Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/23/2025 in all areas
-
I have every single issue of this title. Game Player's began as a single mag which alternated between Nintendo and PC issues. This was VOLUME 1: Game Player's Nintendo Buyer's Guide Vol. 1 No. 1 (this issue was also sold under the title The Game Player's Guide to Nintendo) The Game Player's Guide to MS-DOS Computer Games Vol. 1 No. 2 Game Player's Nintendo Strategy Guide Vol.1 No.3 (this issue was also sold under the title Game Player's Strategy Guide to Nintendo Games) Game Player's MS-DOS Strategy Guide Vol. 1 No. 4 Following Volume 1, GP split into two separate magazines, one for Nintendo and one for PC. When they made this split, each mag started over with a new Vol. 1. However, they quickly changed their mind and switched to Volume 2. The PC mag published just one issue under the 2nd "Volume 1" heading - the issue above. After this issue, the next one was "Volume 2 issue 2." So while this issue SAYS Vol. 1 No. 1 on the cover, it was retroactively treated as Vol. 2 No. 1 just a couple of months later. Whether we list it as Vol. 1 No. 1 or Vol. 2 No. 1 in the DB is debatable, since either way is likely to confuse people: If we list it as Vol. 1 No. 1, people will wonder why Vol. 1 No. 1 came out 6 months AFTER Vol. 1 No. 2. They'll also wonder why there is no Vol. 2 No. 1. If we list it as Vol. 2 No. 1, people will wonder why it says Vol. 1 No. 1 on the cover. I think the second way is better, though. Either way will require an explanatory note in the DB listing, but listing it as Vol. 2 No. 1 is simpler, and is also technically correct since that is what the mag was retroactively considered to be by the publisher. Btw, the GP Nintendo mag is even worse, since they published TWO issues under the 2nd "Volume 1" before changing their mind and switching to Volume 2. So while Vol. 1 of the Nintendo mag is the exact same 4 issues as Vol. 1 of the PC mag, Vol.2 goes like this: Game Player's Buyer's Guide to Nintendo Games Vol. 1 No. 1 Game Player's Nintendo Strategy Guide Vol.1 No.2 Game Player's Strategy Guide to Nintendo Games Vol.2 No.3 ...at which point it continues normally (Vol. 2 No. 4, etc) So while there are no Nintendo mags with "Vol. 2 No 1" or "Vol. 2 No. 2" actually printed on the cover, the above 2 issues were retroactively considered to be the first two issues of Vol. 2. This confused everyone here TO NO END for quite literally DECADES. But with the help of the VGHF, combined with the fact that I've finally got copies of all the mags in question, the mysterious beginnings of the Game Player's series is finally understood. It doesn't make the databases look any less confusing at a glance, though LOL. They obviously had no idea anyone would care about this 36/37 years in the future.2 points
-
1 point
-
He's the other DB Mod. Back in the day it was me and him, but then he sort of stopped contributing (he very infrequently logs in anymore) and so Migjmz was promoted. Then I left the site, making Migjmz essentially the ONLY db mod. I got banned for taking a break from the site, and stripped of my permissions, but RetroDefense is still technically a DB mod, even if he hasn't done any DB modding since before you joined the site.1 point
-
1 point
-
I'm just speaking of my own personal opinion and preferences, but I believe it's best to ignore any and all scanner settings which will alter the image in any way. That's what Photoshop is for. If someone doesn't want to be bothered editing their scans afterwards and just wants to release whatever pops out of their scanner "as is," then that's what those scanner options are for. It's perhaps telling that more expensive scanners usually don't even offer such options. Scans are meant to be fixed in the editing process. If you try to do it in the scanning process, you're basically tossing out some of the image data and severely limiting what you have to work with if you decide to edit it. For example, I took your second pic (the one you didn't care for) and in less than a minute in Photoshop, you can easily remove the bleedthrough and whiten the page: If I started with the first pic (the one where your scanner altered the image), there would have been nothing much I could do to it. If the scanner decided to lighten or darken things too much, there's less you can do to fix it afterwards, since the loss or destruction of image data happened at the scanning stage. Scanning things as close to the original page as possible gives you much more control during editing.1 point
-
Sure we can delete it, I was doing some search on eBay and I came across someone selling it. I do not have this issue, I just put the image there as a temporary image so we know what this magazine looks like. The cover says Vol. 1 No. 1 , but what you are actually saying it’s Vol. 2 No.1 ? I’m really glad you have it.1 point
-
Posting an image in 48-bit color isn't going to get a lot of helpful responses, since most people don't own a display capable of showing it. The human eye can't perceive the additional colors it allows anyway, so a 24-bit scan should look identical to a 48-bit color scan. The only potential advantage a 48-bit scan has is during editing. Since there are more colors to work with (even though you can't see them), there are a broader range of colors that can be accentuated and brought into the visual range by manipulating color controls in editing software. So if you're a professional-level Photoshop user, you might be able to manipulate a scan to get better results from a 48-bit scan than you could from a 24-bit scan. For normal people like us, 24-bit is best. I don't have your scanner, but I'm guessing that the difference between "photo" or "document" is just a fancy way of selecting the DPI, and if you were to change the DPI afterwards, you'd essentially be scanning under a "custom" setting. Neither scanner I own makes this kind of distinction. Descreening is a fancy way of saying "blurring." Magazines have a visible ink dot pattern created by the printing process. If you're zoomed WAY in, you can see it. Descreening blurs the image to the point that the ink dots blend together, creating the illusion of a more solid color, at the expense of, well, making everything blurry. Descreening is always bad for black text (which have no color ink dots to blur) but CAN make certain images more visually pleasing. However, not all images or pages in a magazine are printed with the same print screen. Allowing your scanner to descreen every page identically without any fine control over the process is...perhaps a bit reckless. It's hard to say what results you'll get, so I guess it's up for you to decide. Another option that will allow you far more control over the descreening process is to buy a descreening filter like Sattva for Photoshop.1 point
-
1 point
-
114 downloads
"kitsunebi edition" is a label reserved for scans I release which are superior in some way to scans already available here, but in essence, ALL of my scans are "kitsunebi editions," since I always do my best to make my scans look as good as I can. That doesn't mean that all scans require the same amount of effort, of course. A mag in good shape printed on quality paper will be a much faster edit than a damaged mag printed on cheap, yellowed paper stock. And paper stock doesn't come much cheaper than these early Game Player's titles. So this certainly took as much time and effort to edit as any other "kitsunebi edition." But it's not really the aged paper that makes editing these such a hassle, it's the primitive and poorly reproduced screenshots throughout. This mag is from the era where magazine screenshots were made by pointing a camera at a TV/monitor, and without a carefully controlled environment, every single photo seems to have a different hue and brightness caused by the varying lighting conditions under which it was taken. This often necessitates editing each screenshot on a page separately, since, for example, something meant to be white is yellow in one screenshot, light blue in another, and a dull grey in a third. The end result isn't going to fool anyone into thinking this is a high budget mag from the 90s, but it's still the best this issue has ever looked.1 point -
Sorry, my debinding video seems to have been taken down (and I no longer have a copy), but you can see lots of information about debinding here: https://www.retromags.com/forums/topic/10584-de-binding-with-a-heat-gun/ As for scanning, 300dpi is pretty much the max size for mags released here (exact pixel height depends on the mag, but probably around 3200-3300 for American mags). I scan at 600dpi and make a 300dpi copy for this site (some people release mags here at a height of 2200 pixels, which is around 200dpi and is the mimimum recommended size.) Since you're using a flatbed scanner, though, you probably want to scan at 300, since scanning at 600 on a flatbed is sloooow. Once the mag/guide is scanned, there are editing guides in our help section. I personally disagree with a lot of the specifics in there and think everyone is better off finding their own techniques, but if you're completely clueless, it's a place to start.1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point