Tractor Grills: Kubota Review  -- Kubota Tractors Discussion Forum and Review Tractor Grills: Kubota Review -- Kubota Tractors Discussion Forum

  parts   |   manuals   |   discussion   |   photos   |   podcast   |   reviews   |   specs   |   dealers   |   classifieds   |   contact   |   faq   |   myProfile   |   home          Login Now | Sign Up


FAQ:   What is a tractor?

Forum Index
New As Posted | Active Subjects



www.emerichsales.com - New & Used Equipment
          View Tractors For Sale!


www.partsbynet.com - Lawn and Garden Equipment Parts


Bernardsville Landscape Lighting
Click to Post a New Message!

Discussion Boards > Active Subjects > Messages as Posted > Kubota Review Forum

Page [ 1 ] | 2 | 3 | | Next >>
Reply | Pop Up Window Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo
 07-25-2003, 18:01 Post: 60135
jeff r



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: burton. michigan
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 428

11
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

Guys,

Almost done with my tractors grill/welding project. I have about 20 bucks in materials for this grill made with 1/4 thick plate 2 and 3 inches wide. Looks real professional even if I do say so myself. I will post the pixes when I fetch my cam I left at the office.
My next project is a landscape rake that looks so good that some manufacturers should copy the design. Made with 2x3 and 2x2 1/4 inch thick square tube with the hardened tines costing only 2.99 apiece instead of 5.99 I was quoted from KingKutter. Total materials cost is about 160 bucks with tine cost taking up $120.00. 37 tines gets you about a 72+ rake. From the rakes I have seen I figure you take the number of rake teeth and multiply by 2 to get the overall width of the rake. I would post a pix but the pixes I have are in a Windows BMP Image. I think a wheel kit is part of my plans too. The guy that did it did one heck of a job for not alot of dough for a rake that is commercial heavy duty quality like the ones sold by the major impliment manufacturers. Wonder if that guy that converted my backhoe thumb can convert a BMP image to JPG??? Thanks to TomG, the rake is in my profile under pix # 12. The guy did one heck of a job.

Jeff






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-26-2003, 07:36 Post: 60145
TomG

TP Contributor

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Upper Ottawa Valley
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5406

6
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

Most graphics editors can convert bmp files easily. Usually it's just a matter of using the 'save as' command on the file menu and selecting a different file type such as jpg. The files likely would come out smaller but would have any limitations of the original bmp format.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-26-2003, 12:03 Post: 60148
jeff r



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: burton. michigan
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 428

11
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

THANK-YOU TOMG. I learned something new today. Go to my profiles and check out pix # 12. Isn't that a darling landscape rake the guy made. I am going to make one just like it too....cheap.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-27-2003, 06:39 Post: 60178
TomG

TP Contributor

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Upper Ottawa Valley
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5406

6
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

Yes, a pretty good looking rake. I'm sorry I've never got my welding stuff back together. Well, I was a gas welder and I'd have to learn arc but it's supposed to be easier anyway.

If you are interested, your pic is fairly small. MarkH experimented with various ways to get larger images within the size restriction (30K I think) and the discussions might be worth reading. JPG software usually performs compression on a file as it's saved. My camera offers a choice between JPG, JPG (fine) and several other formats. Far as I know 'fine' means without compression. If your graphics editor isn't compressing the file a 30K image will come out pretty small. However, you may be happy enough just to get the pic here without worrying about such detail.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-27-2003, 07:11 Post: 60181
jeff r



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: burton. michigan
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 428

11
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

ToMG,

I have a Sony 3.2 meg camera and it has the "fine" feature among various pixel resolutions. What do I use to get a better size and still stay in the 30k limit?
As I', reviewing my pixes I noticed some are huge and are 30k and some are small and 30k what am I doing wrong here?

Jeff






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-27-2003, 07:59 Post: 60184
TomG

TP Contributor

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Upper Ottawa Valley
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5406

6
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

Starting out with a high quality uncompressed image file and trying to get under the 30K limit by scaling the pic down is what makes for small posted images. Compression and reducing detail in the image is what makes for larger posted images.

I use a shareware editor called Jasc Paint Shop Pro. I just read a camera pic I saved in jpg (fine) into my editor and saved it as a jpg file under a different name. The file size was reduced from 916K to 506K. That's the effect of compression and most editors will do that automatically.

Reducing detail is maybe the best way to reduce file sizes. Shooting with the lowest camera resolution has the effect of reducing detail and also creates less distortion if the pic has to be severely scaled down. Using the lower quality settings on your camera also probably compresses the file, but the compression routines on a decent graphics editor may be better. Severely cropping a pic to closely frame the subject is another good way. My editor has a variety of noise filters that have the effect of reducing detail. I ran my 506K file through something called a median filter and further reduced the file to 248K. The resulting image was somewhat abstract but certainly good enough quality for posting.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-27-2003, 08:07 Post: 60186
jeff r



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: burton. michigan
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 428

11
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

TomG,

So what you are saying is DONT USE THE "FINE"? lowest resolution I have is 640 x 480? So I use 640 X 480 no "fine"?

jeffr






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-27-2003, 08:33 Post: 60188
TomG

TP Contributor

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Upper Ottawa Valley
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5406

6
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

Yes, that's basically it but it sounds like you could use a decent graphics editor that will crop and filter. My. 2.1mp camera gives me small resolutions and three quality choices. I use the smallest resolution but the highest quality because I believe my graphics editor does a better job scaling things down than the camera. I hadn't compared files sizes before and after using the median filter and was pretty amazed.

If your camera insists on producing high quality images and you have an editor that crops, you might have some luck shooting further back and then severally cropping the image.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-27-2003, 09:11 Post: 60195
jeff r



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: burton. michigan
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 428

11
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

Starting out with a high quality uncompressed image file and trying to get under the 30K limit by scaling the pic down is what makes for small posted images. Compression and reducing detail in the image is what makes for larger posted images......TOMG

TomG,
I am confused here. You said in the above statement using "fine produces small compressed images. DO I use "fine" or not?

Jeffr






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 07-27-2003, 09:35 Post: 60197
jeff r



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: burton. michigan
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 428

11
Filter by User
 Tractor Grills

TOMG,
If you want to arc weld with a minimium of trying to maintain an arc, use 6013 or 7014 rod which are referred to as "contact" rods. You keep those type rods in contact with the base metal unlike a 6011 rod where you have to maintain a 1/8 arc gap. 7014 and 6013 make arc welding sooooooooo easy and quick. These rods are sometimes referred to as "cheater" rods because the real skill in SMAW(shielded Metal Arc Welding) is maintaining that arc gap. Electric arc welding is tougher than gas welding. MIG is the easiest to use and screw up using a too small welder (115 volts) that doesnt have the power to get good penetration on thicker metals. TIG is the toughest to use.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

Reply | Pop Up Window Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo


Page [ 1 ] | 2 | 3 | | Next >>

Discussion Boards > Active Subjects > Messages as Posted > Kubota Review Forum

Thread 60135 Filter by Poster:
DRankin 1 | jeff r 11 | plots1 5 | TomG 6 |




Most Viewed

+ Kubota AT70s Rear Tine Tiller
+ Kubota HST GST Shuttle or Gear Transmission?
+ Best Boom Mower for Kubota B2710 Tractor
+ Definition of Tractor Loader Breakout force ?
+ Kubota B3200 vs. JD 2720
+ New Kubota L3240 First Look Review
+ Kubota Transmission Fluid SUDT
+ Kubota BX2230 VS kIOTI CK20HST
+ KUBOTA Tractor Trouble Free Quality
+ kubota bx25 vs john deere 2720

Most Discussion

+ How to match Truck to Trailer
+ New Kubota L3240 First Look Re
+ Kubota Number 1 in Compact Tra
+ KUBOTA Tractor Trouble Free Qu
+ Source for after market produc
+ 3-Point Quick Hitch
+ B 7100 ST - Making the Leap
+ Kubota Transmission Fluid SUDT
+ Kubota vs John Deere Compact T
+ L3130HST vs. JD4310Hydro HELP

Newest Topics

+ 2000 B2710 I need a loader dealer wants over 4K an
+ Upgrading the Factory 145amp Alternator to 40 Amp
+ Kubota BX2750 Snowblower Fan Shear Pin Alignment
+ Size Kubota for Homeowner Use
+ I need some OEM Quality decals for a B7500 DT-TLB
+ Kubota 4750DT Fuel Venting
+ B1700 Hydostatic unit leaking
+ Kubota B2710 New to meadvice
+ Kubota L4330 three point hitch won t rise
+ Kubota B7200 Hydraulic leak













Turbochargers for Tractors and Industrial Machines
Cab Glass for Tractors and Industrial Machines

Alternators for Tractors and Industrial Machines
Radiators for Tractors and Industrial Machines

Driveline Components for Tractors and Industrial Machines
Starter Motors for Tractors and Industrial Machines