Lifetime Patron
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About Ferneu

  • Rank
    Expert Member

Profile Information

  • Favorite Current Generation Platform?
    Xbox 360
  1. WOW! "the first issue of EGM is actually Buyers Guide. Which in turn is not the really the first issue because EGP came before it. And if you dig a little bit deeper you will also notice ... and ... and ... and therefore we can safely conclude that Steve Harris shot Kennedy and knows where Hoffa was burried." Thanks for all the help. You guys are awesome! PS: you guys just gave me a lot of cool information and I was going to suggest the creation of a new field in the database where things like this could be added. Then I went to the database entry itself and saw that there is already a "Notable Stuff" item inside the contents and, had I read that before creating this topic, I would have saved us all a lot of typing PS2: in my defense, I thought the contents of the... contents would have only... the contents. You tricked me! PS3: if you were asking me, I'd vote to separate the "Notable Stuff" in a new field, instead of leaving it inside the "Contents." Anyway, I'm glad all those cool tidbits exist and are associated with the magazine itself inside the DB, now that I know where to look for it...
  2. I was reading EGM #1 and, even though there is no number in the cover or anywhere else, it seems to keep reffering to itself as if was issue #2. And the last page literally says "strap yourself in for the next invasion as the third issue of Eletronic Gaming Montly hits the stands..." So, is it really issue #1? Or is it #2. Maybe the magazine changed names between #1 and #2 and that is the cause of the confusion? If so, anyone knows the name the previous issue was published as?
  3. Just try to make sure what exactly is being saved inside those TIFFs. Because a TIFF is pretty much a container, i.e., think of it as a zip, rar or pdf file. It can store lossless images, which is what we need in order to test other formats, like webp (just to make kitsunebi mad) but it can also store jpgs. So, unless you are careful, you may end up with just a TIFF that simply contains a jpg inside of it Anyway, if you are not sure, just scan one page and send the TIFF to me. I can check it out and tell you what is going on inside of it. As for the whole dpi/ppi discussion, I am with kitsunebi. Don't get me wrong, I am all for perfect preservation, and if increasing the scanning resolution would get more data from the pages, I would say go for it. Even if it is just to upload it somewhere else, somewhere that can store those giant files, and then downscale it again so it can be uploaded here. But if kitsunebi tests are accurate, then it seems 300somethingPI is more than enough. If you guys are already capturing all the data in the page, increasing the resolution will only give us bigger files. I believe this is what kitsunebi is trying to say - if you take a lens or use your super vision to look at the magazine page and you see the following dots RWGWB And then you look at the image you scanned and see exactly the same colored dots, then it means you've already captured all the data that was available on that page. Increasing the resolution will only result in RRWWGGWWBB Which is just the same information. So you will just be wasting disk space without adding anything. Now, if your high-resolution scans can somehow capture additional information, then go for it. The "how horrible early scanned images look today on our bigger monitors" concern is valid, but only if the scans did not capture all the information. If they did, then it is just a matter of telling your image viewer software to resize the image, in case it is too small. No need to pre-upscale them. It will only waste disk space. And remember that CSI software is magic and not available in the real world - if the information is not there, it won't appear. I bet the CSI image viewer is capable of showing the numbers of those cards in those Duke Nukem pictures...
  4. I didn't know your scanner only supported jpg as the output format. That would have saved us a lot of typing I was assuming it was possible to choose the output format of the scanned image. Only then testing other formats would make any sense. It is just like you said - if source the image already has all the compression artifacts, in the best case scenario the only thing we could hope to achieve would be reducing the file size. But the most likely scenario would be us just making it look even worse. Unless, of course, we had that magical piece of software they use on CSI which can stretch a 2x2 pixel image to 4K and then allow them to zoom in and see things on a molecular level
  5. your fingers type "no", but I know your heart is saying"yes" please understand that I am not trying to force you to change your workflow and, in case it is not clear, let me tell you how much your efforts are appreciated. Please, PLEASE, don't take this conversation the wrong way. With that out of the way, here is how you could perform some tests: after editing your scans on Photoshop, you could use the official cwebp to convert your raws (PNG maybe?) to webp. It is quite simple to use. As simple as cwebp -q 80 image.png -o image.webp Then, since your image viewer does not support webp, you could use a browse to view the resulting image. And then you could try different "quality" values, instead of that 80 I used as an example and compare the results. Please note that I am not trying to enforce webp as a new standard or anything like that. In fact, I don't even know if it will produce better results. But since you are worried about the readability of your scans, I thought, well, why not suggest it to him. At least he would have an extra tool in his arsenal, instead of simply "brute-forcing" giant resolutions while sticking to outdated formats. I also would like to add that I really appreciate your efforts. I am studying Japanese right now and I do agree that non-natives have a hard time with kanjis that are not perfectly crystal clear. Heck, we already have a hard time when we can clearly identify the bloody pictogram PS: may I ask the name of the software you use to view images? I thought most of them had support for webp by now. It is only 10 years old. It is older than your Photoshop hehe!
  6. @E-Day it was either you or him (the one I asked), but I don't remember right now. Anyway, the reason I suggested kitsunebi to give it a try, instead of asking him to give me some raw samples, is that right now I am nowhere near a machine where I can perform the tests. But I promise to bother you guys again later. I just gotta see how those "new" encoders perform. Even if they are never accepted, I still got to do it. For the science!!! @kitsunebi I understand what you are saying. But then again, if nobody ever uses a newer format and always stick with jpg, nobody will ever feel the need to add support to anything other than jpgs in their apps. But then again (inside a "but then again" :)), I remember Google tried to push webp by making it the default on Chrome, and people rejected it like plague (for the same reasons you gave which, don't get me wrong, are quite reasonable). So, if even Google couldn't convince people, who am I to try In the end it is just like the gif plague. Pretty much every browser support something better, but some people keep insisting on uploading gigabytes of low-res 8bit animations that could have been easily replaced by high-res 24bpp formats that use 10x less bandwidth. PS: maybe you could give webp another try? Even if you are not going to use it, just to see how it fares. You are already doing a bunch of tests...
  7. This might be a good case to test "newer" compression formats. Maybe some of them can improve the 2200px quality, or maybe give us a 6000+px scan a smaller size. Sometime ago I asked one uploader for raw files so I could run some tests. Either he forgot or I somehow missed his reply. Anyway, may I suggest you give formats like webP, FLIF and HEIF a try? Some of them support both lossy and lossless compression. I'd test both.
  8. Heh, after 20 years using WinAmp 2.95 to listen music on my computer, I still want to use only WinAmp 2.95 to listen music on my computer. Small, consumes something about 0MB of RAM, native, does pretty much everything I want to, has plugins for FLAC and for game ROMs music. Another great point about WinAmp 2.95 is that it is probably the only software ever created that does not use the "standard" Windows dialog "skin" and do not suck. Have I mentioned how awesome I think WinAmp 2.95 is?
  9. I have to agree. I mean, DKR, Banjo Kazooie and Perfect Dark were great. The awesomeness of Conker's Bad Fur Day alone should be enough to make people cry when Rare left. Jet Force Gemini is still on my "to play" list, but I bet it is awesome too. About Mario Party, they were awesome. But I refused to play because I wanted my controllers intact. I'll wait until somebody invents an unbreakable controller.
  10. Yes!!!! In the matter of fact, it was because of that very first torrent that I found out about this site, back in the day. Thanks!!!
  11. Truer words have never been said. And by the way, did I see Star Fox 2 on the list of games? Was it ever released officially, back in the day?
  12. Ha! That is tough! And if there is one thing I admire in those systems pre-internet is that, despite maybe the Amiga case hehe, the developers did provide some solid pieces of software. Yes, there may be a few glitches here and there, but 99.99% of the time you could finish the game just the way it was intended. Nowadays you buy a blu-ray with the game and have download another 50GB worth of bug fixes. May I just ask one favor? Even though you did not spoil anything, I think if we always put everything except the game name inside a spoiler tag will help to prevent others from making a mistake and ruining something for a person who have not played a game yet.
  13. Ah, let me just make one thing clear: I think Metal Gear, despite the flaws I mentioned, is great. Also, my condolences for you map. I do stupid stuff like that from time to time I do not know if it is the first game of its genre (I think I read once the series creator mentioning the ideas came from an older game), but I would have loved to be able to play it back in the days. I would probably get stuck a lot earlier because, as you have probably noticed, English is not my first language and back in the NES days I had zero knowledge of it. But the whole sneak in instead of shooting everything, getting items and using them, an open world you could go anywhere instead of just moving from left to right... it was just so different, so awesome. About the game map, it was available on several magazines I had, and after I played the game I was able to find it while searching for the manual. Since it was full of "KONAMI tm" here and, I assumed it came with the game. But exploring and discovering stuff is something I really like to do, so using that map would have spoiled everything. But yes, the map would have helped a lot, and if you question my kindness towards the game let me remind you that I even let out of my rant the part where there is no way to know which weapon is effective against each type of enemy Anyway, I am going to edit my post in order to make it clear that my idea was just to discuss and talk about the flaws of the games. It was never meant to be a "I hate this game because of this" post.
  14. Lets expose those broken games that made us spend hours and hours trying to find out what we were supposed to do. The only thing I ask is that you put everything inside a spoiler tag, leaving only the system and game name outside. This way people will be able to avoid reading a spoiler about a game they have not played yet. EDIT: in order to avoid any confusion, please do not read these posts as "I hate this game because of this". The truth is quite the opposite: some of these games are awesome. Metal Gear is a great example of that. I think it is awesome. The ideas they used in the game are great, just not executed as good as they could have been. Was it the developers fault? As a system developer I must say that I think it probably wasn't. Sometimes in order to meet a certain deadline the higher management decides to sacrifice quality, and that is exactly what I think happened here. So... rant away without fear! Tell the world about that jump on TMNT's level 3, express your feelings towards whoever had the tornado idea in Castlevania 2 and, if possible, send me the address of the guy who though executing the (Alex Kid In High Tech World for Master System spoiler) Metal Gear for the NES