[Coco] Re: Feedback on Quality Requested

[Richard E. Crislip]

Hello Michael

I can not read the scanned imaged, but the camera image looked good to me.

On 04/27/2006, Michael Wayne Harwood wrote:
> I can see from my webserver's logs that many people have taken a look
> at the "scanner.jpg" and "camera.jpg" examples, but I haven't heard any
> feedback.
>
> It's hard for me to believe that no one has an opinion or preference.
>  My intention in presenting these to the list is so that I can gauge
> how many people would rather sacrifice quality so that they could
> receive something quickly.
>
> One issue that needs to be considered is that if there were two
> versions of the product (one quickly done with lesser quality and a
> final product with higher quality) I would not be able to offer a free
> "upgrade".  Lonnie has stated that the license fees would need to be
> paid a second time if one were to desire the upgraded product.
>
> I have compiled a 9 page .djvu example of how the end product will look
> as far as image quality goes - it is located at
> http://www.musicheadproductions.org/downloads/sample.djvu.  This
> example does not include the "bookmark" style contents that will be
> included in the final product.
>
> Here is a link to the image that is of a lesser quality, but most of
> the images are already taken and ready to be "re-published" -
> http://www.musicheadproductions.org/downloads/camera.jpg.
>
> So my question is this - would you rather have a product of the quality
> of the "camera.jpg" or of the "sample.djvu"?
>
>
> Regards,
> Michael Harwood
>
>
>
>
>
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
>
Regards
-- 
Criusing on AutoPilot                       |
        With an Amiga           ---o-o-O-o-o---  and a CoCo


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.1/326 - Release Date: 4/27/2006