steve Kordek
historical archives, I've been working with IPDB to get important
documents and information to them. I'm also getting infected with
Steve's penchant for making lists. Lots and lots of lists he made! Now
I've made a list, and I need everyone's help to fill in the holes.
Starting in 1967, Williams issued Parts Catalog Supplements with each
game, designed to be dropped in your 3-ring binder behind the latest
master parts catalog, so you'd know all the part numbers of the
game-specific parts that were released with each game. The first one
was called Supplement A. Then B. Eventually they got to A-A and so on.
Then eventually to A-A-A and so on. Did they make it all the way to
Z-Z-Z? Maybe. They got close, at least! Then they started using the
game model number as the catalog name.
So I have created a list with all possible letter combinations in that
range, and filled in the names of the ones I can find proof of. I used
Steve's archives, then the IPDB, then a lot of googling. Then
consultation with Jay at IPDB. There are still a lot of holes! This is
where you come in - Jay and I want you to dig through your files, in the
bottom of your games, in the attic, wherever those ubiquitous brown
envelopes are hiding, with all of the leftover stuff nobody ever pays
attention to after grabbing the instruction manual and schematics, and
help us fill in the holes. A good number of the holes are likely to be
gun games, pitch and bat games, shuffle alleys, and various other
non-pinball devices, so dig deep when looking for these.
I have added dates to the list, just to help when trying to figure out
what era the missing titles might be from. Where the supplements had
dates printed on them I used that and noted that in the list; for all
the others I just used the commonly accepted release date for the game.
Some documents don't fit cleanly into this scheme, but I included
everything I could lay my hands on, just so we'd have them all in one place.
Jay and I will keep this list updated at the existing link, so send
either one of us your additional information and we'll add it to the
list. Let's find all these missing manuals!
http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt
Duncan

Hi Duncan,

I'll get one of my apprentices to check through my archives and see what
we can do to fill the gaps. I have a number these I'm pretty sure. Your
list would be improved if you tagged the ones you have already got...

Many of these are in public domain as Williams didn't start copyrighting
documents until the late 70s.

John :-#)#

[Duncan Brown]

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown
As the current caretaker of the vast and still-disorganized Steve Kordek
historical archives, I've been working with IPDB to get important
documents and information to them. I'm also getting infected with
Steve's penchant for making lists. Lots and lots of lists he made! Now
I've made a list, and I need everyone's help to fill in the holes.
Starting in 1967, Williams issued Parts Catalog Supplements with each
game, designed to be dropped in your 3-ring binder behind the latest
master parts catalog, so you'd know all the part numbers of the
game-specific parts that were released with each game. The first one
was called Supplement A. Then B. Eventually they got to A-A and so on.
Then eventually to A-A-A and so on. Did they make it all the way to
Z-Z-Z? Maybe. They got close, at least! Then they started using the
game model number as the catalog name.
So I have created a list with all possible letter combinations in that
range, and filled in the names of the ones I can find proof of. I used
Steve's archives, then the IPDB, then a lot of googling. Then
consultation with Jay at IPDB. There are still a lot of holes! This is
where you come in - Jay and I want you to dig through your files, in the
bottom of your games, in the attic, wherever those ubiquitous brown
envelopes are hiding, with all of the leftover stuff nobody ever pays
attention to after grabbing the instruction manual and schematics, and
help us fill in the holes. A good number of the holes are likely to be
gun games, pitch and bat games, shuffle alleys, and various other
non-pinball devices, so dig deep when looking for these.
I have added dates to the list, just to help when trying to figure out
what era the missing titles might be from. Where the supplements had
dates printed on them I used that and noted that in the list; for all
the others I just used the commonly accepted release date for the game.
Some documents don't fit cleanly into this scheme, but I included
everything I could lay my hands on, just so we'd have them all in one place.
Jay and I will keep this list updated at the existing link, so send
either one of us your additional information and we'll add it to the
list. Let's find all these missing manuals!
http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt
Duncan

Hi Duncan,
I'll get one of my apprentices to check through my archives and see what
we can do to fill the gaps. I have a number these I'm pretty sure. Your
list would be improved if you tagged the ones you have already got...
Many of these are in public domain as Williams didn't start copyrighting
documents until the late 70s.
John :-#)#

John,

Thanks!

It's not really important for this list whether I physically have them
in my hands or not. For now I'm just trying to create the list of what
was published and what their catalog names are. I do have a great
number of the ones listed, and they will eventually be all scanned and
uploaded to IPDB along with everything else I have for the games. I
believe I overloaded poor Jay with the several hundred PR photos I
scanned and sent to him, so I figured I'd let him catch up on that
before dumping on him again ;-)

I have far, far greater coverage on the instruction manuals in these
archives (which include some of the historical stuff from the Parts and
Service department at Williams too.) But there's no need to develop a
list for those - pretty much one per game, and they have the game name
on the cover! I'll eventually get those all scanned too.

My current scanning project is a giant catalog of United parts, looks to
be from the 50s, complete with photographs of all the parts. Hope to
have that finished before too long.

Duncan

[John Robertson]

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown
As the current caretaker of the vast and still-disorganized Steve Kordek
historical archives, I've been working with IPDB to get important
documents and information to them. I'm also getting infected with
Steve's penchant for making lists. Lots and lots of lists he made! Now
I've made a list, and I need everyone's help to fill in the holes.
Starting in 1967, Williams issued Parts Catalog Supplements with each
game, designed to be dropped in your 3-ring binder behind the latest
master parts catalog, so you'd know all the part numbers of the
game-specific parts that were released with each game. The first one
was called Supplement A. Then B. Eventually they got to A-A and so on.
Then eventually to A-A-A and so on. Did they make it all the way to
Z-Z-Z? Maybe. They got close, at least! Then they started using the
game model number as the catalog name.
So I have created a list with all possible letter combinations in that
range, and filled in the names of the ones I can find proof of. I used
Steve's archives, then the IPDB, then a lot of googling. Then
consultation with Jay at IPDB. There are still a lot of holes! This is
where you come in - Jay and I want you to dig through your files, in the
bottom of your games, in the attic, wherever those ubiquitous brown
envelopes are hiding, with all of the leftover stuff nobody ever pays
attention to after grabbing the instruction manual and schematics, and
help us fill in the holes. A good number of the holes are likely to be
gun games, pitch and bat games, shuffle alleys, and various other
non-pinball devices, so dig deep when looking for these.
I have added dates to the list, just to help when trying to figure out
what era the missing titles might be from. Where the supplements had
dates printed on them I used that and noted that in the list; for all
the others I just used the commonly accepted release date for the game.
Some documents don't fit cleanly into this scheme, but I included
everything I could lay my hands on, just so we'd have them all in one place.
Jay and I will keep this list updated at the existing link, so send
either one of us your additional information and we'll add it to the
list. Let's find all these missing manuals!
http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt
Duncan

Hi Duncan,
I'll get one of my apprentices to check through my archives and see what
we can do to fill the gaps. I have a number these I'm pretty sure. Your
list would be improved if you tagged the ones you have already got...
Many of these are in public domain as Williams didn't start copyrighting
documents until the late 70s.
John :-#)#

John,
Thanks!
It's not really important for this list whether I physically have them
in my hands or not. For now I'm just trying to create the list of what
was published and what their catalog names are. I do have a great
number of the ones listed, and they will eventually be all scanned and
uploaded to IPDB along with everything else I have for the games. I
believe I overloaded poor Jay with the several hundred PR photos I
scanned and sent to him, so I figured I'd let him catch up on that
before dumping on him again ;-)
I have far, far greater coverage on the instruction manuals in these
archives (which include some of the historical stuff from the Parts and
Service department at Williams too.) But there's no need to develop a
list for those - pretty much one per game, and they have the game name
on the cover! I'll eventually get those all scanned too.
My current scanning project is a giant catalog of United parts, looks to
be from the 50s, complete with photographs of all the parts. Hope to
have that finished before too long.
Duncan

Hi Duncan,

OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a distributor of the
day):

Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.

Supplements:

C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Isle
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).

Hope that helps!

John :-#)#

[Duncan Brown]

Post by John Robertson
Hi Duncan,
OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a distributor of the
Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.
C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Isle
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).
Hope that helps!
John :-#)#

John,

That helps a lot! Thanks!

Does JJJ have a date on it? Most of them by that time did (though not
VVV - Big Deal, oddly.)

Duncan

[Duncan Brown]

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson
Hi Duncan,
OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a distributor of the
Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.
C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Isle
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).
Hope that helps!
John :-#)#

John,
That helps a lot! Thanks!
Does JJJ have a date on it? Most of them by that time did (though not
VVV - Big Deal, oddly.)
Duncan

OK, added those changes to the list. I corrected Tropic Isle to Tropic
Fun (I assume that was you that made the typo, not Williams!) and I made
Klondike and Yukon a single entry. Or were they separate manuals, like
Gold Rush and Jack Pot?

Duncan

[John Robertson]

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson
Hi Duncan,
OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a distributor of the
Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.
C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Fun (opps!)
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).
Hope that helps!
John :-#)#

John,
That helps a lot! Thanks!
Does JJJ have a date on it? Most of them by that time did (though not
VVV - Big Deal, oddly.)
Duncan

OK, added those changes to the list. I corrected Tropic Isle to Tropic
Fun (I assume that was you that made the typo, not Williams!) and I made
Klondike and Yukon a single entry. Or were they separate manuals, like
Gold Rush and Jack Pot?
Duncan

Did I forget to mention the Supplement to 1963 Parts Catalog as I have
that? I also have some revised Parts Price Lists - August 1, 1964 for
example.

J-J-J is dated August 1974

John :-#)#

[Duncan Brown]

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson
Hi Duncan,
OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a distributor of the
Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.
C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Fun (opps!)
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).
Hope that helps!
John :-#)#

John,
That helps a lot! Thanks!
Does JJJ have a date on it? Most of them by that time did (though not
VVV - Big Deal, oddly.)
Duncan

OK, added those changes to the list. I corrected Tropic Isle to Tropic
Fun (I assume that was you that made the typo, not Williams!) and I made
Klondike and Yukon a single entry. Or were they separate manuals, like
Gold Rush and Jack Pot?
Duncan

Did I forget to mention the Supplement to 1963 Parts Catalog as I have
that? I also have some revised Parts Price Lists - August 1, 1964 for
example.
J-J-J is dated August 1974
John :-#)#

Thanks for the confirmation on J-J-J.

If your 1963 Parts Supplement is titled "Number 2" then I already have
that one, and it's on the list at the top.

Making a master list of the parts catalogs and their pricing adjuncts is
a whole different project. I have most of those from the 60s forward
and will also be getting those scanned and onto ipdb at some point.

Thanks,
Duncan

[John Robertson]

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson
Hi Duncan,
OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a distributor of the
Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.
C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Fun (opps!)
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).
Hope that helps!
John :-#)#

John,
That helps a lot! Thanks!
Does JJJ have a date on it? Most of them by that time did (though not
VVV - Big Deal, oddly.)
Duncan

OK, added those changes to the list. I corrected Tropic Isle to Tropic
Fun (I assume that was you that made the typo, not Williams!) and I made
Klondike and Yukon a single entry. Or were they separate manuals, like
Gold Rush and Jack Pot?
Duncan

Did I forget to mention the Supplement to 1963 Parts Catalog as I have
that? I also have some revised Parts Price Lists - August 1, 1964 for
example.
J-J-J is dated August 1974
John :-#)#

Thanks for the confirmation on J-J-J.
If your 1963 Parts Supplement is titled "Number 2" then I already have
that one, and it's on the list at the top.
Making a master list of the parts catalogs and their pricing adjuncts is
a whole different project. I have most of those from the 60s forward
and will also be getting those scanned and onto ipdb at some point.
Thanks,
Duncan

Hi Duncan,

My 1963 parts does not have a #2 (or #1) on it. Yours is a revision of mine!

I just found the Parts Supplement for Black Knight - 16P-500-110

I have run out of time to search for now, but I can answer any specific
questions you may have.

John :-#)#

[Mark]

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson
Hi Duncan,
OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a distributor of the
Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.
C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Fun (opps!)
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).
Hope that helps!
John :-#)#

John,
That helps a lot! Thanks!
Does JJJ have a date on it? Most of them by that time did (though not
VVV - Big Deal, oddly.)
Duncan

OK, added those changes to the list. I corrected Tropic Isle to Tropic
Fun (I assume that was you that made the typo, not Williams!) and I made
Klondike and Yukon a single entry. Or were they separate manuals, like
Gold Rush and Jack Pot?
Duncan

Did I forget to mention the Supplement to 1963 Parts Catalog as I have
that? I also have some revised Parts Price Lists - August 1, 1964 for
example.
J-J-J is dated August 1974
John :-#)#

Thanks for the confirmation on J-J-J.
If your 1963 Parts Supplement is titled "Number 2" then I already have
that one, and it's on the list at the top.
Making a master list of the parts catalogs and their pricing adjuncts is
a whole different project. I have most of those from the 60s forward
and will also be getting those scanned and onto ipdb at some point.
Thanks,
Duncan

Hi Duncan,
My 1963 parts does not have a #2 (or #1) on it. Yours is a revision of mine!
I just found the Parts Supplement for Black Knight - 16P-500-110
I have run out of time to search for now, but I can answer any specific
questions you may have.
John :-#)#

I too have a '63 Wms catalog with no suffix. I also have a '49, '59 and
'62 before that. And an undated United catalog with photos, but not
something I would call "giant".

I also have some old third party catalogs which look to me like they
copied the original catalogs and put their own covers on them.

If you get around to scanning and cataloging catalogs, where would they
live, on IPDB? I've often looked for, or considered starting a master
list of parts catalogs.

/Mark

[John Robertson]

Post by Mark

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson
Hi Duncan,
OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a distributor of the
Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.
C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Fun (opps!)
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).
Hope that helps!
John :-#)#

John,
That helps a lot! Thanks!
Does JJJ have a date on it? Most of them by that time did (though not
VVV - Big Deal, oddly.)
Duncan

OK, added those changes to the list. I corrected Tropic Isle to Tropic
Fun (I assume that was you that made the typo, not Williams!) and I made
Klondike and Yukon a single entry. Or were they separate manuals, like
Gold Rush and Jack Pot?
Duncan

Did I forget to mention the Supplement to 1963 Parts Catalog as I have
that? I also have some revised Parts Price Lists - August 1, 1964 for
example.
J-J-J is dated August 1974
John :-#)#

Thanks for the confirmation on J-J-J.
If your 1963 Parts Supplement is titled "Number 2" then I already have
that one, and it's on the list at the top.
Making a master list of the parts catalogs and their pricing adjuncts is
a whole different project. I have most of those from the 60s forward
and will also be getting those scanned and onto ipdb at some point.
Thanks,
Duncan

Hi Duncan,
My 1963 parts does not have a #2 (or #1) on it. Yours is a revision of mine!
I just found the Parts Supplement for Black Knight - 16P-500-110
I have run out of time to search for now, but I can answer any specific
questions you may have.
John :-#)#

I too have a '63 Wms catalog with no suffix. I also have a '49, '59 and
'62 before that. And an undated United catalog with photos, but not
something I would call "giant".
I also have some old third party catalogs which look to me like they
copied the original catalogs and put their own covers on them.
If you get around to scanning and cataloging catalogs, where would they
live, on IPDB? I've often looked for, or considered starting a master
list of parts catalogs.
/Mark

The WICO, BANCO, Peach State, and other after market parts catalogues
should be archived too. They have a cross reference to the original part
numbers and have pictures of many parts that are not shown in the
original manuals.

I have a number of those going back to the early 60s. They are glue
bound, and as such more difficult to scan. I don't feel like cutting the
spine off and I do not have an automated book scanner (very cool!).

John :-#)#

[Frank Furhter]

Post by John Robertson

Post by Mark

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by John Robertson
Hi Duncan,
OK, I was a little bored and thought I'd see what I could pull up easily
from my two filing cabinets of Williams paper (from a
distributor of
the
Parts Catalogues - I have 1949, and 1959 and almost all of the rest.
C - Baseball parts New and Improved for All Games 1966-1967
D - Shuffle Alley
E - Bowling Alley
M - Spooks Gun
N - Fast Ball
R - Expo 1969
S - Phantom Gun
V - 4 Aces (3/70 written on cover)
BB - Ringer
FF - Zodiac
II - Mine say Klondike and Yukon. I don't have an II for Jack Pot though.
KK - Sniper Gun
LL - Star Dust
OO - Jungle Drums
VV - Stockade Gun
Z-Z - Gulfstream and Tropic Fun (opps!)
AAA - Upper Deck
JJJ - Strato-Flite and Super-Flite
??? - Road Champion (video game).
Hope that helps!
John :-#)#

John,
That helps a lot! Thanks!
Does JJJ have a date on it? Most of them by that time did (though not
VVV - Big Deal, oddly.)
Duncan

OK, added those changes to the list. I corrected Tropic Isle to Tropic
Fun (I assume that was you that made the typo, not Williams!) and I made
Klondike and Yukon a single entry. Or were they separate manuals, like
Gold Rush and Jack Pot?
Duncan

Did I forget to mention the Supplement to 1963 Parts Catalog as I have
that? I also have some revised Parts Price Lists - August 1, 1964 for
example.
J-J-J is dated August 1974
John :-#)#

Thanks for the confirmation on J-J-J.
If your 1963 Parts Supplement is titled "Number 2" then I already have
that one, and it's on the list at the top.
Making a master list of the parts catalogs and their pricing adjuncts is
a whole different project. I have most of those from the 60s forward
and will also be getting those scanned and onto ipdb at some point.
Thanks,
Duncan

Hi Duncan,
My 1963 parts does not have a #2 (or #1) on it. Yours is a revision of mine!
I just found the Parts Supplement for Black Knight - 16P-500-110
I have run out of time to search for now, but I can answer any specific
questions you may have.
John :-#)#

I too have a '63 Wms catalog with no suffix. I also have a '49, '59 and
'62 before that. And an undated United catalog with photos, but not
something I would call "giant".
I also have some old third party catalogs which look to me like they
copied the original catalogs and put their own covers on them.
If you get around to scanning and cataloging catalogs, where would they
live, on IPDB? I've often looked for, or considered starting a master
list of parts catalogs.
/Mark

The WICO, BANCO, Peach State, and other after market parts catalogues
should be archived too. They have a cross reference to the original part
numbers and have pictures of many parts that are not shown in the
original manuals.
I have a number of those going back to the early 60s. They are glue
bound, and as such more difficult to scan. I don't feel like cutting the
spine off and I do not have an automated book scanner (very cool!).
John :-#)#

Do all manuals, all paper, all things that belong to the hobby and the
public, where it belongs. This shit has long been needed, done by some
in the past, and hoarded by the paper pimps of today. Get it ALL out
there, and make pinball as a hobby something more than ass-raping the
next clown idiot that decides remembering childhood memories is fun, and
then finding it a HUGE mistake.

[I.P.D.B.]

http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt

Just a quick note to say that an entry on Duncan's list does not mean the IPDB has that manual on the site. I encourage anyone who digs out a manual for that list to check IPDB and, if not there, scan it for the IPDB.

Happy Holidays!

Jay

[wiredoug]

I encourage anyone ...scan it for the IPDB.
Jay

I have a fair stash of high quality newer files but as we've mentioned before jay, many are of a quality that doesnt meet your file size limit. I like the idea of splitting game manuals. I have started doing that now and with the smaller files i can even do schematic at 600dpi not 300..

perhaps you could make a section for parts catalogs? I would do a separate site for it but i can see it leading to nothing but "snatch snatch leach leach leach, .. melting server as everything just grabs the lot." How do you handle that ? or do you just ignore it? I wonder if it would upset the rights holder?

~doug

[I.P.D.B.]

Post by wiredoug
perhaps you could make a section for parts catalogs?

It's on the IPDB webmaster's ToDo list. I, too, have catalogs to share.

Post by wiredoug
How do you handle that ? or do you just ignore it?I wonder if it would upset the rights holder?

We do not show items for which we have been informed to not show.

[Mark]

Post by I.P.D.B.

Post by wiredoug
perhaps you could make a section for parts catalogs?

It's on the IPDB webmaster's ToDo list. I, too, have catalogs to share.

You might begin with a simple list or maybe just cover shots to get
things started. Then you could identify those in the public domain, and
those for which a scanning source is available.

Do you need a webminion? I'm willing to help.

/Mark

[I.P.D.B.]

Post by Mark
Do you need a webminion? I'm willing to help.
/Mark

Well you know, Mark, I've never heard that term "webminion" before and google is no help to define it for me.

Occasionally there are tasks where I wish I had someone to delegate to, but I'll warn you that sometimes the tasks are repetitive and sometimes unexciting. Sometimes, research might make me have to track down a bunch of folks, requiring patience and good PR skills. The reward is in the results, even if the users of the IPDB have no idea how much time it took to be able to state even the most mundane of facts that we present. If you can follow instructions to the letter and not go rogue, handle work that is detail-oriented, is often exacting, pays nothing, and if you have no expectation of glory, email me! LOL

Jay

[Frank Furhter]

Post by I.P.D.B.

Post by Mark
Do you need a webminion? I'm willing to help.
/Mark

Well you know, Mark, I've never heard that term "webminion" before and google is no help to define it for me.
Occasionally there are tasks where I wish I had someone to delegate to, but I'll warn you that sometimes the tasks are repetitive and sometimes unexciting. Sometimes, research might make me have to track down a bunch of folks, requiring patience and good PR skills. The reward is in the results, even if the users of the IPDB have no idea how much time it took to be able to state even the most mundane of facts that we present. If you can follow instructions to the letter and not go rogue, handle work that is detail-oriented, is often exacting, pays nothing, and if you have no expectation of glory, email me! LOL
Jay

God bless this man, exact and to the point! Donate now if you don't
already, and continue to do so be-cause.

[I.P.D.B.]

Post by I.P.D.B.

Post by Mark
Do you need a webminion? I'm willing to help.
/Mark

Well you know, Mark, I've never heard that term "webminion" before and google is no help to define it for me.
Occasionally there are tasks where I wish I had someone to delegate to, but I'll warn you that sometimes the tasks are repetitive and sometimes unexciting. Sometimes, research might make me have to track down a bunch of folks, requiring patience and good PR skills. The reward is in the results, even if the users of the IPDB have no idea how much time it took to be able to state even the most mundane of facts that we present. If you can follow instructions to the letter and not go rogue, handle work that is detail-oriented, is often exacting, pays nothing, and if you have no expectation of glory, email me! LOL
Jay

Ha, I forgot to mention probably THE MOST VALUABLE quality you could have for helping me: a cultivated talent or natural insight of knowing when you don't know something. Knowing when something presented to you as a "fact" is really only a strongly held belief and knowing how to tactfully distill the former from the latter without losing cooperation from the person upon whom you are relying. And keeping your zeal from affecting your ability to discern.

[Frank Furhter]

Post by I.P.D.B.

Post by I.P.D.B.

Post by Mark
Do you need a webminion? I'm willing to help.
/Mark

Well you know, Mark, I've never heard that term "webminion" before and google is no help to define it for me.
Occasionally there are tasks where I wish I had someone to delegate to, but I'll warn you that sometimes the tasks are repetitive and sometimes unexciting. Sometimes, research might make me have to track down a bunch of folks, requiring patience and good PR skills. The reward is in the results, even if the users of the IPDB have no idea how much time it took to be able to state even the most mundane of facts that we present. If you can follow instructions to the letter and not go rogue, handle work that is detail-oriented, is often exacting, pays nothing, and if you have no expectation of glory, email me! LOL
Jay

Ha, I forgot to mention probably THE MOST VALUABLE quality you could have for helping me: a cultivated talent or natural insight of knowing when you don't know something. Knowing when something presented to you as a "fact" is really only a strongly held belief and knowing how to tactfully distill the former from the latter without losing cooperation from the person upon whom you are relying. And keeping your zeal from affecting your ability to discern.

Jesus, have we found God in the world of pinball. Give more money to
this guy, and those that help him. The hobby needs this shit, to the core.

[I.P.D.B.]

Thank you, Frank. That is high praise indeed. Very uplifting.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to you and yours,

Jay

[barakandl]

Post by wiredoug

I encourage anyone ...scan it for the IPDB.
Jay

I have a fair stash of high quality newer files but as we've mentioned before jay, many are of a quality that doesnt meet your file size limit. I like the idea of splitting game manuals. I have started doing that now and with the smaller files i can even do schematic at 600dpi not 300..
perhaps you could make a section for parts catalogs? I would do a separate site for it but i can see it leading to nothing but "snatch snatch leach leach leach, .. melting server as everything just grabs the lot." How do you handle that ? or do you just ignore it? I wonder if it would upset the rights holder?
~doug

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size even at 600DPI. I do document management as part of my day job and I am very familiar with scanning documents etc... I see lots of manuals on IPDB are scanned improperly. The worst offense I see on IPDB is scanning a black / white manual in using CMYK. This can quadruple the file size while giving no real benefit of clarity.

These kind of documents need to be scanned in pure black and white, 300dpi is plenty with a near lossless compression.

[I.P.D.B.]

Post by barakandl

Post by wiredoug

I encourage anyone ...scan it for the IPDB.
Jay

I have a fair stash of high quality newer files but as we've mentioned before jay, many are of a quality that doesnt meet your file size limit. I like the idea of splitting game manuals. I have started doing that now and with the smaller files i can even do schematic at 600dpi not 300..
perhaps you could make a section for parts catalogs? I would do a separate site for it but i can see it leading to nothing but "snatch snatch leach leach leach, .. melting server as everything just grabs the lot." How do you handle that ? or do you just ignore it? I wonder if it would upset the rights holder?
~doug

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size even at 600DPI. I do document management as part of my day job and I am very familiar with scanning documents etc... I see lots of manuals on IPDB are scanned improperly. The worst offense I see on IPDB is scanning a black / white manual in using CMYK. This can quadruple the file size while giving no real benefit of clarity.
These kind of documents need to be scanned in pure black and white, 300dpi is plenty with a near lossless compression.

Occasionally, users will download a large document from the IPDB, convert it to a smaller size, no loss of clarity, and resubmit it to us, telling me what they have done.

[Frank Furhter]

Post by barakandl

Post by wiredoug

I encourage anyone ...scan it for the IPDB.
Jay

I have a fair stash of high quality newer files but as we've mentioned before jay, many are of a quality that doesnt meet your file size limit. I like the idea of splitting game manuals. I have started doing that now and with the smaller files i can even do schematic at 600dpi not 300..
perhaps you could make a section for parts catalogs? I would do a separate site for it but i can see it leading to nothing but "snatch snatch leach leach leach, .. melting server as everything just grabs the lot." How do you handle that ? or do you just ignore it? I wonder if it would upset the rights holder?
~doug

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size even at 600DPI. I do document management as part of my day job and I am very familiar with scanning documents etc... I see lots of manuals on IPDB are scanned improperly. The worst offense I see on IPDB is scanning a black / white manual in using CMYK. This can quadruple the file size while giving no real benefit of clarity.
These kind of documents need to be scanned in pure black and white, 300dpi is plenty with a near lossless compression.

No, 600 DPI is really where it needs to be, and if it can be done in
1200 that would be ideal. B&W is fine yes, but what is lost is the aged
look and feel of the paper. More than the typed information is often
being archived, the originality of the document is critical as well.
You are my friend seeing things from a perspective of business, the
folks archiving are after much more than you are in your day job.

[wiredoug]

Post by Frank Furhter

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size >> even at 600DPI.

No, 600 DPI is really where it needs to be,

well the planets align... I agree with frank and think barakandl is wrong.

Your compromised quality scans are smaller files for sure andrew but side by side I still think they compare poorly compared to 300-600dpi color. I make that 'big offense' and I am going to keep doing it. If the files are too big I will keep them or split them up into chunks. If you want to downscale them feel free. I want to read a digital version of the original file not something that looks like a cheap photocopy of it.

See for yourself .. both work ..but i know which one I prefer to archive
Loading Image...

[barakandl]

Post by wiredoug

Post by Frank Furhter

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size >> even at 600DPI.

No, 600 DPI is really where it needs to be,

well the planets align... I agree with frank and think barakandl is wrong.
Your compromised quality scans are smaller files for sure andrew but side by side I still think they compare poorly compared to 300-600dpi color. I make that 'big offense' and I am going to keep doing it. If the files are too big I will keep them or split them up into chunks. If you want to downscale them feel free. I want to read a digital version of the original file not something that looks like a cheap photocopy of it.
See for yourself .. both work ..but i know which one I prefer to archive
http://www.legbolt.com/tmp/compare-scans.png

Doug, you cherry picked out one page from the firepower manual with color lines and heavy shading. Fine, that is one page, scan that one page in color. Not the entire manual. Black line documents needs to be scanned in black and white, not color.

All you are doing is wasting IPDB's bandwidth which i am sure is not free.

[wiredoug]

Post by barakandl
Doug, you cherry picked out one page from the firepower manual

it was the only scan I knew it was you that did. It seemed perfectly legitimate for me to use a color section to illustrate the need for color on color and greyscale pages. (that WAS the point of the whole exercise)... Sorry you didnt agree. Lets continue to disagree and still be friends. it adds interest to the party :)

Post by barakandl
Nothing pisses me off more than some idiot who scans a black & white manual in color.

Hi! I *always* do that. So I guess I piss you off too.. sorry ken :)
I've scanned literally GIGS of manuals in my own time, I happily do it but I will keep doing it but I will do it my way and I wouldn't want to piss anyone off so I'll just keep them to myself :P ( after i share them all with you:)

BUT... i dont print them .. ever. I always thought it was odd that people take a perfectly good pdf and print it again. seems redundant? kinda like the people who print out emails...

Post by barakandl
All you are doing is wasting IPDB's bandwidth

He has never complained when i uploaded the files? But that is what i meant about about how he handles it when i asked above. Anyway I dont *need* to upload them if they offend you. I'll just keep them on my own site instead. Wouldnt want to piss people off by sharing the data in too good a quality now would we. :D

I wonder if im the only idiot who has ever sat down and scanned the red,blue, yellow and grey book parts catalogs.. now theres a big file.. :D

this is fun ... love you guys .. even you frank :D

[seymour.shabow]

Post by wiredoug
BUT... i dont print them .. ever. I always thought it was odd that
people take a perfectly good pdf and print it again. seems
redundant? kinda like the people who print out emails...

I tried taking notes on my computer screen, but it didn't work too well.
Sometimes a pencil onto a sheet of paper is much better. Also, if you
can scale it up to get detail, that's better.

Post by wiredoug
I wonder if im the only idiot who has ever sat down and scanned the
red,blue, yellow and grey book parts catalogs.. now theres a big
file.. :D

How about tracing over the scan and rentering all text labels etc. for a
supreme time waster? (Although it is nice to print out the schematics
as 24x36 engineering plots.... granted, this is more for EM schematics
than SS)

[wiredoug]

seymour! check out adobe readers 'comments' feature. its kind of neat if you like writing on the screen but you have a point. To each his one, some people just like a pencil better.

please enjoy printing this at 24x36.. http://mirror2.ipdb.org/files/486/Bally_1974_Champ_Schematic_Diagram_continuous.pdf
Some clown scanned it in color for you :) its one that could well have been better greyscale but I like the aura of history stained on the original paper :)

[barakandl]

Post by wiredoug
BUT... i dont print them .. ever. I always thought it was odd that people take a perfectly good pdf and print it again. seems redundant? kinda like the people who print out emails...

The point of a good scan is to be able to reproduce again in the same quality.

When you scan in color, you pick up the background of the sheet. This reduces reproduction quality. We can argue about it all day, but across the board it is bad practice in all document retention.

Maybe i am old school. I would much rather reference schematics from paper copies. My pcb work area all four walls are coated with arch d prints of the boards i work on with penciled in notes.

Loading Image...

[Ken Layton]

Post by barakandl

Post by wiredoug
BUT... i dont print them .. ever. I always thought it was odd that people take a perfectly good pdf and print it again. seems redundant? kinda like the people who print out emails...

The point of a good scan is to be able to reproduce again in the same quality.
When you scan in color, you pick up the background of the sheet. This reduces reproduction quality. We can argue about it all day, but across the board it is bad practice in all document retention.
Maybe i am old school. I would much rather reference schematics from paper copies. My pcb work area all four walls are coated with arch d prints of the boards i work on with penciled in notes.
http://s30.postimg.org/5qlmc64u9/20151221_235622.jpg

I also like working from a paper copy.

[Frank Furhter]

Post by barakandl

Post by wiredoug
BUT... i dont print them .. ever. I always thought it was odd that people take a perfectly good pdf and print it again. seems redundant? kinda like the people who print out emails...

The point of a good scan is to be able to reproduce again in the same quality.
When you scan in color, you pick up the background of the sheet. This reduces reproduction quality. We can argue about it all day, but across the board it is bad practice in all document retention.
Maybe i am old school. I would much rather reference schematics from paper copies. My pcb work area all four walls are coated with arch d prints of the boards i work on with penciled in notes.
http://s30.postimg.org/5qlmc64u9/20151221_235622.jpg

With a high quality raster scanning, you can run it through line
detection and you can even filter to your heart's content. To remove
information of any type (noise is one thing, and certainly if you are
able to determine in volume what is noise or not and accurately remove
it), you have removed some of the information of the original
document/source.

If you choose to do so, do at your own risk. Some things are better
captured, and then removed by choice, yet not having them at all leaves
little for any derivative work to be done on no information.

This is not direct to disc recordings, we are talking about folded up,
printed on paper, originals which by default include a bunch of
information not originally intended to be included by the engineers, or
printers themselves. We are talking about archiving 40-50 or older
documents, which does not mean reproducing originals, but really
capturing and then opting to reproduce at whatever level makes sense.

Your eyes, your feet, your hands, your nose, they all tell a story and
to ignore them makes this all stink.

[barakandl]

Post by wiredoug

Post by Frank Furhter

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size >> even at 600DPI.

No, 600 DPI is really where it needs to be,

well the planets align... I agree with frank and think barakandl is wrong.
Your compromised quality scans are smaller files for sure andrew but side by side I still think they compare poorly compared to 300-600dpi color. I make that 'big offense' and I am going to keep doing it. If the files are too big I will keep them or split them up into chunks. If you want to downscale them feel free. I want to read a digital version of the original file not something that looks like a cheap photocopy of it.
See for yourself .. both work ..but i know which one I prefer to archive
http://www.legbolt.com/tmp/compare-scans.png

Check this scan out.

http://mirror2.ipdb.org/files/1780/Williams_1978_Phoenix_Schematics_paginated.pdf

36 megabytes of a cream colored sheet background. That scan is garbage and needs replaced. Even if the original was light, scanning it so dark you pick up the sheet background just inflates the file size insanely.

This document, if scanned properly, should be less than 5 megabytes in size. 36 meg just wastes IPDB 7 times more bandwidth.

[barakandl]

Post by barakandl

Post by wiredoug

Post by Frank Furhter

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size >> even at 600DPI.

No, 600 DPI is really where it needs to be,

well the planets align... I agree with frank and think barakandl is wrong.
Your compromised quality scans are smaller files for sure andrew but side by side I still think they compare poorly compared to 300-600dpi color. I make that 'big offense' and I am going to keep doing it. If the files are too big I will keep them or split them up into chunks. If you want to downscale them feel free. I want to read a digital version of the original file not something that looks like a cheap photocopy of it.
See for yourself .. both work ..but i know which one I prefer to archive
http://www.legbolt.com/tmp/compare-scans.png

Check this scan out.
http://mirror2.ipdb.org/files/1780/Williams_1978_Phoenix_Schematics_paginated.pdf
36 megabytes of a cream colored sheet background. That scan is garbage and needs replaced. Even if the original was light, scanning it so dark you pick up the sheet background just inflates the file size insanely.
This document, if scanned properly, should be less than 5 megabytes in size. 36 meg just wastes IPDB 7 times more bandwidth.

Lets look at an actual schematic page.... Here is color scan of a schematic on the left. Pure black and white scan on the right.

Loading Image...

NOtice how solid black the lines are. This is what you want for reprint clarity. It NEEDS to be scanned in black and white if you want to reprint these manuals. The cream background will make a reprint look like crap.

Trust me on this. Black line drawings and black line text Needs to be scanned in black and white. Industry standard. I do document engagement for people that build things. The prints and scans i do have to be perfect.

[Ken Layton]

Post by barakandl

Post by barakandl

Post by wiredoug

Post by Frank Furhter

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size >> even at 600DPI.

No, 600 DPI is really where it needs to be,

well the planets align... I agree with frank and think barakandl is wrong.
Your compromised quality scans are smaller files for sure andrew but side by side I still think they compare poorly compared to 300-600dpi color. I make that 'big offense' and I am going to keep doing it. If the files are too big I will keep them or split them up into chunks. If you want to downscale them feel free. I want to read a digital version of the original file not something that looks like a cheap photocopy of it.
See for yourself .. both work ..but i know which one I prefer to archive
http://www.legbolt.com/tmp/compare-scans.png

Check this scan out.
http://mirror2.ipdb.org/files/1780/Williams_1978_Phoenix_Schematics_paginated.pdf
36 megabytes of a cream colored sheet background. That scan is garbage and needs replaced. Even if the original was light, scanning it so dark you pick up the sheet background just inflates the file size insanely.
This document, if scanned properly, should be less than 5 megabytes in size. 36 meg just wastes IPDB 7 times more bandwidth.

Lets look at an actual schematic page.... Here is color scan of a schematic on the left. Pure black and white scan on the right.
http://s12.postimg.org/azn5xx0h9/Untitled.png
NOtice how solid black the lines are. This is what you want for reprint clarity. It NEEDS to be scanned in black and white if you want to reprint these manuals. The cream background will make a reprint look like crap.
Trust me on this. Black line drawings and black line text Needs to be scanned in black and white. Industry standard. I do document engagement for people that build things. The prints and scans i do have to be perfect.

I also do generally what barakandl does. I scan black and white manuals in black & white. If there is/are pages with halftone pictures, then those particular pages only are scanned as halftones. Same goes with color manuals. This keeps the overall file size down, looks good, and speeds up printing. Nothing pisses me off more than some idiot who scans a black & white manual in color. It makes a huge file, slows the printer way down, plus uses tons of expensive color ink needlessly.

I have come across manuals where the vast majority of the manual is black & white, but has a couple of pages in color. Then I scan those particular pages in color. Sometimes people scan manuals where the original has a "comb" style binding which shows up as huge black areas on one side of the page. This makes the file size bigger, uses much more black ink, and generally slows down the printer. Please folks, if you scan manuals that have a comb binding, either remove the binding or use image editing software to remove the black areas of the comb from the scans.

All the manuals I scan are done on my old Windows 98SE laptop and Visioneer "Paperport" one touch flatbed scanner (vintage 1997 era) along with Paperport 5.0 (I know it's old but still serves my purpose) software. I use the editing features to remove the black images of comb binding and to do digital "clean-up" of the scanned images. I always scan schematics at 600 d.p.i. and most black and white text manuals at 300 d.p.i. minimum.

[Frank Furhter]

Post by Ken Layton

Post by barakandl

Post by barakandl

Post by wiredoug

Post by Frank Furhter

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size >> even at 600DPI.

No, 600 DPI is really where it needs to be,

well the planets align... I agree with frank and think barakandl is wrong.
Your compromised quality scans are smaller files for sure andrew but side by side I still think they compare poorly compared to 300-600dpi color. I make that 'big offense' and I am going to keep doing it. If the files are too big I will keep them or split them up into chunks. If you want to downscale them feel free. I want to read a digital version of the original file not something that looks like a cheap photocopy of it.
See for yourself .. both work ..but i know which one I prefer to archive
http://www.legbolt.com/tmp/compare-scans.png

Check this scan out.
http://mirror2.ipdb.org/files/1780/Williams_1978_Phoenix_Schematics_paginated.pdf
36 megabytes of a cream colored sheet background. That scan is garbage and needs replaced. Even if the original was light, scanning it so dark you pick up the sheet background just inflates the file size insanely.
This document, if scanned properly, should be less than 5 megabytes in size. 36 meg just wastes IPDB 7 times more bandwidth.

Lets look at an actual schematic page.... Here is color scan of a schematic on the left. Pure black and white scan on the right.
http://s12.postimg.org/azn5xx0h9/Untitled.png
NOtice how solid black the lines are. This is what you want for reprint clarity. It NEEDS to be scanned in black and white if you want to reprint these manuals. The cream background will make a reprint look like crap.
Trust me on this. Black line drawings and black line text Needs to be scanned in black and white. Industry standard. I do document engagement for people that build things. The prints and scans i do have to be perfect.

I also do generally what barakandl does. I scan black and white manuals in black & white. If there is/are pages with halftone pictures, then those particular pages only are scanned as halftones. Same goes with color manuals. This keeps the overall file size down, looks good, and speeds up printing. Nothing pisses me off more than some idiot who scans a black & white manual in color. It makes a huge file, slows the printer way down, plus uses tons of expensive color ink needlessly.
I have come across manuals where the vast majority of the manual is black & white, but has a couple of pages in color. Then I scan those particular pages in color. Sometimes people scan manuals where the original has a "comb" style binding which shows up as huge black areas on one side of the page. This makes the file size bigger, uses much more black ink, and generally slows down the printer. Please folks, if you scan manuals that have a comb binding, either remove the binding or use image editing software to remove the black areas of the comb from the scans.
All the manuals I scan are done on my old Windows 98SE laptop and Visioneer "Paperport" one touch flatbed scanner (vintage 1997 era) along with Paperport 5.0 (I know it's old but still serves my purpose) software. I use the editing features to remove the black images of comb binding and to do digital "clean-up" of the scanned images. I always scan schematics at 600 d.p.i. and most black and white text manuals at 300 d.p.i. minimum.

Do the former with line detection (if you have that feature) and your
scans will come out cleaner and less background noise. Then tweaking
your scans with brightness and saturation are a breeze.

What needs to really happen here is a best practices and a pitfalls
document for scanning. Maybe all the genius that come forward unafraid
of the paper hoarders should put together such a document, and get
formally a movement going for folks that do this work anyway, and
eventually can all come together on a process that works best with a
core of old and modern equipment that makes it easy, simple and the
results are to a standard that the community agrees serves 80% of the
community well.

I'd like to slip this in, the paper was delivered with the machines, and
it was intended to be used by the owner of the machine. This should
drive a movement to openly without hoarding, without gouging for copies,
without fear. The courts agree, and the industries of our modern
society agree as well by their putting manuals and schematics for old
hardware long been gone and forgotten online or not bothering those
people that do.

[Frank Furhter]

Post by barakandl

Post by wiredoug

Post by Frank Furhter

There is no reason for file sizes of these document to be a huge file size >> even at 600DPI.

No, 600 DPI is really where it needs to be,

well the planets align... I agree with frank and think barakandl is wrong.
Your compromised quality scans are smaller files for sure andrew but side by side I still think they compare poorly compared to 300-600dpi color. I make that 'big offense' and I am going to keep doing it. If the files are too big I will keep them or split them up into chunks. If you want to downscale them feel free. I want to read a digital version of the original file not something that looks like a cheap photocopy of it.
See for yourself .. both work ..but i know which one I prefer to archive
http://www.legbolt.com/tmp/compare-scans.png

Check this scan out.
http://mirror2.ipdb.org/files/1780/Williams_1978_Phoenix_Schematics_paginated.pdf
36 megabytes of a cream colored sheet background. That scan is garbage and needs replaced. Even if the original was light, scanning it so dark you pick up the sheet background just inflates the file size insanely.
This document, if scanned properly, should be less than 5 megabytes in size. 36 meg just wastes IPDB 7 times more bandwidth.

Scanning properly is a matter of choice, and to do things like line
detection and noise removal is important. However, to ignore what is
there, darkened or not, is to knowingly remove information that is
otherwise there. Now we know the intention is to give schematic
information, that is a given so no argument. The issue is what was
trying to be archived? The document being old, with information, or a
document with information and cleaned up.

I say you can spend time going through and cleaning up the schematics,
scans that are so dark they are relatively worthless. Plenty of filters
to run this junk through, and you can do it, or just complain and
mandate via voice loud and clear folks should understand what they are
trying to accomplish. Maybe a clear set of standards and examples of
how to get there would be appropriate...

Again, knock yourself out on that 'ISO' effort.

[Gott Lieb?]

PP is Spanish Eyes

Jim

[Duncan Brown]

Post by Gott Lieb?
PP is Spanish Eyes
Jim

Thanks for that. In addition, Steve Young scoured his files and filled
a dozen more holes for us! Many of them gun and shuffles, which are
probably going to be the hardest to track down. Updated list reposted
at the same link:

http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt

(Yes, poor Lucky Ace wasn't so lucky when it came time to assign it a
supplement number: K-K-K!)

Duncan

[Ken Layton]

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Gott Lieb?
PP is Spanish Eyes
Jim

Thanks for that. In addition, Steve Young scoured his files and filled
a dozen more holes for us! Many of them gun and shuffles, which are
probably going to be the hardest to track down. Updated list reposted
http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt
(Yes, poor Lucky Ace wasn't so lucky when it came time to assign it a
supplement number: K-K-K!)
Duncan

Has anyone found the "F" parts catalog supplement for Williams "Derby Day" (1967) yet? I need one.

[John Robertson]

Post by Ken Layton

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Gott Lieb?
PP is Spanish Eyes
Jim

Thanks for that. In addition, Steve Young scoured his files and filled
a dozen more holes for us! Many of them gun and shuffles, which are
probably going to be the hardest to track down. Updated list reposted
http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt
(Yes, poor Lucky Ace wasn't so lucky when it came time to assign it a
supplement number: K-K-K!)
Duncan

Has anyone found the "F" parts catalog supplement for Williams "Derby Day" (1967) yet? I need one.

Hi Ken,

I was able to get to the shop today and we do have the "F" parts
supplement. I'll send a scan to the archives...

John :-#)#

[John Robertson]

Post by Gott Lieb?
PP is Spanish Eyes
Jim

Thanks for that.  In addition, Steve Young scoured his files and filled
a dozen more holes for us!  Many of them gun and shuffles, which are
probably going to be the hardest to track down.  Updated list reposted
http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt
(Yes, poor Lucky Ace wasn't so lucky when it came time to assign it a
supplement number: K-K-K!)
Duncan

Ah, but which ones DON'T you have? That would be of use to those of us
with lots of files and a wee bit of scanning time available!

Perhaps put them in BOLD or Italics?

John ;-#)#

[pinballmania]

Post by John Robertson

Post by Duncan Brown

Post by Gott Lieb?
PP is Spanish Eyes
Jim

Thanks for that. In addition, Steve Young scoured his files and filled
a dozen more holes for us! Many of them gun and shuffles, which are
probably going to be the hardest to track down. Updated list reposted
http://backglass.org/williams/kordek_archives/williams_parts_supplements_list.txt
(Yes, poor Lucky Ace wasn't so lucky when it came time to assign it a
supplement number: K-K-K!)
Duncan

Ah, but which ones DON'T you have? That would be of use to those of us
with lots of files and a wee bit of scanning time available!
Perhaps put them in BOLD or Italics?
John ;-#)#
--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John's Jukes Ltd.
MOVED to #7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3
[phone] (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."

Williams Catalog Supplement "A-A" is for STRAIGHT FLUSH.
I do not have it. There is one listed for sale on Ebay (Auction #115648156116)