The post seems pretty clear to me... he's scanning directly into Profiler, which then resizes his images automatically.

Superior scans should be cropped, resized, and retouched first. I remember someone making a post about how you should name your images using the UPCf and UPCb format directly, so DVD Profiler doesn't import them and JPG compress them twice. In fact, if the file size is still too high when the images are uploaded, they get recompressed again, giving a potential double recompress (total of three JPG compressions) and many users never realize it.

It never fails to amaze me that whenever I end up making any posts on having better standards and results from scanned images, people are not only resistant to the idea, but actually get angry about it. Why you would want something inferior is so perplexing an ideal to me that it makes me want to pull my own head off knowing there are so many people who think this way.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
I didn't see any resistance nor did I see anybody get angry.  I saw someone question where you got the idea that bigdaddy scanned directly into profile, as they didn't see it...which I agreed with because he only mentioned resizing.

Nodbody did resist, and there definitely was no one that was angry (much less angry as it may have been).

I still don't see ANYWHERE where bigdaddyhorse said "I scan directly into Profiler" and the way it's being talked about, it's spotlighting him in a negative light and I believe that's an unfair thing to do when he never once stated that's what he does. Until someone can quote him as saying those exact words, I still have to wonder as I did before, where's the other stuff coming from? No anger. No resistance. Just curiosity.

I'm also curious Grendell, as to whom you're speaking with when you say

Quoting Grendell:

Quote:
Why you would want something inferior is so perplexing an ideal to me that it makes me want to pull my own head off knowing there are so many people who think this way.

Because I haven't seen a single person in this thread say that they'd prefer inferior images either, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from either. (Although I may very well have missed someone saying this... I didn't read every word of every post).

Again. No resistance. No anger. I actually agree with you. The higher quality...    But I do have to question you making negative claims about other users when there's no proof to back up your claims (as well as question who you're talking to when you say someone would want something inferior).