Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;samjimmy, post: 294307, member: 3813&quot;]This really sums up the issue.&nbsp; I&#039;ve seen GDJMSP&#039;s scanned images and they are OK (better than most other scanned images), but a camera would do much better.&nbsp; People generally don&#039;t have the proper equipment or knowledge, let alone macro photography equipment or knowledge, to produce decent images.&nbsp; If that&#039;s you, then you probably would be better off scanning.</p><p>It&#039;s showing the hairlines and imperfections due to what I&#039;d term &quot;ugly lighting&quot; - the flat, more or less uncontrollable scanner light.&nbsp; It&#039;s along the same lines as why you see RED EYES in snapshots (and not in professional portraits).&nbsp; Direct, straight-on light rarely makes anything look good, unless you&#039;re going for that flat look.&nbsp; Multiple, angled light sources will show dimension, etc., etc.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in