Print

[rez]

I'd like to say it was a horror story I'd just scanned and read but it isn't so.

I'd like to awaken and realize it was all a bad dream but that isn't going to happen.

It seems the rage of brash aggressiveness has taken it's toll in a rare moment of savage insensitivity once again
and the comic world looses yet another grade to the willful misconduct by one of it patrons.

What is this of which you speak one might question. Whether 'tis nobler to admit a snafu before one's peers and hopefully find some degree of solace from the ravages of self incrimination or hide in secrecy the act of which one partook is a question oft debated within the minds of those who err.

I speak of my recent new forage into the wiles of comichood as a new awareness of wunnerful wunnerful goldenage comics was paraded before mine eyes thru agency of modernday online creativeness

where suddenly I found myself propelled into a world of afore unseen wonderment,
complete with colors of brillance coupled with worded charm that before was only hinted to from across comic convention aisles as I might only gaze at the out of reach goldenage wonders.

Reacting to an emotion akin of giddyness at this marvelous discovery of online goldenage presentations I only sought to somehow return this life edifying favor in which I sudden found myself amidst
and declared to self that I too would provide scans of my books, tho' paltry in comparison to the many, aware that yet even the small coin given from the beleaguered adds to the total sum.

So with that thought in mind I gathered my forces and charged ahead into the mounded data banks seeking that which might be needed to fulfull my dream

when finally, believing I had enough to sufficeintly climb the fortress walls, I decided to attempt that which was my nemisis, the how-to knowledge regarding the upload capabilities of the common man now walking among the many experienced cyber folk.

If only I had thought to recheck the date of publication it would have been enough to give me pause to think and consider my ways, but no, coming in wound up from the coarse physical work of the day and openig my brew I had but one thought in mind, that being of putting my new found knowledge to work and finally scanning my first comic.

The destroying of a grade of book might mean little to some but when it occurs to one of your favorites in the collection it carries a certain humbling effect as when in a serious mode of introspection one grades himself and is found lacking.

more to follow...

[rez]

It all began innocently enough. Take one of my prize books and begin the scanning process. So with careful fingers the book was removed from it

[John C]

The only solace this tortured soul can drum is that tho

[narfstar]

While some may not think they are as good you find my latest scans to be digital camera pictures rather than scans to not damage my books.  I have gotten pretty good at it so my later are better than my first efforts.

[Aussie500]

Just remember to turn the flash of narfstar lest you blind us with such brilliance.

Sorry to hear your first foray into scanning cost such a price rez, hopefully if you venture into the water again you would have gained enough knowledge that the comic survives relatively unscathed. Cannot say l have ever removed the staples from anything, although sometimes l have not used the lid because l did not want to risk tearing something. l am sure some of the others might have some advise on removing staples without tearing the comic.

[Yoc]

Plus one Karma for Rez!   

My heart goes out to you buddy.  I'm betting a high percentage of the scanners out there have gone down the same road as you just did.  I myself have and this is why I personally prefer opening the staples of a book.  I find this way the scans look much better and the damage done is much less likely to happen or be as severe.  But I have had 3 or 4 staples break in the process.  If they are fairly rusted it's likely to happen.  But I figure better to wreck a staple than a printed page.  I've replaced them with modern staples that are the exact same size so they can fit in the same holes.

I'm sure there are many who cringe at the idea but I've always thought of it as the lesser of two evils.  But I also only did it on books that were FAR FAR from high grade!  Narfstar is correct about digital camera scans being less harmful to the book but nobody would say the scans are nearly as sharp or readable as a 'true' scan.  But nobody expect anyone to destroy their prized books for the sake of others.  Those who do risk their books on the scanner bed - We Salute You!!   

Good luck with any future scans Rez!
-Yoc

[darwination]

I'm a staple puller, too.  I use micropliers and my finger nail to carefully extract staples and then very carefully reinsert them when done scanning.  I feel this approach actually damages the spine far less than the flipping back and forth and such.  I have caused damage with this method of course but most of the time it goes very smoothly.  Pulling staples also allows for a perfectly flat scan, less risk of damage to the scanner glass, and for a wider crop on poorly printed pages.

I'm not a collector and buy to scan, so I'm pretty cool with all this.  The rule of thumb seems to be that a comic will drop a grade when you scan it.  This is probably true for higher grade comics but often a 2.0 is still a 2.0 when you get done with it.  The added bonus is that you can now read your comic, repeatedly, without fussing over getting it out or hurting it when reading it.  Not to mention that one good scan keeps the rest of the world from having to pull theirs out to read em.  Im a HUGE enemy of those CGC things and consider paper a vessel.  I watch ebay enough to know that you just don't see issues too often of a lot of these comics, so now's the time.

Thanks for scanning your comic for us, if you scan more you'll learn how to handle them a lot better.  I do far less damage to my comics, pulps, and books in scanning now that when I began not too long ago .

[Yoc]

Nicely said Darwination.
I find myself agreeing with you on most of your points both here and in the scanning styles thread.
A big thank-you for all the great work you've shared with everyone here!

[cimmerian32]

Ghost Comics #9...  bought it as a VG from Metropolis...  when I opened it at the centerfold, in order to scan the cover, the entire spine broke, the staples fell out, and I had a pile of loose leaf pages...  ended up selling it (with an accurate description, and pictures showing the loose nature of the thing) for around 30.00 anyway...  once a book becomes brittle, in any way, it is only a poor copy, regardless of how nice it might look...  something that many dealers refuse to accept   But, it made a DAMN fine scan 

Cimm

[rez]

Alas tho' the hours grow late, as I reread the thread of this horrid memory and ponder the thoughts of jco, narf, aussie, yoc, darwin and cimmerian I could do not but retrieve my KO KOMICS from it's casketed tomb to revisit the analysis of the grade since attentiveness to detail was not in the forefront of my thoughts at that moment of dire transgression.

So here I sit with tome in hand
to study yet again... again.

The definition of browning to brittleness before given in an intended offhand way not meant to specify that particular of a detail has seemingly come full circle to a presentation as truth which gives me cause to cry once more.

Tho' the cover retains a goodly amount of gloss and pliabilty with a definite lack of browning in comparison to the interior pages the results of those interior pages are not so positive to report.

I see now that those interior pages do have a strong browning and edge brittleness which before was easy to glance over the seriousness of it since the book itself with the solid cover and tightness of the staple presented itself as an old but still solid book.

The removal of the staple certain was akin to the opening Pandora's box as the 4 outer pages of the spine being weakened by the rough handling of the antistaple maniac caused the separation of the spine on those pages.
and it would not be that hard to see it continue thru the rest of the pages I fear.

It is interesting to see the exterior cover paper's strength in comparison to the interior, the interior weaknesses must just being due inherent to age and average general exposure, the  paper quality at manufacture probably not being worth bragging rights in the first place.

I suppose I have now calmed enough since time heals all wounds to carry a more level re-evaluation of the episode.
The fact that I took a readable book, ie meaning on which could be held in hand, pages turned, albeit with much care, and replaced in it's mylar seemingly unscathed

and ended up with four loose split pages and an unstapled book cannot be looked at in any way except a boner move. The fact that it containing a Kirby cover and a designation of scarce 20 to 100 copies in existance doesn't help the matter any

but I have resolved the issue somewhat in that the book being defective to start with removes a certain portion of the pain so the heart does not bleed quite so profusely as at first

and the balm provided by the peers does promote a certain soothing coolness so I may speak in thanks to you all for your attentiveness.




HEY, we all love these things or what?? A book like this is going to retain some value regardless of who mucked it up so i'll just chalk it all up to experience and have a better go at it next time!

So back it goes to it's mylar complete with a little spec of paper floating there. If it ever comes back out again it will be for trade or sale purpose I surmise.

Cheers
and long live all scanners.
 

[citaltras]

Thanks a lot for your scan, rez.

With the downloaded copy of KO Comics 01 before my eyes,
I can follow better your horror story...in images.
First the staple can be seen  on the cover page, displaced from the spine position.
Then the tear when opening  the inside cover can be clearly seen.
And finally the staple removed and the tears in the rest of the pages.

The only suggestion I have for the next time you dare to scan another of your oldies
is that you use higher resolution, perhaps 200 or 300 ppi.
Your scan is fine, but it is good to keep a high resolution copy
if further adjustments to the image are needed.
You can keep a copy at 300 ppi for you,
and post your scan at 200 ppi saved as mid quality jpg files.

[rez]

The Web of Mystery 12 I filed yesterday was kept at 300ppi throughout.
Was it any better?

[Yoc]

Nicely done Rez.
Keep up the great work!

[rez]

Nicely done Rez.
Keep up the great work!

Well, I have a confession to make.

When I'm going thru my books looking to pick the next scan,
I notice I shy away from my higher grade stuff.

That and I look at the 64 pagers and go on looking for a 32.

Need to work on that.

snorK*

[octal]

Rez, thanks for what you are doing. Keep up the good work, practice makes perfect! 

As to rusty staples, I vote for taking them out. Because of the chemical reaction going on, leaving them in will probably cause more damage and subsequent devaluation than taking them out.

octal

[citaltras]

The Web of Mystery 12 I filed yesterday was kept at 300ppi throughout.
Was it any better?

Rez: thanks for your scan of Web of Mystery 12, but the copy I downloaded from the site
is still 150 ppi and not 300 ppi as you mentioned.
Otherwise the width of the pages would be larger than 1024 pixels,
as shown to me on photoshop.

[rez]

I had kept the 300ppi on the first preview scan and also on the final scan to save.
The ppi wouldn't have been altered in the resize to 1024 would it?


Want to present the best scan possible with the tools I'm using so I need whatever help I can gather.

The Web of Mystery 12 I filed yesterday was kept at 300ppi throughout.
Was it any better?

Rez: thanks for your scan of Web of Mystery 12, but the copy I downloaded from the site
is still 150 ppi and not 300 ppi as you mentioned.
Otherwise the width of the pages would be larger than 1024 pixels,
as shown to me on photoshop.

[Yoc]

Hi citaltras,
If you check you'll see the story pages are all at 300dpi.  *confirmed in PhotoShop 7*
The cov,ifc are at 96dpi.

-Yoc

[rez]

Ah, that would explain it.
I must have been adjusting something using the cover, later saw those scans sitting there and used them for the final presentation. Maybe, i dunno.

Those various size folders containing that book are all mixed together in their own folder so I wouldn't be sure which I had used at the time.



Details, details.
It's all in the details.

[Yoc]

No harm done Rez.
For a newbie you're learning at a fantastic rate.  Better than I did.
Hang in there buddy, it's all good.

[citaltras]

Hi citaltras,
If you check you'll see the story pages are all at 300dpi.  *confirmed in PhotoShop 7*
The cov,ifc are at 96dpi.

-Yoc

Hi Yoc.
I should had said before, when I talk about comic scan resolution,
that I always resize first the images to the actual page size of the original comic.
Now, the original of Web of Mystery #12 is 17.34 cm wide (or 6.827 inches).
If you scan at 150 ppi, that means 1024 pixels wide (= 150 * 6.827).

According to Photoshop CS, the cover is 96ppi, but the width is 10.667, so the number
of pixels is still 1024  (= 96 * 10.667 ). Therefore, if you resize to the actual width,
without resampling, you obtain the same resolution 150 ppi.

Finally, page 1 has 300 ppi, but now it has a width = 3.413 (half of the original).
Hence 1024 pixels again ( = 300 * 3.413 ).

Hence all the pages have 1024 pixels wide and have the same resolution 150 ppi
when normalized to the same, original comic size of 6.827 inches.

[rez]

citaltras,
I just rescanned the cover of WebOfMysteryNo.12 the same way I did before with ArcSoftPhotoStudio2000 and saved as .jpg after using the dotted line 'Selects the rectangular area for scanning' function on the perimeter of the book.

I have placed two copies of that same scan in a folder and used winzip to zip the folder and

have uploaded that zipped folder containing the two copies into the FTP in my rez folder.

The first copy is resized to 1024x1530 after it was scanned at 300dpi and resizing from the original 2096 to 1024 using Irfanview.

The Irfanview data window during the save has a DPI box showing 300.

The other copy was saved also using the 300DPI showing in the box but leaving the 2096x3132 unchanged.


Ok, I just rescanned the cover yet again as before only this time before zipping I did not run it thru the Irfanview resizer and zipped the raw 3.44 from the scanner instead for comparison purposes.

That file is in the zip folder with the word 'unprocessed' in the title.

[citaltras]

Thanks, Rez.
I think that you are losing quality due to the use of inadequate irfanview  parameters
when resizing. I am going to examine your scans and will  send you a PM