February 14th, 2016, 10:04 PM | #1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3
Thanks: 5
Thanked 31 Times in 3 Posts
|
1st scan
I'm just starting scanning and editing (and posting) Here's a sample, Tabatha Cash from Color Climax 171. I've had a 20+ year thing for her the color balance isn't ideal between the two pages. The scan is resized and compressed significantly.
I'm not sure what size image I should aim for? Happy to get feedback. Last edited by grabo; February 14th, 2016 at 11:22 PM.. Reason: resize preview |
|
February 14th, 2016, 10:54 PM | #2 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,651
Thanks: 80,415
Thanked 32,730 Times in 3,527 Posts
|
Seems like you've done a good job with it, grabo. Not grainy, we can't see the original dots the image would've been printed with in the mag, and the colour seems fairly neutral.
The 'thumbnail' size you've posted is rather large. I'm pretty sure you'll be asked to re-up the pic with a thumbnail size no bigger than 180x180 (or is it 80x80?) pixels. You should see the option of thumbnail size just above the 'upload now' button if you use imagebam. Anyway, the image size I usually go for on pics is around 1000 pixels high or thereabouts. This allows the pic to be seen 'full height' without the top and bottom being cut off when I click on the 'Actual size' icon. I don't know if you do this already, but I scan and save the image as a bitmap, close the scan and when I come to work on the pic I open with the programme I'm using (ability photopaint 2001 or micrografx picture publisher 8) depending on what I want to do first, I then save the file as a bitmap with an extra letter or number so that I don't overwrite the original bitmap. I compare the original with the new version in the 'Slideshow' mode in windows picture viewer, I pause the slideshow and click between the two pics too see if the new version is better. If I decide to do other changes, I do them and save as a third bitmap and re-do the comparison, this time with version 1 and 2. This can go on for quite a while, with someitmes several days between the versions. This has helped a lot with 'problem pics'.
__________________
<-- That's Emer Kenny and I want to be stuck in her front bottom. Quote from electrofreak : I'd rather have questions that can't be answered, than answers that can't be questioned. |
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to seany65 For This Useful Post: |
February 14th, 2016, 11:05 PM | #3 |
Super Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sunny South Florida
Posts: 7,852
Thanks: 163,934
Thanked 119,241 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. |
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Pepper II For This Useful Post: |
February 14th, 2016, 11:20 PM | #4 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3
Thanks: 5
Thanked 31 Times in 3 Posts
|
Many thanks for the feedback.
I'm scanning at 300dpi from a high quality magazine copy. I have an image at 1.45MB which is a little better when you zoom in but not really noticeable at basic HD resolution. The biggest question I have is what resolution to save the final version as? The original merged image is about 4K wide and is only slightly better than the 348k image above. Only another 120 pages to go and I'll have this issue ready |
February 15th, 2016, 12:30 AM | #5 |
Super Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sunny South Florida
Posts: 7,852
Thanks: 163,934
Thanked 119,241 Times in 7,641 Posts
|
I wouldn't want you to waste your time; CC 171 was already posted here by hartwig. His links are no longer good but I have his archive which I could repost. You're free to scan and post your own, of course but if you have other mags which aren't already here I'd rather see you work on those.
|
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Pepper II For This Useful Post: |
February 17th, 2016, 05:03 PM | #6 | |
Sourcer of Smut
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,829
Thanks: 83,600
Thanked 341,625 Times in 8,422 Posts
|
Quote:
I suggest you find a modus operandi that works best for you. Choose a resolution that gives the best quality:time ratio. As others have already said, in some cases you may want to change the resolution in order to avoid moiré. The compression you use is similar to the one I use, so I think it's fine. For some hints you can check the links in my sig. Good luck!
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Feel free to post my scans to the relevant model threads, but do give credit |
|
February 17th, 2016, 06:17 PM | #7 | |
in mourning
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,895
Thanks: 70,697
Thanked 72,545 Times in 1,868 Posts
|
to prevent scanning a magazine that is already on the forum:
Follow-up on these remarks:
Quote:
for a specific search in a magazine thread use this search option: in detail: also, important: please read this thread first: http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/t30...-function.html regards, hfh.
__________________
Thanks to all scanners, moderators and posters; keep this forum alive To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Please read and try to follow the VEForum rules To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Avatar: Siân Adey Jones
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ...... R.I.P. Erdnuss To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Last edited by haVEFun here; February 18th, 2016 at 03:49 PM.. Reason: text and link added, more info added |
|
February 18th, 2016, 07:07 PM | #8 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3
Thanks: 5
Thanked 31 Times in 3 Posts
|
Quote:
My 'collection' comprises of 2 magazines in total, both acquired recently so I don't think I'll be able to add to the archive |
|
February 22nd, 2016, 11:12 AM | #9 |
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upper left corner
Posts: 7,205
Thanks: 47,953
Thanked 83,439 Times in 7,199 Posts
|
Very nice scan. The question of "how big should the scan be" is a vexing one, because it depends on the quality of the original. Scanning a low quality original at very high resolution doesn't get you any more detail, because it isn't there in the original; in fact, scanning at a too high resolution can create a file that looks worse.
What you've produced looks excellent. You can try scanning at a higher resolution to see the difference, but I suspect you're already at or near the sweet spot in quality with the scan you posted. No moire, no grain, looks very good. |
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to deepsepia For This Useful Post: |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|