Close
This post was deleted. Reason: dupe. MD5: 34b5fba98c7239dd99209e71f69acaa6
This post belongs to a parent post.
Search
Tags
  • ? tinkle 2223
  • ? dress 100724
  • ? duplicate 1151
  • ? garter belt 9775
  • ? lolita fashion 13357
  • ? nipples 188742
  • ? pantsu 169909
  • ? see through 73254
  • ? fixme 4305
  • ? screening 8648
    • panties てぃんくる see-through pantsuga underwear nipple fix me dupe pantsu2 panties under pantyhose pink panties black panties pink pantsu blue pantsu white dress vertical-striped dress pantsy brown dress pinafore dress red dress blue dress pink dress grey dress bow panties white panties long dress red panties frilled panties visable panties panty peek black dress inverted nipple blue panties orange panties puffy nipples pixel-perfect duplicate lace panties maid panties
Statistics
Options
Related Posts




Edit | Respond

petopeto
about 15 years ago
I think post #96522 is a different scan (the bottom-right corner isn't blurry in that one). Tricky colors, the white spots in the eyes might work to find the whitepoint...

There's still enough noise in the top-left for it to be visible in the sample. Very tough image...
midzki
about 15 years ago
Since I can't get accurate color (not only I don't have a print, also I don't know how color distortion a CIS scanner has), I couldn't think to do manual masking. just one action + several dusts removed.
happyhobo898
about 15 years ago
petopeto said:
I think post #96522 is a different scan (the bottom-right corner isn't blurry in that one).
Well if midziki used my raw, then it's the same scan. And as for color the print is in between my post and this one. This one is a little too bright and yellow compared to the print.
fireattack
about 15 years ago
It's second time you spelled midzki's name mistakenly , LOL
midzki
about 15 years ago
to spell my name by hepburn nomally, mizuki :p
Debbie
about 15 years ago
Midzki's name or the picture? :O
Radioactive
about 15 years ago
Mudskis attempt with the scan.
Debbie
about 15 years ago
Ah... I see... D;

Mudskis. :P

Maybe you should try... If you like the picture, you know. :D
midzki
about 15 years ago
Radioactive said:
Yuck. Still pretty ugly.
right. I didn't use an extra pass for AM screening, which can mask out details manually. the reason is above. unlike overfiltered, it can be fixed later.
Radioactive
about 15 years ago
Debbie said:
Maybe you should try... If you like the picture, you know. :D
I'll leave that to the experts. I only perform minor fixes.