Post #2958909

2026-05-08 00:08 UTC

@outofprintarchive@retro.pizza Don't forget there's always APNG. It never really particularly took off, but things will accept it as a PNG and then browsers should render it as animated automatically. Not sure what the best tools for it are. If no serious processing has to be done, ffmpeg can just output right to a .apng (and then you can rename to .png for compatibility.) I honestly feel like the one on the left looks sharper. But, too much so really. They definitely left a lot of noise in that probably should have been cleaned up — which is probably part of why it's so much bigger too (noise compresses worse.) Take a look at the top middle image of that vertical building/ship/whatever. Some of the gradient and shadow is lost on the right.

Replies (1)

@outofprintarchive@retro.pizza 2026-05-08 08:08

@nazokiyoubinbou@urusai.social Everything is a balancing act. The reason there seems to be more detail is because those scans haven't been descreened so they add an extra pattern to the page as a whole. Gaming Alexandria, who I myself view as the best outlet for quality scans put together a great tutorial, since I'm to busy/lazy to put it all down on paper. Not to mention how every setup, be that scanner, OS and software does things in a certain way, which can have wildly different results. You see the descreening example about halfway on the page: https://scanning.guide/post_production_editing And that's not even taking into account how a scanner views and tries to replicate a page, compared to how our eyes actually see it in real life. The thing, is a scan is not a 1:1 copy. Never will be. It's more of an interpretation. Also then viewing those scans on a variety of screens bring with it another bunch of issues, as yet again, paper doesn't have a backlight in real life. Needless to say, replicating it 1:1 is impossible.

Open ##2958910