|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
It helps if you read the thread first before starting your arguments.
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Brent came onto the thread, lied, and left.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/sets |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Veni, mentiri, abdici, or something like that.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. ![]() My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/sets |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Abusus non tollit usum.
![]() ![]()
__________________
Check out my website www.imageevent.com/rgold |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
You're right, I didn't read the entire thread. I picked up from post 142 where you inferred that a scan should never be adjusted. You're were wrong and two other people have also since told you that you are wrong. There are sometimes when scans should be adjusted to represent the actual card. My point was, and I'll repeat it again because you obviously keep missing it, is that you can take the same card, scan it with two different scanners using the factory settings, and they'll still appear differently. I have forgotten more about scanners than you'll ever know.
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
It's easy to say, man, and it obviously took you this long to figure out a response. Just go back to post #159 and tell me straight that you don't think the scanner settings have been adjusted on that PWCC card. I don't think you can.
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Let me just say that as a matter of general record, folks, go back and look at the card in post #159. You can see from the example that, yes, while scanner results may vary, there is no scanner that makes the results look like that. And on top of it, the person who took the scan came onto this very thread and said that he had been changing the settings. What more evidence do you people need?
Anyways, I am done responding to this Runscott character for the time being. Scott, I've met you in real life, and you are a nice guy. But your posts don't resemble much the person who you are in real life. And that's all I've got to say to you at this point. You may have whatever opinion, and all I've got to say is, good luck to you. Peace. -J |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I went back to post #159 and what I see is two different cards with scans taken by two different scanners?
|
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Your comment above, regarding the PWCC card is completely irrelevant, as I am in complete agreement with you that some sellers modify scans to enhance cards and hide defects. That is fraudulent. I am in disagreement with you over your repeated claim is that NO ONE should adjust scanner settings. Also, I realize that the thrust of this thread is to discredit PWCC, and I took it off topic by arguing with you about whether or not it's okay to change scanner settings. I've said all I have to say about the subject, and I respect your right to disagree with me.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree with everything you wrote except that the PWCC card is completely irrelevant. Go look at the title of the thread and the original post. In fact, your arguments are irrelevant to this thread. You wrote yourself that you took it off topic. It appears that other than what is or isn't relevant, we don't really disagree on anything at all. Which is actually kind of a relief. Good luck, Scott.
|
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Here is a good example when it is necessary to adjust the settings. Check out the Mays from this auction... http://www.ebay.com/itm/1959-Topps-B...ht_3407wt_1121 The first scan below is the seller's scan. The second one is mine, with some adjustments. Jamie, do you really think the colors are supposed to look that faded on the seller's scan? No, it's not a good representation of the card. That may be the best the seller can do with their factory settings. That's why it's necessary to sometimes make adjustments. I think my adjumstments are a better representation of the actual card. And really I don't know why I'm even typing all this. You still won't get it, it's like talking to a wall. |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Increcible prices for PWCC auctions | Peter_Spaeth | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 103 | 09-22-2016 08:46 AM |
| Did anyone get the T206 SGC 86 O'hara on PWCC? | CMIZ5290 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 09-30-2013 08:36 AM |
| Anyone win any of the STAMPED E90-1 cards from PWCC? | CaramelMan | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 17 | 08-08-2013 04:51 AM |
| Latest PWCC | drmondobueno | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 16 | 02-14-2013 03:15 PM |
| 1935 Goudey Master on EBay with PWCC | grundle20 | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 0 | 06-02-2012 12:44 PM |