Danbooru-based image board with a specialization in high-quality images.
This post belongs to a parent post.

areola cameltoe erect_nipples school_swimsuit screening swimsuits youta

Edit | Respond

I'd take this but it's up to you. No need to worry, I wont bother you by contributing my worse than raws into here anymore. Peace out.
Oh, come on! Your other scan was good. Different from usual, and I'm not an expert so I don't know about technical quality, but I'm more than happy with it. Really. It's clear enough to appreciate. I think it's far better than raws. Scanning is very difficult and there are so many different methods, it's hard to say what's the best, right?
Debbie, you are so wrong this time...
Am I? I'm sorry...
Erm, I was discussing these days with my friend, about the scanning process and their differences on various monitors. Maybe my monitor and mimikku's doesn't show up the faults that well. I forced my eyes but I couldn't spot what's so bad about the picture. What about it?
Well either way I have no idea of what I'm talking about. Hm, I will read more about scanning on the wiki/help page as soon as my vacation starts... I plan on scanning some stuff my friend and I got. But of course I'll do it the "oreno" way and I'll re-scan it as much as it takes to get "decent"...
This is about the quality of the presets i use on my epson scanner b4 filtering and processing on PS.
So that means each scanner has a different quality, and it affects greatly the quality of final scan.
How to avoid scanning faults then? My scan is HP, is that good? Or HP scanning software isn't good?
A little information on scanners. The maximum resolution of a scanner is limited by two things - the OPTICAL resolution and the software. Interpolated resolution is total BS - these are only resampling algorithms applied to the final image from the hardware (basically bicubic resampling algorithms you can do in photoshop).

What is there's no optical resolution? Suppose the scanner is listed with a hardware resolution of 9000 x 2400 dpi. The optical resolution is 2400 dpi - only the lower of the two numbers means anything with the detail in the final image from the scanner.

Another measure of quality is color. Although, it appears there's less ability to choose here because, with today's technology, photo scanners can only hope to resolve 24bit depth. Beyond that is marketing. The images may come in 48 bit format (perhaps even 96bit, wow!11!!1! one eleven) but they won't be any more colorful than a 24bit version of the same image.

My suggestion for improving color quality is to tweak the driver settings of the printer until you find the settings that enable the best color detail. Too much or too little brightness will cause either the shadows or highlights to lose detail. If your scanner is having trouble resolving both at the same time for some reason, perhaps scanning the sample picture with different brightness settings and merging to HDR in photoshop will yield a better image.

PRICE and FUNCTION! A 2,000 dollar DOCUMENT scanner will make shitty scans, and a 200 dollar PHOTO scanner (that says it can do 9600 x9600 scans) will leave you disappointed. When you see new photo scanners with resolutions of 2400 x 2400 and a price tag of over 2,000 dollars, I advise very SKEPTICALLY analyzing the specifications and reviews on consumer-class scanners that claim equivalent or higher resolutions. The thing about commercial, professional, and industrial scanners is that they are "horridly priced" for their specs but are a better value than consumer products because the real specs for the consumer products are horridly inflated by marketing tactics.

Finally, check REVIEWS! You'll find things that aren't mentioned in the specifications and marketing hype of any product. You'll find things like comaptability issues, quality control, and even praise for superior performance compared to other products.

I BEG and PLEAD for image providers to use QUALITY SCANNERS!!! I really hate a shitty scan of a really beautiful piece of art. I'd rather not even see those images because then I'll be put into a "waiting mode" where I am disappointed at the scans until someone else comes along and provides a decent one.
True, but not everyone will go about buying quality 200$ scanners like some of us here... We should be glad things are even being scanned.
I think of this everyday. What would it be like if people didn't scan like it happens here?
I'm very thankful you guys try so hard to provide the best possible.
And thank you Toan for the clear information.
Oops, forgot the second thing scanning resolution is limited by: resolution limits. I.e. my epson scanner limits me to 10000 x 10000 px.

You're welcome Debbie :)

I hope I didn't come across as harsh. When I was thinking of poor scans I was thinking of scans like 63496.

Fortunately today decent-quality scanners are so common place someone would probably need to be extremely outdated to have horrible scans. I think the most horrible "scans" are probably actually cellphone camera photographs or sample images.