File :-(, x, )
All About G.J? Anonymous
Hi /e/,

I borrowed a scanner and since I've not seen scans of this artbook anywhere yet, I thought I'd make some. They're pretty shitty since I'm not experienced and because I'm not willing to start ripping the pages off. Sorry about that.

Any tips from the pros about how to best handle raster prints would be appreciated. And if anyone knows if there are scanners out there which would allow scanning a whole page from a book properly without tearing it off, I'd love to hear about that! Even this one which I borrowed would have done if the scanning surface extended all the way to the edge, but it doesn't so one side of the page gets smudged and the other gets cut off...

Oh and if anyone else wants to do better scans (or has them already / knows where to get them), I'd love to hear about that too!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
Are these artbooks based on the H-Games/Anime?
>> Anonymous
>>304076

Oh, sorry about the dupe.
>> Anonymous
>>304091

The book has most (if not all) art from the first 3 G.J? H-games plus promotional art / DVD/VHS covers which I've concentrated on scanning here.
>> Anonymous
>>304097
I might not be able to help, but I will offer my gratitude toward you, oh god of GJ scans.
>> Anonymous
This thread delivers.

Thanks, anonymous.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Op here, I just scanned the poster that comes with this artbook. I had to scan it in three parts, maybe someone here can try to shop something decent together.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>304143

I'm on it niggah
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
And here's the other side. Too bad about the censoring, though.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>304145
too bad you didn scan her right foot fully ;<
>> MDG
     File :-(, x)
>>304147
im faster

although still non cropped/shooped
>> MDG
     File :-(, x)
>>304097
what was the full name of the artbook again ?
dont even know what the heck im stiching atm
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>304156
I would have scanned it but they didn't print it fully for some reason. :) The poster really ends there!

Have the cover jacket front while I'm at it. (the real front cover under the jacket is nothing particularly interesting, so don't worry about it)
>> Anonymous
>>304162

?All About GJ?? GJ? ???????????? (???)

(copypasta from amazon.co.jp)
>> MDG
>>304165
narf...

>>304164
try doing the same u did to
>>304157

^^
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>304167
>> Anonymous
FUCKING WINNAR.

Could you rescan>>304089and>>304078in higher quality, please? Too many image artifacts from compression and resizing for my tastes.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
could you scan these one?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>304182
Is this better? I still had the original huge "raw" scan, just did the postprocessing differently.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Same here. This pic (along with 08, 10 and 12) is only half the page, so unfortunately I don't think it's possible to get a big and sharp scan of it.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>304188

Yeah, I know this looks a bit pixelated but it's like that in the book too. I guess they didn't have a higher resolution version of the pic to use for printing.
>> Anonymous
>>304192

Hm. A little better, but they still seem to have artifacts. It might be because you're saving in JPG. Try PNG, please?
>> Anonymous
you should make a rapid out of your scans...
>> Anonymous
>>304197

Well a PNG is going to be huge and not much better, but maybe tomorrow (I'm going to sleep after this post). I'll probably need to upload it to rapidshit or another similar service.

If you're bothered by what looks a bit like background noise, then that's probably unavoidable (but I was asking for tips on how to minimize the effect in my first post) due to how colour images are printed in books.
>> Anonymous
these are some of the hottest images... ever
>> Anonymous
Holy fuck. Can you megaupload them by any chance?
>> Anonymous
>>304262
Megaupload sucks, I hate It even more than rapidshit.
Better use depositfiles.
>> sage against the machine
     File :-(, x)
Feeling nice so, All pictures posted so far . . .

http://rapidshare.com/files/34903730/G.J.rar

Pic is Anne from Ane to Boin
>> age Anonymous
this shit is fantastic
>> Anonymous
bump
>> Anonymous
>>304217

>Well a PNG is going to be huge and not much better

PNGs are similar in filesize to JPGs. I don't know where the idea that PNGs are huge comes from. Maybe they were one time, but not anymore.

PSD, however...
>> Anonymous
>>304378
Just about the only time png will be close in size (or even smaller) than jpeg is with very clean line-art type illustrations (png is great for manga, for instance, if scanned well).

For complex images like these, though, it's bound to be several times larger at least. A quick example:
>>304196
13_ren_hatoko2.jpg - 612KB
13_ren_hatoko2.png - 4,009KB

Note: not dissing png or anything... it's just the difference between lossless vs. lossy compression schemes. I much prefer png where possible.
>> Anonymous
>>304473it's just the difference between lossless vs. lossy compression schemes. I much prefer png where possible.

Except 99.9999% of the time, the PNGs are no higher quality than JPEGs, which essentially means you've got a massive JPEG.

Like all those morons who take screen captures from low quality videos and make them huge PNGs despite the quality of the image being sub-par JPEG. And then proceed to make long-winded speeches about the virtues of their "lossless" PNGs.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>304502
Are you an ass?
>> Anonymous
thread is made of epic win
>> Ricky
     File :-(, x)
Source should always be a file without compression. The .jpg format almost always has a compression acted on it. Anyways if the source is already compressed, screw it theres no hope just use .jpg and if you want to keep the detail use just a tiny compression and you'll get a decent drop in file size. If you can suffer a barely noticeable detail loss, set compression a little bit more and you'll get a huge drop in file size. My standard for this huge drop (I use Macromedia Fireworks) is 80% Quality so I suppose a 20% compression and I apply progressive display for the file so it loads up in waves instead of one solid wipe.

Original File Size: 554.19 KB (567,488 bytes)
My File Size: 446 KB (456,718 bytes)

More or less. Use .gif for simple colors. Use .jpg for compressed files with shading. Use .png for source files for everything. I don't have Photoshop so don't know about .psd, but just use .png cause its universal and you don't have to worry about it.
>> Anonymous
this is the best thread ever.
any more g.j stuff?
>> two diff things Anonymous
if you first save image as JPEG and then save it PNG, the PNG file is much bigger than it would be if the image was saved as PNG in the first place. JPEG makes the image messy, which means it adds a lot of small noise into the image. this makes PNG compress badly, because it needs to save a lot more "detail" than it otherwise would have to.

PNG compresses noiseless images very well. if you use a PNG optimizer, you can get the filesize down a lot without losing any image quality.

PNG doesn't lose image quality and that way add distortion or noise into the image, JPEG does.
>> blablabla
>>304830
we dont care
>> Anonymous
Are you blurring the images? The edges look to be sharp in that funny kind of way instead of looking like lines off a Megami poster.
>> Anonymous
>>304143
Hey OP, one thing to consider. Distributing completed scans as jpegs is one thing, because presumably they would not have to be altered. But if you're asking others to edit jpeg sources, they'll have to re-encode as jpeg a second time. This means you'll get a double-helping of jpeg artifacts.

If pngs are too big for 4chan, why not put them up on rapidshare? That way, you can get a cleaner edit? Up to you of course - but if you're taking the time to scan and share these, I'm presuming you'd like the results to be as good as possible.
>> Anonymous
omg. this thread wins.
>> Anon
     File :-(, x)
ijust put a request for the book up in /r/ anyone have a rapid or mega sause on it?
>> Anonymous
God damn, OP deserves a tip of the hat