hopper <Troll5layer@avay.invalid>, wrote
>Snakepit@pit.com, wrote
>>On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 03:12:34 -0500, Paperboy
>><paperboy@whoknowswhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>Can you possibly scan the image instead of taking a photograph? A
>>scanned image is much more "workable" than one that is only a
>>photograph.
>
>'ere 'ere... even a scan of a print with "sharps" on
>is going to produce something halfway "workable".
sowwy.. that should read with "sharps switched to 0n"....
|
|