>>7990965So, yeah, the 1680x2480 dimensions were supposed to be 1860 wide. If that's important, tell me & I'll do what I can. It would mean more aggressive upscale & maybe more loss/distortion of detail, plus stronger cropping in the vertical which will throw out part of the top &/or bottom.
Or, I could try a different dimension
>>7990819 to avoid the upscale issues.
>picrelA conversion from 16.7 million color to 8 BPP/256 shades grayscale. Lots of contrast & gamma tweaking, plus dropped the brightness a bit. Not a great source image, but I wanted to try it and see what I ended up with. Let me know how it looks on an ereader.
G'dnight. I'll drop in every now & then to see how things are going.
