No wonder why the dark areas looked horrible...someone needs to learn how to wipe dust off their scanner and pages.

Not so!....

I clean the scanner surface w/glass cleaner and a rag periodically, and use a large makeup brush (for applying
powder--so a thick/dense one, not like you'd use for lining or eye shadow) that I bought specifically for dusting off source material. (I.e. it's not just an old make-up brush), but a thick-sable hair that I keep in a sealed bag between usages.

I've seen other copies of this scan (and from the same book) that have the same "dust and smudges in the same place, so am pretty sure it's printed that way.

Uncommon from most scans I've done -- these source images look like they were done using actual wet-paint, or something that simulates it, as there appear to be brush strokes that are more evident in the dark areas.

Also, FWIW, I usually have to remove pages from the binding to get a good flat image. Maybe that's normal, dunno.

Looking at the histograms of a few of the raws from this book, they seem to use a lower-dynamic range than normal (could just be the ones I started with).

I haven't seen any better scans or processed material from this book (doesn't mean there isn't), but, most are blurred or show a fair amount of screening. Even ones with screening artifacts show significant signs of being hand-corrected - see another scan (not from me) @ http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/666857. Lots of screening left, BUT also details removed -- like the 3 dots on the back arm.

I, also, removed those in my first attempt on this until I started looking for patterns in the image. Dots that are clustered or lined up, or, like the arm dots -- have whitish-blue halos around them -- which I took to mean they were deliberately placed -- vs. the ones that look like flecks on her front thigh.

FWIW, you can probably still order a copy from j-list...

that has to be dust. I just use microfiber glass cloth to clean scanner and pics.

I'll have to see if I can find a good quality one. Some of those I've seen with a hand-towel type weave seem a bit scratchy when I've tried to use them to dry my hands -- could be because of the finer threads composing the cloth, dunno, but made me wonder if they might not be a bit abrasive on paper-backed source materials...
----
If you get a chance, please compare my SAO post and see if it suffers from the same 'dust and problems' that this one does. IMO, the SAO post didn't have the dust and other probs this one does --- but both were cleaned, similarly, and scanned on the same scanner bed (also cleaned)...

I'd have to get a high powered magnifying glass to tell for sure, but it seems like many of the 'nits' in the scan are also in the print. Maybe it's just not printed well? :-(