same site.declined again

RawAlex · 2003-09-12, 04:32 PM

http://xxx-mans.com/anal/1/content/022.jpg

Same thing still - still that "unregister version" thing on the top, and still horrible flaring / brightness stepping on the image itself. Rather than a smooth flesh tone, you have a target effect, rings of color tone.

It would appear that the number of colors in the picture is too low, and the compression WAY too high.

Unless forbidden by your license, I would trim them down to get rid of the borders and disclaimer text, which would drop the image size down a little bit. The original images are a bit over exposed to start with, and agressive compression just makes them flare and get ugly. Remember, these are 35MM photos scanned from the slides or whatever about 10 years ago. Technology has gone a long way since!

Alex

2003-09-12, 04:32 PM	#18
RawAlex Took the hint. Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,597	http://xxx-mans.com/anal/1/content/022.jpg Same thing still - still that "unregister version" thing on the top, and still horrible flaring / brightness stepping on the image itself. Rather than a smooth flesh tone, you have a target effect, rings of color tone. It would appear that the number of colors in the picture is too low, and the compression WAY too high. Unless forbidden by your license, I would trim them down to get rid of the borders and disclaimer text, which would drop the image size down a little bit. The original images are a bit over exposed to start with, and agressive compression just makes them flare and get ugly. Remember, these are 35MM photos scanned from the slides or whatever about 10 years ago. Technology has gone a long way since! Alex