Thread:Murali9395/@comment-23771723-20170907162330/@comment-2106279-20170921185003

KylaraE wrote: A higher resolution isn't the only factor when it comes to which version of an image should be used. I recall one Rem image where it was an improved resolution but it was in the middle of a motion, so part of the image (the wings I think) were blurred by the motion. I reverted that because although the previous image was a lower resolution, the image of Rem was clearer because it wasn't blurred. The higher resolution wasn't an improvement. When the images are slightly smaller, I understand that. But when some images are so tiny you wouldn't be able to see anything of detail anyways, is a bigger image not considered an improvement?

And yes, I try to replicate the image perfectly. But even as I went frame through frame, every still had the blur to the wings since Rem was flapping those constantly. So I chose the one most closely resembling the original image.