I may not be entirely qualified to chime in as I don't own an "industrial strength" scanner, but imo, if your time is better spent scanning instead of editing, just scan. You have to remember, for those of us with slower, mundane scanners, we have the time during scans to perform edits, so why not? But given the scanning horsepower at your disposal, I don't think the usual should apply. If you have the capacity to scan/upload even three or four unedited issues for every one edited issue, it's to the benefit of Preservation for you to spend your time scanning instead of editing. Personally, I prefer aligned pages only because I read most digital mags via tablet anymore and mis-alignments are noticeable. But it's not a deal breaker. As KiwiArcader mentioned, as long as your scans are optimized for preservation in most other regards (DPI, etc), these type of edits can always be performed after the fact (i.e. after the initial upload). Don't get me wrong - I greatly appreciate RetroMags' attention to detail in archiving quality scans. I've found mag scans via other sites where standards are almost non-existent, with scans blurry, misaligned to the point of lost content, etc. But when you compare RetroMags' current rate of preservation versus the backlog (which increases every time the cutoff date is adjusted), it's fair to say there is a very long, long way to go. And given physical mags exist in less and less numbers every day, I'm all for your "picking up the pace" and letting alignment/margin edits become secondary if it means more preserved content. 'Course, the final decision is up to RetroMags as to what scans they want to host. A compromise may be an "edit queue" of sorts, where your scans can be made available to editors before they're officially posted to the site. Essentially, that "call for editors" you mentioned - let others in the community step up and assist in editing scans to "RetroMag Certified" standards, so to speak.