Does anyone have any concern for the size of pictures in articles? I am writing an article about ads from old comic books. One part of my appreciation for them comes from the cheap processes and materials used. You can where two colors were overlaid. Some of them also have smudgy ink and very small lettering. It is easier to see that quality well on a computer screen if the image is very large, and I like to be able to read everything and see the halftone dots. I have scanned some pages at high resolution for my personal archive, but for an article here, 2000x3000 pixels is surely overkill. Some images could be cropped, but other ads used a full page. I think 1000x1500 pixels is a decent compromise. Does anyone else feel that is still too large?
Quote by tangspot2
Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch
I'm not sure it matters. Beyond a certain size the image size gets reformatted anyways. Cosgrove just did an amazing article on comic ads, might wanna check it out.
Cosgrove just did an amazing article on comic ads, might wanna check it out.
Now that you mention it, I did see that a bit ago. Funny. I started scanning these in February, although wasn't reading RJ at the time. Maybe the notion of an article did come from that, though. I'll more be doing ads from 70s and 80s books. I don't have much taste for the ones from the 90s, even though I was certainly reading them at the time.
Quote by Mezase_Master
1295x31.
seems a bit off...
Quote by tangspot2
Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch