File :-(, x, )
Claymore Anonymous
MT didn't like these so I figured I'd dump them here. Hope you don't mind.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
No wonder MT rejected them, they're obviously resized.
>> sage
>>218907
Original size was 2584x4431. So yeah, they were resized, so obviously you can't tell the difference either. Also I downloaded a few from the gallery for comparison and I didn't see much difference. You be the mod that deleted it?
>> Anonymous
>>219151
WTF are you talking about? He could tell the difference. Why would you size them down you fucking idiot?
>> The Nightmare Factory !r5OSw310Bk
>>219151
Post the originals please?
>> Spyffe
>>219198you fucking idiot?
My understanding (and please, people in the know correct me on this) is that scaling removes a lot of scanner artifacts like quantization effects and aliasing, as well as hiding whatever filters he used to remove things like dirt and page boundaries.

However, it is true that there are a lot of very skilled scan retouchers on 4chan, so untouched originals might still be useful to post.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>219198
Like it's any of your business pipsqueek. Besides, would it be better to scale them up larger? Don't be a moron. It's like Spyffe says it's better to resize down than up. Any 'fucking idiot' would know that. Here Nightmare, use them in good health.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Here's the other.
>> The Nightmare Factory !r5OSw310Bk
Thanks.
>> MDG !dv/tx/klx6
>>219227
thats about the quality i used on my own scan

AP rejected it...

too smooth for most ppl I guess... well better than billons of dust/noise
>> Anonymous
Blurry scans are blurry.
>> Anonymous
>>219151

Ah, no. Besides, I don't think MT mods visit 4chan.

The higher res ones are still too blurry, by the way.
>> Anonymous
>>219277
Thanks for pointing out the obvious

>>219278
Hence the reason I resized them, the two large ones are untouched. That's how my scanner scanned them @600dpi. I may have to try something different and see what I can come up with.
>> Anonymous
anymore?
>> Anonymous
>>219334
I might scan some more tomorrow, tonight I'm going to go get drunk. I won't scan the whole books because it's already been done.
>> Anonymous
>>219298
Resizing an image does NOT make it less blurry. You can get the same effect just by viewing the original image at a lower magnification (assuming your image viewer has a decent scaling algorithm, unlike Firefox).

In short, STOP DOWNSIZING IMAGES TO 'IMPROVE' THEM. Thank you.
>> Anonymous
>>219443
What? Really? I don't know how you figured that out. Resizing to a smaller size does improve the image. So please stop with your words of wisdom, because they are not.
>> Anonymous
>>219481
facepalm.svg
>> Anonymous
wow these scans suck
>> Anonymous
line art is too blurry, itd be deemed low quality.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>219481

Well I'm not>>219443, but he does have a point. Making an image smaller definitely does reduce noise, moire, etc, but that doesn't increase its quality. Aside from having a much smaller resolution, some details are lost, and the scan takes on this weird over-sharpened effect.

Random scan, for justified thread bump.
>> Speedycat !pitV0nGrEw
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>219220
Maybe it'd help if you turned off your scanner's descreen aka blur-the-fuck-out. When something's as detail-free as this is, resizing ain't gonna hurt it, nigs.

MT probably thought they were fanart. lol @ two poses are so identical that it's practically a hair-swap.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
It really amazes me how many low-brow people visit 4chan. Mix in a few people that actually scanned before and it makes a comical conversation.
>>219616
I thought of that last night but got around to rescanning this morning. Here's the results. Makes a big difference doesn't it?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I can hardly wait for all the low-brow responses, quips and comebacks ...
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
All things Claymore must end in drama. That's an iron-clad rule of /hr/.
>> Anonymous
>>219795
LOL good one!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>219799

It's true. Maybe once in a blue moon there's a Claymore thread that isn't shat on by the original artist for removing obtrusive watermarks (thus ruining original intent MYGAWDS) or possessing some form of general faggotry.
>> The Nightmare Factory !r5OSw310Bk
     File :-(, x)
>>219804
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>219804
And it's good drama and it's funny. Here's another scan. I left a gap so those that know how to fix it can. Those that don't will just bitch. Adds to the drama. I guess I shouldn't encourage them.
>> Anonymous
>>219795
Anybody have the original they could post?
>> The Nightmare Factory !r5OSw310Bk
     File :-(, x)
>> The Nightmare Factory !r5OSw310Bk
>>219812
More please!
>> Anonymous
>>219839
Thanks!
>> Anonymous
>>219793
If you get offended by something you read on 4chan, you're doing it wrong.

Also, you suck cocks.
>> Anonymous
>>219845
*Grunt* you suck cocks *Grunt* Ha Ha I made a funny. Can't get any funnier than that! Try something original that we haven't read on here a million times.
>> Anonymous
>>219846
You're doing it wrong.
>> Anonymous
>>219849
There's another original saying on 4chan ...