On 2017-04-29 19:45:27 +0000, symm said:
> Thanks for the offer, but I was just interested in comparing the ones
> discussed (45-102) to the scans I have to see if any were better.
> Except for the Marvel DVD Collection scans (I posted the complete run
> in a.b.p.c.complete), the scans I have are unlabeled. Old cw posts
> after their shutdown?
>
> No need to pick through the comcicdownload.net site if you don't
> already have them. The links I did test all fed through an ad network
> interstitial before you could even try/test the link. Too much BS for
> me given the poor state of the site. It's up and download like a pogo
> stick. It all appeared very shady like some spyware infested Russian
> site.
>
>
> any reprints, the scans are pretty clean as expected from an official
> collection. At least the FF scans don't slap them on the covers; only
> on the bottom border on the interior pages.
>
> Note 2: I checked "Fantastic Four v1 065.cbr" at random and did
> discover an nfo file from punkrat, but "Fantastic Four v1 069.cbr" had
> no tag or nfo file. I need to go through all of them and see if I can
> restore the attribution labels.
>
> Note 3: When Wizard adds me to his kill list, imagine all the fun he
> can have finding my original scans (I haven't made any upgrade scans,
> just previously unscanned material) on the other sites after they
> eventually appear. Even my reconstruction of the first published
> graphic novel from 1950 ended up at a site, athough it was stripped
> down. Since almost no one posts original scans here (and those
> invariably end up on the usual suspect sites), why would anyone use
> usenet with that attitude?
I uploaded a text file of my whole FF paper scan collection including
file sizes. Most of the unattributed ones in the 10-15MB range are from
the DVD collection you uploaded (and thank you for those). I really
like the original Flattermann/Fett/Punkrat/etc. scans but to each his
own. Anything you want is yours, say the word.
|
|