 | | Re: Quickie 10000 Guarded Inn (a review as if there never had been a set #6067) —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | (...) I do't know why anyone expected any different. Offset printing has been pretty common for years, especially in Star Wars. Also, the printing in the two sets I've opened so far haven't been off by much at all, and one set had perfect printing (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.reviews, lugnet.castle)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Quickie 10000 Guarded Inn (a review as if there never had been a set #6067) —James Stacey
|
| | | | | It does seem to be more of a common thing these days, but then is the volume of sets being made much larger now?? and has anyone noticed the print quality of the instruction book it reminds me of a colour photocopy (all be it a good one) of the (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.reviews, lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Quickie 10000 Guarded Inn (a review as if there never had been a set #6067) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | (...) Yup, I noticed that, and also the "fuzziness" of the other print. I'm guessing that they could not find the original camera ready artwork (or it had faded beyond useability) and they have done the next best thing, scanned the best available (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.reviews, lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Quickie 10000 Guarded Inn (a review as if there never had been a set #6067) —Victor Knight
|
| | | | (...) My three red tudor elements were smudged and faint. (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.reviews, lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | |
