>>7626692oh, you're just retarded then and don't understand how technology works.
Again, see
>>7620033 and
>You're dumb if you think I'm ignoring the fact it's made up three colors >It's the entire point of that image, because it's still finer than the newspaper print quailty you keep on defending and need to pretend isn't unnoticeably an outdated 1970s quality newspaper image.fake edit:
And just to make it clear i know about pixels and failed to read the thread, here's my other post
>>620043 >YEah, it's way unfair, considering the fact that screen pixels are many times more denser than this shit.But again, all this shit just to defend crappy newspaper low resolution print quality
