Ryan's Cocktail Machine

[wrx2hot4u]

Hi All  

It has been awhile since I posted something so I thought I would post the progress of a cocktail machine I am fixing up.

Anyone with a constructive idea feel free to post and I will think about adding/changing the look/feel of the cabinet.
Some of things i havent decided on are art and controls.

Things that have been done so far. Cost are in Aus dollars.

Control Panels and other plastics have been taken of and are ready for re-spray.
Re Crome legs mmm looks nice but cost me $220

Last night I started on the cabs sides

Here are some pics and I will post some of the cab befores and afters very soon

[wrx2hot4u]

Here is another

P.S I found the cost of lamenate was hugh. $400+ for the smallest sheet and that was 5 x 5 meters.

[Apollo]

Holy crap dude! Nice to see you back but
RESIZE! RESIZE! RESIZE!

[wrx2hot4u]

Ooops um yeah they were abit big for people to see. Sometimes I forget about the little people with slow connections LOL just kiddin. What would be a good recommended size for people to be able to see the detail but not have there internet slow down???

[DougHillman]

It's not a question of connection speed, it's the physical display size of the pictures.  Even on my 1200x1024 display they're spilling off the edge of the screen.  

I'd imagine that 1024x768 is probably an average screen resolution these days.  Make 'em that size or even smaller.  I personally typically won't post anything that I haven't resized to 800x600 or less.

Oh, and ... wrong forum.

[paigeoliver]

On the internet you should always design for 800x600, which means your pictures should usually be sized for that resolution.

You can forget about the 640x480 (like my parents) as they are clueless and happily scroll the screen left and right to read each line of text in their aol browser, and refuse a higher resolution because it makes the icons small (the clueless are very, VERY picky about icons, as they have no idea how to launch anything that doesn't have a desktop icon).

But, there are a lot of 800x600 people out there. I myself do 1024x768 regardless of monitor size. I used to do 1600x1200, but I came to realize that it was stupid, no applications are optimized for a res that high.

[wrx2hot4u]

My monitor is 21" running 1024 x 768

[ufo8mycat]

i think you need to take a few steps back and re-shoot those pics

[danny_galaga]

good work. that re-chroming sounds expensive...

you can modify your messages that have pics in them. just remove the pics while modifying. then when resized, put them back in. you will have to change the names of the pics though. just add a letter on the end...

then we can appreciate them properly  

[DougHillman]

On the internet you should always design for 800x600, which means your pictures should usually be sized for that resolution.

You can forget about the 640x480 (like my parents) as they are clueless and happily scroll the screen left and right to read each line of text in their aol browser, and refuse a higher resolution because it makes the icons small (the clueless are very, VERY picky about icons, as they have no idea how to launch anything that doesn't have a desktop icon).

But, there are a lot of 800x600 people out there. I myself do 1024x768 regardless of monitor size. I used to do 1600x1200, but I came to realize that it was stupid, no applications are optimized for a res that high.

Optimized?  In what way?  As I said, I run 1280x1024 on my main 21" monitor (and 1024x768 on the secondary LCD - dual screens RULE!).  That equals more screen room and more stuff visable in my web browser, Photoshop, Illustrator, 3D design programs, games, etc.  Less time spent scrolling means more productivity.  That's "optimized" enough for me.

D

[Stingray]

that re-chroming sounds expensive...

Chrome work is now and always has been a pricy proposition.
The finished result is almost always worth the money spent though.
Well done for not taking the easy way out and just painting the chrome bits.

-S

[wrx2hot4u]

OK, I have taken off the pics and will resize then post again.  

Yeah the new Chrome on the legs looks awsome   !  I spent till 1am this morning finishing the sides with a wood grain finish. I am undecided as yet if I should also lacker the sides in a high gloss. mmmmmmm should I or shouldn't I ??

The wood grain didn't take very it was the distractions, funny enough the next door neighbour came past as I was working in the shed and popped in to say hello. 2 hours later we had finished, Sunset Riders, Vendetta, TMNT and Snow Bros. LOL  

[paigeoliver]

On the internet you should always design for 800x600, which means your pictures should usually be sized for that resolution.

You can forget about the 640x480 (like my parents) as they are clueless and happily scroll the screen left and right to read each line of text in their aol browser, and refuse a higher resolution because it makes the icons small (the clueless are very, VERY picky about icons, as they have no idea how to launch anything that doesn't have a desktop icon).

But, there are a lot of 800x600 people out there. I myself do 1024x768 regardless of monitor size. I used to do 1600x1200, but I came to realize that it was stupid, no applications are optimized for a res that high.

Optimized?  In what way?  As I said, I run 1280x1024 on my main 21" monitor (and 1024x768 on the secondary LCD - dual screens RULE!).  That equals more screen room and more stuff visable in my web browser, Photoshop, Illustrator, 3D design programs, games, etc.  Less time spent scrolling means more productivity.  That's "optimized" enough for me.

D

I do run photoshop higher res, usually the highest res the monitor will do, but otherwise it is 1024x768.

[wrx2hot4u]

Alright   no more about screen sizes and resolutions. I dont care if I have to scroll as long as the pics are detailed otherwise there is no point because you cant see the quality of work.

Next.............