Help and Support > Feedback and Suggestions

scan size

<< < (6/11) > >>

JVJ (RIP):
I really should post one with MY notion of color correction, too, so here's #JVJ:
http://www.bpib.com/temp/cb-sharpen/sharpen-jvj.jpgFWIW.

(|:{>

Yoc:
thanks Jim.
They weren't showing at all when I first looked.
If they were links I didn't pick up on that at the time.

-Yoc

JVJ (RIP):
They were always links, Yoc,
but perhaps five of them in one post was too much. So I split them up. Maybe they would have worked together, but now for certain they do.

(|:{>

citaltras:
Hard to say, because you applied a further sharp mask in photoshop and these are not the raw scans.
But after zooming in Picara's face, my guess is:


image 1: maximum sharp
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj200/citaltras/basura/facelarge1.jpgimage 2: low sharp
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj200/citaltras/basura/facelarge2.jpgimage 3: medium sharp
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj200/citaltras/basura/facelarge3.jpgIt is not really easy to appreciate on these thumbnails, but you can check by zooming at some small black line or dot in the original images.

As for your color correction, is perhaps too much for me. The yellow of the paper is lost, but with it, some of the yellow components
of the art are lost too, plus the faces tones are shifted to pink.

I prefer to keep the paper as background, correcting just a little if too yellow. For two reasons:

1- I want to see a scan of the original comic book and not only of the art. For me the paper is a part of the book.
    Editing colors too much you end with a new edition of the book, very different to the original.
   An example are the scans of old Pulp magazines that are available. If you eliminate the paper, you lost the essence of the pulp
   since only the text remain.

2- The second reason: if you read these comics in a computer or in the IPAD, then the white background is annoying
for the eyes. A yellow background, like that of the original paper is more comfortable and less harmful for the eyes.

builderboy:
Thanks, one and all for sharing of techniques and opinions on various scanner quality.  All I know is that my current methods are far different from those that I initially used, that my image quality is improving, and that I am learning as I go.  I trust this will continue, and that's enough to keep me satisfied.

Citaltras, there have been some parallel discussions in other threads regarding color correction (among other corrections), and about the personal preferences of the editor in what he or she wants to see.  I do understand the attachment to the object itself, the book with all its warts and aging phenomenon.

One thing that I keep in mind, though, is that my perception of a 50 year comic is not the perception that the original buyer had when he picked it off the rack 50 years ago. Mine is an arbitrary snapshot in time.  Add to that the abuses of the 50 years of storage, or the poor execution of the printing press man, and I think I am comfortable saying that the image that I am most eager to see is what the creative team tried to produce back at Year 0.  As best as I can guess it, anyway.

So, for me, editing includes removal of paper discoloration, obvious ink blobs, paper folds and tears.  I don't like backgrounds going to absolute white, either. I agree about with you about eye strain, and it was never brilliant white paper back then anyway.

there's my 2 cents.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page