Vintage Erotica Forums - View Single Post

**Pepper II** · February 14th, 2016, 11:05 PM

Hi, grabo and welcome.

Yes; the maximum allowable thumbnail size here is 180 x 180 so you should rehost the image and edit your post. This scan is about 348k which is small by today's standards. I'd rather see close to 1mb per page for these magazines. The difference would be mostly visible in the text but less compression would yield a better image overall. Everyone has their own method but I scan at 300dpi then resize if necessary. I have noticed different magazines (with poor print quality) sometimes can't handle that much resolution but scanning at higher resolution won't help significantly. Overall, though it looks very good.

February 14th, 2016, 11:05 PM	#3
Pepper II Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Sunny South Florida Posts: 7,852 Thanks: 163,910 Thanked 119,238 Times in 7,641 Posts	Hi, grabo and welcome. Yes; the maximum allowable thumbnail size here is 180 x 180 so you should rehost the image and edit your post. This scan is about 348k which is small by today's standards. I'd rather see close to 1mb per page for these magazines. The difference would be mostly visible in the text but less compression would yield a better image overall. Everyone has their own method but I scan at 300dpi then resize if necessary. I have noticed different magazines (with poor print quality) sometimes can't handle that much resolution but scanning at higher resolution won't help significantly. Overall, though it looks very good.