| Comment: |
I wondered why the low rating and looked at the scans. Possibly a couple of folks didn't like the color editing (reverting margins and space between panels to stark white), but my guess is that the 2-3 out-of-focus pages caused the ratings. If the scanner still has the comic on hand, it would be nice to get those pages re-scanned in-focus. That aside, there is actually some fairly decent art in this issue considering it's Fox without any evidence of Iger shop or Matt Baker. |
| Comment: |
Fan777's scans have one detractor who automatically gives all his scans a 1. I gave this one a 9. If nothing else, just for the effort and expense of going to the Library of Congress and actually getting permission to scan these rare comics. I don't really mind the edits. It's not what I would do but it doesn't make the comic any less enjoyable for me. |
| Comment: |
I apologize for the out of focus scans, I was using an overhead scanner with no way to hold the books down except with my fingers. I must have twiched when the scanner took the pictures. The books are still at LOC if anyone wants to make the effort to rescan these pages. |
| Comment: |
I'm sorry, I don't want to sound mean or inconsiderate, but whiting out the edges of the pages makes these scans look ridiculous. It would look much better to have a raw scan, let people edit it themselves if they wish. |
| Comment: |
I'm still waiting for Issue #9. |
