I apologize for criticizing, but this appears to be a blurry 40M version
of these two sharp 5.7M and 3.4M files I found on my drive. I don't know
where I got them, presumably archive.org or web8201.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1yriOM60OrGU94kBm81UsGNcaNmDki5_C
The 3.4M appears to be a made from the 5.7M. The both have the same
created date in 2005, both say ABBYY FineReader, but the 3.4M also says
modified 2017 and with Adobe Acrobat and is saved as PDF 1.6 while the
5.7M is 1.2. So someone reprocessed the 5.7M to get the 3.4M without
losing anything as far as I can tell. They both look the same sharpness.
It appears to have all the same dust speckles and random lines and
scratches and the same major flaws on the pages John specifically
pointed out like 77 and 79.
Is that in the original and all copies will have it?
... Yes I see Kurt's new scan has those same things too.
Some original fax or xerox from NEC must have had it.
What does Kurt's new scan fix?
Sorry Kurt I know how tedious it is to scan a book!
--
bkw
On 10/20/26 01:47, Mike Hyde wrote:
I tried cleaning it up a bit.
nec8201_techref.pdf <https://drive.google.com/file/
d/1lrG5xFYHzFkpzP9aIkPClPZplgM7CVsL/view?usp=sharing>
drive.google.com <https://drive.google.com/file/
d/1lrG5xFYHzFkpzP9aIkPClPZplgM7CVsL/view?usp=sharing>
drive_favicon_2026_32dp.png <https://drive.google.com/file/
d/1lrG5xFYHzFkpzP9aIkPClPZplgM7CVsL/view?usp=sharing>
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lrG5xFYHzFkpzP9aIkPClPZplgM7CVsL/view?
usp=sharing>
On Oct 19, 2026, at 10:39 PM, Gary Weber <[email protected]> wrote:
Kurt's scan is in three parts:
https://www.web8201.net/Files/LIBRARY_web8201/nec8201_techref_pt1.pdf
<https://www.web8201.net/Files/LIBRARY_web8201/nec8201_techref_pt1.pdf>,
https://www.web8201.net/Files/LIBRARY_web8201/nec8201_techref_pt2.pdf
<https://www.web8201.net/Files/LIBRARY_web8201/nec8201_techref_pt2.pdf>,
https://www.web8201.net/Files/LIBRARY_web8201/nec8201_techref_pt3.pdf
<https://www.web8201.net/Files/LIBRARY_web8201/nec8201_techref_pt3.pdf>
And yes these are getting uploaded to archive.org <http://archive.org/
>, along with all of the other PDFs I have fro the various other manuals.
Gary
On Mon, Oct 19, 2026 at 7:44 PM B9 <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
__
I suggest uploading to archive.org <http://archive.org/> as a start.
--b9
On October 19, 2026 6:54:45 PM PDT, Kurt McCullum
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I've just finished scanning the manual but it's just over 36
megs in size. I need to figure out where to upload it, but
when I do I will send the links.
Kurt
On Sun, Oct 18, 2026, at 9:41 PM, John R. Hogerhuis wrote:
I think it was Kurt McCullum that had a clean copy...
I need the following pages from the NEC tech ref:
Pg 77, 78, 79, 97, 99, 105, 177, 119, 191, 198, 210, 211, 228
What I am working on is a very accurate OCR with good
formatting of the ASCII art and accurate content for all
assembly listings, etc. I'm using gemma4:31b on a local rig
to do the conversions to ASCII and ultimately .md. My current
purpose is informing the AI as to low level access to file
system etc for it to generate VirtualT socket tests for
Gary's port of SuperROM.
The AI is doing a much better ocr of the content than the
PDF has. It is doing an excellent job. Even at ASCII art.
Sometimes hallucinating portions of diagrams that aren't
there, which is bizarre. And it keeps stopping and needing to
be kicked to continue working. Even so it will save me a lot
of time and we will all have a more tractable version of the
content, ultimately.
Thanks,
-- John.
--
bkw
