#288428 has been deleted for being a duplicate.

I uploaded this version since the original has some screening issues.
Admittedly, this a JPG (I didn't edit this) so it is somewhat a case of pick your poison.

I would like to know if was deleted due to:

1. Accident
2. Not a significant enough fix
3. Someone is working on a PNG fix

Thanks in advance.

P.S. How do you do links?

http://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/1699424 vs post #288354

They both have screening but appear to be different scans.

I thought so too, but if you compare them side-by-by (or just switch between them in different tabs), they are exactly the same, pixel for pixel. Right down to the screening pattern.

I feel it should be restored since it has better color, slightly less screening, and without the dust/speckles on the other scan. At least until a PNG fix is uploaded.

I'm seeing a few threads open just for deletion appeals, and I'd like to call the attention of the staff here: should we open a sticky thread for Deletion Appeals?

Arkheion said:
I feel it should be restored since it has better color

Subjectively or objectively? Have you got the original to check the colours against?

blooregardo said:
I'm seeing a few threads open just for deletion appeals, and I'd like to call the attention of the staff here: should we open a sticky thread for Deletion Appeals?

It would make sense to have a central place to appeal deletions.

Ahhhh, I had this logical argument thought out then I find a digital sample -_-

http://www.terra.dti.ne.jp/~otomo/110128.png

I guess the saturation is tiny, tiny bit closer to the deleted one, but both look pretty off.
Since, it's come to this, can anyone with editing knowledge clean the PNG to match the sample? Pretty plz?

P.S. Still can't figure out how to do links Q_Q

I can fix the screening, but color-fixing isn't my forte. One of our regulars will do it better than myself.

Arkheion said:
P.S. Still can't figure out how to do links Q_Q

Just write this way: post #123321 and the system will automatically link to the post.

It's not a png, and it's even worse than the original one by turning unsaturated color to over-saturated color.

"Fixing" the color of a scan is not easy, and sometimes it can't be done (except convert every colors one by one) because information is already lost during the process. IMO it's not worth the effort either, unless the original one is extremely poor (not in this case).

Well you can at least get somewhat closer like http://i.imgbox.com/aEK81GB9.png with a bit of effort ...but I agree that making a perfect match is not really worth the time.

Anyone doing frequent scanning should really invest the time to profile their scanner, so any serious discrepancies of saturation, hue, and gamma caused by the sensor can be somewhat auto-corrected.

Cyberbeing said:
Well you can at least get somewhat closer like http://i.imgbox.com/aEK81GB9.png with a bit of effort ...but I agree that making a perfect match is not really worth the time.

Anyone doing frequent scanning should really invest the time to profile their scanner, so any serious discrepancies of saturation, hue, and gamma caused by the sensor can be somewhat auto-corrected.

Well done, do u mind me to post that to yande.re? Or you can just do it by yourself. It has much better quality in color and filtering compare to above two.

fireattack said:
Well done, do u mind me to post that to yande.re?

Feel free to post it if you find it acceptable enough. I never find myself fully satisfied with major color corrections such as this. All the tweaks quickly become very subjective, but at least the overall appearance now feels somewhat similar to the digital sample.

Much Thanks :)