Shards of Alara

[Mahamoti]

[Mahamoti]

Shards of Alara scans:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=131256

[halfheart]

Wow!

[Mahamoti]

Shards of Alara Masterbase and pics:
http://www.slightlymagic.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6432#p6432

[extreme]

message deleted

[Mahamoti]

Visual Spoiler pics (249/249):
http://www.mediafire.com/?2mlnftyy3mm

[scottchiefbaker]

Needs some photoshop work to clean up... Scans of Arcane Sanctum, Sedris, The Traitor King, Etherium Sculptor

[extreme]

thanks, these are good !

[halfheart]

Needs some photoshop work to clean up...

Thats the size (or half) that i'll waiting for on the next years

[extreme]

half is the best you can hope for

[scottchiefbaker]

Scans of Marble Chalice, Sharding Sphinx and Fatestitcher

[scottchiefbaker]

Scans of Prince of Thralls, Covenant of Minds

[extreme]

thanks, i updated the wishlist

[halfheart]

half is the best you can hope for

Yep, the limit of 672x966 are good.

[PresetM]

Yep, the limit of 672x966 are good.

No, it is not good. The ratio width/height of a Magic card is 1:1.4 [theoretical exactly 1:sqrt(2)]. Therefore the dimension of the HQ scan have to be in this case 672x941.
Our currently HQ dimensions of 480x640 is wrong too. It should be 480x672.
A reason for this error is the scanner movement in y-direction. Most older scanner works not exactly in this direction and produces a little inaccuracy. So the decision to use 480x640 pixel for HQ scans eventually based on such a scanner inaccuracy.
I think, the dimension of a Magic card scan should be 500x700 or 600x840 pixel and this includes the complete(!) border. Regarding the current 1920x1200 resolution of a LCD-Monitor, these are very suitable dimensions. More is definitely not recommended because the overall quality of such a big scan will be lower (the print pattern will become more visible and the 'natural sharpness' will decrease).