Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Dominion General Discussion => Topic started by: werothegreat on April 26, 2015, 09:13:29 pm
-
When first putting up Adventures images for the wiki, I scanned them at 300 dpi. Essentially, a little lower quality, for a couple reasons. 1) It scans faster and 2) It's a lower resolution, so if any lint or hair or dust or whatever gets stuck on the card or the scanner, all it takes is a couple eyedropper/pencil strokes in paint to pretend they never happened. However, the images look a bit "washed out", particularly some of the cards with art that has a lighter background.
When I was rescanning Prosperity and Adventures cards, I scanned them at 400 dpi. This was definitely a higher quality image where you could see details better, but 1) This makes it scan longer, and if there's lint/dust/whatever it takes me longer to deal with it, or else I have to wipe everything and rescan and 2) They look like newspaper cutouts for some reason.
Maybe it's just my shitty scanner, but I can't seem to scan cards so they look like the images on the wiki for Base through Alchemy.
So I'm leaving it up to you people - which do you prefer? Is "washed out" fine, and I can call it a day? Or would you prefer "newspaper", given that it looks better and fits more with the other scanned cards? I don't mind rescanning, just don't expect it to be done tonight.
Washed out cards:
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/archive/b/b2/20150427025226%21Wine_Merchant.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/archive/6/60/20150427025248%21Page.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/archive/7/76/20150427025315%21Coin_of_the_Realm.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/archive/9/9a/20150427025117%21Lost_City.jpg)
Newspaper cards:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oyyiIaIOduE/VT2KnmTBDTI/AAAAAAAAA4U/-3TVjuZTB-I/s1600/wmerchant.jpg) (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DsswXO3naF0/VT2Km1NbZHI/AAAAAAAAA4M/oRhxr6e9PtY/s1600/page.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-r0H9vTgpT9Y/VT2Km8f9sxI/AAAAAAAAA4Q/1k-9CCJcZWA/s1600/cotr.jpg) (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PKT1SsIdfdE/VT2KmwhemOI/AAAAAAAAA4I/W33adJ6No9g/s1600/lc.jpg)
-
I would do the "washed out" for all of them, and then redo the ones where it looks really bad (e.g. lost city) at a higher resolution later.
-
I prefer newspaper, but not enough to make anyone scan all the cards again.
-
I prefer newspaper, but not enough to make anyone scan all the cards again.
It's fine. I have a fair amount of free time anyway.
-
That you could spend playing Adventures instead!
-
That you could spend playing Adventures instead!
If I had someone to play with!
-
Also just realized that now that I'm updating the pictures you can't see the difference anymore...
-
(1) Clean your scanner surface with a lint-free cloth.
(2) Scan at 2400 dpi.
(3) ???
(4) Profit.
-
My scanner only goes up to 600 dpi.
-
Also just realized that now that I'm updating the pictures you can't see the difference anymore...
That's like how my opponent and I both suffered from turns where we couldn't buy the amount of Peddlers we anticipated because we had played Knights that revealed other knights and got trashed mid-turn.
Okay maybe it's not similar.
-
There must be something wrong with me, but I can't see the difference at all.
-
There must be something wrong with me, but I can't see the difference at all.
Oh, I thought you were being facetious.
-
I really don't know why you'd bother to scan at something lower than your scanner's max DPI.
Yeah it takes longer, but you multitask during that time; it takes the same amount of effort to put the card in and run the scan... and gives a better result.
The higher DPI images in the OP look much nicer. Perhaps their brightness/contrast should be tweaked, but the detail is great and obviously better.
-
I prefer the newspaper style. More details are visible and the contrast is soft.
The washed out cards look like bad low-budget displays. Dark parts are just black and bright areas are white without any details. The contrast is way too high. Maybe you could do some postprocessing to improve the image quality.
-
The yellow, it ows.
-
There must be something wrong with me, but I can't see the difference at all.
Heh. Maybe I should adjust color settings on my display. Because now, me being at work, the difference is clearly seen (and second option looks way nicer).
-
Can you just up the brightness / saturation on the Newspaper cards? I don't like how the first cards are so washed out, and the only problem for me with the second set of cards is that they're a bit dark.
-
When I had a scanner, there was an option called "reduce moiré". Without checking that, I got the "newspaper" version. Checking that, no problem. I'm sure your scanner has the same or something that works the same.
-
On my iPod the 2nd set look nicer.
-
The yellow, it ows.
Actually, that's black and blue, not white and yellow.
-
When I had a scanner, there was an option called "reduce moiré". Without checking that, I got the "newspaper" version. Checking that, no problem. I'm sure your scanner has the same or something that works the same.
It's the "reduce moire" setting that gives it the washed out look. :/
-
Are moire pattern (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moir%C3%A9_pattern) visible without that option active? I do not expect that because short period patterns are rare in dominion card art.
-
Are moire pattern (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moir%C3%A9_pattern) visible without that option active? I do not expect that because short period patterns are rare in dominion card art.
Any printed image, if you look at it very closely, is going to be printed as a stippling of four primary colors: magenta, cyan, yellow and black.
(http://www.teardropvideo.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/PhotoDPI.jpg)
What the "reduce moire" setting is doing here is not actually getting rid of any moire, because there isn't any - it's smoothing out that stippling. Unfortunately, the quality of my scanner means that picking that option washes out the image.
Without reducing "moire":
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aPRqhuw0EII/VT5ief8CK0I/AAAAAAAAA40/ECazkPJAhas/s1600/moire.png)
With reducing "moire":
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LoDvrstGrcY/VT5ifOGbVWI/AAAAAAAAA44/aS09P18GvWM/s1600/washed.png)
-
Here's a more contrasting example:
Without reducing "moire":
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MBgq6TY4Hx8/VT5j6ExSlqI/AAAAAAAAA5M/UgjhGYXEFi0/s1600/z2.png)
With reducing "moire":
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rvN6_0Cm0_E/VT5j6C9GtrI/AAAAAAAAA5I/zXn6EfrM7O4/s1600/z1.png)
-
OK I got it.
-
Interesting, I just looked at the cards again on my second monitor at work, and now I can see the "Newspaper" effect.
But if I just drag this same window over to this Macbook's Retina display, the newspaper effect goes away completely (and the images look perfect).
So that newspaper effect is only noticeable on some screens. Weird.
-
The colour on the "newspaper" versions is better. There are a few things you could try to reduce the "newspaper effect" (moire patterns?).
1. Apply a very minimal Guassian Blur.
2. Apply a very minimal Dust and Scratches filter.
You can do these changes on a duplicated layer and lower the opacity of the top layer afterwards to adjust how big the impact is.
If you figure out a satisfactory way of doing it, I'm pretty sure you can automate it all in Photoshop with a "macro" or an "action" or something (this is something I am vaguely aware of but never taught myself to do in Photoshop).
Here's a quick attempt on your "newspaper" scan of Lost Cities, with your original on the right for comparison:
(http://i.imgur.com/87t4rwK.jpg) (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PKT1SsIdfdE/VT2KmwhemOI/AAAAAAAAA4I/W33adJ6No9g/s1600/lc.jpg)
Better? (The different is more obvious at full size, of course.)
Here are my exact steps:
1. Duplicate Layer. I only edit the top layer from now on; the bottom layer is your original scan.
2. Filter > Blur > Gaussian Blur with radius of 0.5.
3. Filter > Noise > Dust & Scratches with radius of 1.
4. Auto Levels (Ctrl+Shift+L).
5. Reduce layer opacity to 70%.
6. Save for Web & Devices (Ctrl+Alt+Shift+S) as jpg at 80% quality.
Step 4 is primarily a colour adjustment. I think it's an improvement, but that's subjective.
If you think the patterning is still too prominent, you can use a higher radius in steps 2 and/or 3. You could also use a higher opacity in step 5.
-
I don't have Photoshop.
Though I have noticed there's a tiny piece of lint on Lost City that I'm going to go fix right now.
EDIT: That said, whatever you did looks much better.
-
I don't have Photoshop.
GIMP is free and will be plenty enough to do this sort of thing.
-
I don't have Photoshop.
GIMP is free and will be plenty enough to do this sort of thing.
Just remembered I had installed that a couple months ago to make gifs!
-
I don't have Photoshop.
Though I have noticed there's a tiny piece of lint on Lost City that I'm going to go fix right now.
EDIT: That said, whatever you did looks much better.
I could probably do it for all the cards. It would be an excuse to learn how to automate. I probably would not get around to it for a while though.
-
Okay, using GIMP I went through eHalcyon's steps with Amulet. What do you guys think?
Before: After:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RsnOads57rI/VT7LXnrPLiI/AAAAAAAAA5g/EQvEhNbU50g/s1600/amulet.jpg) (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3H1_jGt4hDk/VT7LYyAmSuI/AAAAAAAAA5o/9KxaVjO19Rc/s1600/amulet.jpg)
-
Much better! :)
-
Much better! :)
Mr. Frog, you have not informed the proper authorities that you have chosen a card art avatar. I shall be forced to write you a ticket.
*scribbles furiously in Lisa Frank notepad*
-
The thumbnail version has more noticeable square patterning than with mine, but it's still an improvement. Not familiar enough with GIMP to suggest changes, but I would experiment with the settings at various steps. The opacity of the top layer is the easiest change. I lower the opacity because it helps retain some of the sharpness of the original (the reduction is most noticeable with the text, especially the credit and copyright text at the bottom). If it's acceptable even at 100% opacity, duplicating the layer isn't a needed step.
PPE: Be careful with those jokes, because some people might not realize that you are joking!
-
The thumbnail version has more noticeable square patterning than with mine, but it's still an improvement. Not familiar enough with GIMP to suggest changes, but I would experiment with the settings at various steps. The opacity of the top layer is the easiest change. I lower the opacity because it helps retain some of the sharpness of the original (the reduction is most noticeable with the text, especially the credit and copyright text at the bottom). If it's acceptable even at 100% opacity, duplicating the layer isn't a needed step.
Gotcha.
EDIT: Also, I'm more concerned with washing-out than with stippling. With the opacity too high on the second layer, it starts to look more like the first try. I had to increase the radius on the Gaussian blur to get rid of the stippling.
PPE: Be careful with those jokes, because some people might not realize that you are joking!
Is it even physically possible to be serious with a Lisa Frank notepad?
-
By "washing out" you mean the colour issue, right? It should just be auto-levels that is adjusting the colour, so you could try omitting that step. Or even better, you could do auto-levels on a third layer with its own (lower) opacity. If you were feeling especially Adventurous, you could also try tweaking Levels manually for each card... but that's a lot of extra work.
Edit: Does GIMP have a Dust & Scratches filter? You could also see if any of the other filters are better, either as additional steps or replacement steps (particularly different kinds of blurs and things that have to do with noise reduction or correction).
-
Added a third layer:
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/5/50/Amulet.jpg)
-
I think it's a touch too blurry at full size, but I am majorly nitpicking. Sometimes when I am doing random design stuff I also spend 10 minutes nudging one layer back and forth a pixel trying to decide which is better. ::)
-
I think it's a touch too blurry at full size, but I am majorly nitpicking. Sometimes when I am doing random design stuff I also spend 10 minutes nudging one layer back and forth a pixel trying to decide which is better. ::)
What irks me is that it's now at the same quality as the Seaside card images, but it's a different color orange. :/
-
I think it's a touch too blurry at full size, but I am majorly nitpicking. Sometimes when I am doing random design stuff I also spend 10 minutes nudging one layer back and forth a pixel trying to decide which is better. ::)
What irks me is that it's now at the same quality as the Seaside card images, but it's a different color orange. :/
There are many ways to account for that. In Photoshop, you can adjust Color Balance or add a Photo Filter. It looks like the Seaside images have more blue and less yellow overall. In Photoshop, I would try adding a cooling (blue) Photo Filter first, and then go into Color Balance adjustments if the quick filter wasn't adequate. You could also try adjusting Curves and Brightness/Contrast, and the Levels may have an impact as well.
-
I think it's a touch too blurry at full size, but I am majorly nitpicking. Sometimes when I am doing random design stuff I also spend 10 minutes nudging one layer back and forth a pixel trying to decide which is better. ::)
What irks me is that it's now at the same quality as the Seaside card images, but it's a different color orange. :/
There are many ways to account for that. In Photoshop, you can adjust Color Balance or add a Photo Filter. It looks like the Seaside images have more blue and less yellow overall. In Photoshop, I would try adding a cooling (blue) Photo Filter first, and then go into Color Balance adjustments if the quick filter wasn't adequate. You could also try adjusting Curves and Brightness/Contrast, and the Levels may have an impact as well.
I'm going to just decide right now that that's above my pay grade.
-
I think it's a touch too blurry at full size, but I am majorly nitpicking. Sometimes when I am doing random design stuff I also spend 10 minutes nudging one layer back and forth a pixel trying to decide which is better. ::)
What irks me is that it's now at the same quality as the Seaside card images, but it's a different color orange. :/
There are many ways to account for that. In Photoshop, you can adjust Color Balance or add a Photo Filter. It looks like the Seaside images have more blue and less yellow overall. In Photoshop, I would try adding a cooling (blue) Photo Filter first, and then go into Color Balance adjustments if the quick filter wasn't adequate. You could also try adjusting Curves and Brightness/Contrast, and the Levels may have an impact as well.
I'm going to just decide right now that that's above my pay grade.
Haha, totally fair. :P
BTW, I don't think the Seaside card images are as high resolution as the ones you've uploaded for Adventures. I checked Wharf when you mentioned the colour difference and it's a much smaller size. You could scan all the Seaside cards too, and then it would be consistent...
This has been another episode of "wero does way too much work on the wiki".
-
I think you should just scan again all the cards ever. And be grateful this is not gatherer.wizards.com.
-
I think you should just scan again all the cards ever. And be grateful this is not gatherer.wizards.com.
Right, what are 289 cards compared to however many thousands Magic: The Gathering has shat out?
-
I think you should just scan again all the cards ever. And be grateful this is not gatherer.wizards.com.
Right, what are 289 cards compared to however many thousands Magic: The Gathering has shat out?
Too bad the Dominion Online client didn't install on the user's system. That's how I got high-res images for all the PK Cards (366) a few years ago.
[It also gave me access to all the layers needed to create fan cards]
-
I think you should just scan again all the cards ever. And be grateful this is not gatherer.wizards.com.
Right, what are 289 cards compared to however many thousands Magic: The Gathering has shat out?
Too bad the Dominion Online client didn't install on the user's system. That's how I got high-res images for all the PK Cards (366) a few years ago.
[It also gave me access to all the layers needed to create fan cards]
The problem with that is that Goko doesn't include illustrator names or the RGG copyright.
-
I think you should just scan again all the cards ever. And be grateful this is not gatherer.wizards.com.
Right, what are 289 cards compared to however many thousands Magic: The Gathering has shat out?
Too bad the Dominion Online client didn't install on the user's system. That's how I got high-res images for all the PK Cards (366) a few years ago.
[It also gave me access to all the layers needed to create fan cards]
The problem with that is that Goko doesn't include illustrator names or the RGG copyright.
Why on earth would they not? It's not like it's that much harder to have that information accessible.
Besides, it's still RGG's property and still the illustrator's art... :o
-
So I think the problem with the Seaside Durations is that they're all pictures Jay posted in previews, not scanned cards. I'm re-uploading them now, and the color is much better.
Before: After:
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/archive/c/c8/20150429021148%21Caravan.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/c/c8/Caravan.jpg)
-
The problem with that is that Goko doesn't include illustrator names or the RGG copyright.
Why on earth would they not? It's not like it's that much harder to have that information accessible.
Besides, it's still RGG's property and still the illustrator's art... :o
I presume that they don't include it because it would be illegible at many monitor resolutions.
Is there a credits screen somewhere?
In fact, looking at those Caravan scans above, it's already not super easy to read the illustrators name and those cards look huge on my monitor.
-
That artist does have an unusually long name, resulting in smaller text.
-
Uploaded all the Alchemy cards in high-res earlier today, as well as Walled Village, which was the only Promo left to do.
-
What about the official adventures card art, will you get the image files and upload them?
-
What about the official adventures card art, will you get the image files and upload them?
The official card art for previous cards came from Goko. Since Adventures is not yet on Dominion Online, I have no resource to download them from. However, some of the artists have uploaded the art they've done to their own personal websites (or Deviantart pages), and I've uploaded the ones I can find.
-
Sorry for the necro, but at long last, every single card has a high-quality image on the wiki. The only set I didn't re-scan myself was Dark Ages, as the original scans were good enough, just needed some GIMP touching up. Cornucopia was the last set to do, and I just uploaded the new Fairgrounds scan. Time to take a break. Until Empires, at least.