10-06-2006, 05:48 PM
hummmmmmmmmmmmmmm think i answered this for you 
But, since not everyone knows the answer i will post it here too.
There are 2 respective conclusions to this and (amethyst has had her disks replaced btw), i believe that they are very interesting.
1. Sub Standard Media (Either FX or the Printer) used crap processing. Now this isnt badtalking FX, im pointing things out. Since it seems to have happend in the same "printing frame" i think that one of thier printers cut some serious corners.
2. These could be those "bootleg" fx (yes bootleg of bootlegs) disks that were around some time ago. There have been threads regarding them.
Either way, both of the disks in question have been examined by myself and another dealer whom has been selling items on media for a very long time (i go back to laserdisk days), and it is definately NOT laserrot. It is just crap printing.
B
But, since not everyone knows the answer i will post it here too.There are 2 respective conclusions to this and (amethyst has had her disks replaced btw), i believe that they are very interesting.
1. Sub Standard Media (Either FX or the Printer) used crap processing. Now this isnt badtalking FX, im pointing things out. Since it seems to have happend in the same "printing frame" i think that one of thier printers cut some serious corners.
2. These could be those "bootleg" fx (yes bootleg of bootlegs) disks that were around some time ago. There have been threads regarding them.
Either way, both of the disks in question have been examined by myself and another dealer whom has been selling items on media for a very long time (i go back to laserdisk days), and it is definately NOT laserrot. It is just crap printing.
B