marktrade

I received word back from a color calibration professional saying that a standard IT8 photo paper target will correct most color faults in scanners, especially ADF scanners, which typically have a greater color fault as they are usually made for speed and not quality. Because photo paper dyes are different from offset printing dyes used in magazines, there will be a "metamerism fault" in the resulting color profile, but this fault is preferred to not having a profile at all. I'm told that while this fault is often visible, it is much more easily corrected manually than the faults inherent in the scanner. I'm interested to see what this looks like. He gave me a lot more technical information which I still have to parse and research, particularly regarding problems that might occur during profiling, what software to use and how to use it, but basically the answer is using a photo paper target is a lot better than not calibrating at all. It's good to see you JohnSmith! It took a lot of trial and error but so far I find the best technique with the heat gun is to point it at the page near the binding, so as not to melt all the glue, just loosen the point which the paper is attached, and then pull the sheet perpendicular to the binding and parallel to all the other sheets. I experienced a lot of problems earlier by pulling pages apart opposite one another. I think it's possible making a color profile for our scanners could be very helpful. I'll learn more and report back.

Okay, I ordered an IT8 target on the cheap off eBay and made a few more inquiries. I'll work on page separation until then. I'm heading into a super busy weekend at work and wouldn't have been able to scan much anyway.

Well the thing is if you scan a color target sheet and create a color profile for your scanner, then in theory you should be able to automatically correct any other scan you've ever done. I read in some places that professionals re-calibrate their scanners every few months or so just in case but I also read that scanners tend to be durable. Color correction should be a quick and automatic process if done properly. I think.

Calibration targets are apparently very expensive. Ideally the sheet should be made of the same material as whatever you're scanning. There are many different kinds of magazine paper and I'm unable to find a calibration sheet for any kind. If I called a magazine printer they might be able to help but they're probably not cheap. Most of what's out there commercially is for slide and film scanners but there are some for reflective photo paper. I'm looking at one that costs 300 bucks. Just for a sheet of colors! Although there's a re-seller in Germany who buys them in bulk and then sells them individually at a discount. I really don't know how calibrating for color on photo paper will affect scans of magazine paper. It might help. I'll keep looking.

Well you guys I'm learning as I go, but it looks like what professionals to do is scan a test sheet of colors called a "target" provided by some company specializing in color standards like Kodak or Fuji. Then, through special automated software that compares the scan to how it should look, they create a color profile that automatically adjusts every other scan. Or they do what I just did and manually look for adjustments, except I didn't scan a target. I found an old page that reviews targets from different companies and makes some recommendations. In the end using a substandard target is still better than not using one at all. http://www.computer-darkroom.com/it8cal/it8_page_1.htm I really should get on that.

I suppose it comes down to the color temperature of the scanner's light source. Even different models of the same bulb can emit cooler or warmer light than another, and that will cause more blues or fewer reds to reflect back from a magazine. I made a few selective color adjustments to see if I could match JohnSmith's scan just to see if it could even be done in principle. I think I got pretty close.

Here's a photo from my iPhone 5s under my kitchen's fluorescent light followed by a photo taken near my window with late afternoon natural light, for another look.

Here is one of my scans from issue 22 of Next Generation followed by one from JohnSmith for comparison. I have to admit his colors are more accurate, but they are a little oversaturated in the other direction. The real color is somewhere in between, but closer to his. But I did manage to scan the whole page and line two of them up so they connect almost perfectly. My scans are not perfect and people would be wise to hold on to JohnSmith's scans because they are excellent. I still want to make my own.

Next issue of MacAddict: https://archive.org/details/MacAddict002Oct1996 The two-page spreads in this magazine look like they'll come together nicely.

Original post updated with verified and complete list!

I was reading through the whole magazine and when I got to that page, I thought, "that's something Areala would do—and do very well."

Hey, I found you!

Usually the curators wait until we have a verified complete listing of all the issues released under a certain title before even making database entries. It's a long project, but hopefully someday. It the meantime, if you're downloading from my archive.org page, be sure to click on "Comic Book RAR" in the download options. That will download the original file I put together so you can read it offline.

His scans are very good, much better than the earlier issues. Their resolution is good (over 2600 px tall), the colors look mostly on point and the pages are all straightened, but his double-page graphic spreads could use some work and he doesn't have the spines. Some of my old scans are like that too. I'll want to update my own scans someday to include spines and repaired double page spreads. I look at some of the Official Dreamcast scans I made last year and I regret being so rough and sloppy with page separation. It just didn't occur to me that I needed more patience and practice with the heat gun.

Definitely better resolution. I scan and edit at 600 DPI. I'll be separating the pages with a heat gun and getting closer alignment on those double page ads. It looks like the old scanners used a cutter. Since I have an A3 scanner, I can scan the entire cover piece front and back and capture the continuous art that Next Generation often had on its covers, including the spine, which the old scans do not have. The colors will be more accurate. The old scans have pale blues where there should be whites and bright bleeding reds where the red should be more subtle, probably the result of a really cheap color enhancement filter that uses red to draw attention. If you compare my scan of issue 1 with the old one, a good example of that is the double page ad on pages 68 and 69. My colors aren't perfect either but they're significantly closer to the actual page. Then there's the simple fact that my scans are properly credited. I mean here we are talking about these old scans and we don't even know who made them. All we have is, "didn't JohnSmith scan of them?" Yeah, I guess. Scanning all the magazines would allow me to share all of them in one complete collection without having to ask permission or have someone someday say "hey I scanned that!" and then make demands on me, or contain any splash pages or credit pages, a collection that is already primed to be replaced in the future by full quality 600 DPI versions of itself, and one that I can look at without ever ever having to wonder if I could have made it better if I scanned it myself.

I think I now see the genius behind Phillyman sending me those magazines to scan. He knows that anything I scan is fair game for you to put on OGM. And thus peace is maintained. Well played, Phillyman.

Well, Sega did drop out of the console market in 2001, and since this was the official magazine for the console, it would make sense for the magazine to end around the same time. But you're right that ultimately it is just a wiki.

I saw that double page ad and remembering this thread thought whoa "mature" is right.

Next issue is done! https://archive.org/details/GPPCEVol5No3

You'll never be able to convince me it's a waste of time, that's for sure! I mean, I have some nice scanning equipment. Why not use it to scan my favorite magazine? That's all this is about.

Oh, sorry! Well yeah of course it was me, lol. Duh.

I think we just have different priorities when it comes to scanning. That's a good thing. I don't know why you "waste time" removing every small speck of a dust from every page, but evidently it's not a waste of time to you. We're all better off for it. Everybody gets to share in something they wouldn't have provided themselves otherwise.

Are you sure it was edited? I uploaded an unedited version to archive.org and finally edited it today to get it off the back burner.

This monthly from Famitsu was also the official Sega Dreamcast magazine in Japan. According to SegaRetro there were 32 dated issues and one special issue for 33 issues in total. The official numbering starts with the year and then the issue number for that particular year, starting with #1999/01 for January 1999. So issue #2000/03 would be March 2000 and the 15th issue published. If we were to number them sequentially, it would look like this: 01 - Jan 99 02 - Feb 99 03 - Mar 99 04 - Apr 99 05 - May 99 06 - Jun 99 07 - Jul 99 08 - Aug 99 09 - Sep 99 10 - Oct 99 11 - Nov 99 12 - Dec 99 13 - Jan 00 14 - Feb 00 15 - Mar 00 16 - Apr 00 17 - May 00 18 - Jun 00 19 - Jul 00 20 - Aug 00 21 - Sep 00 22 - Oct 00 23 - Nov 00 24 - Dec 00 25 - Jan 01 26 - Feb 01 27 - Mar 01 28 - Special issue 29 - Apr 01 30 - May 01 31 - Jun 01 32 - Jul 01 33 - Aug 01 And it just so happens that I've scanned and edited the penultimate issue, July 2001. https://archive.org/details/FamitsuDC200107 Enjoy!