In a lot of ways the new modern standard of writing is to say more with less. So if you can describe something similarly with less words, you've likely done a better job at writing.
Instead of:
"She peeled the dusty, tattered pages apart and marveled at the dark-red archaic print."
...you could go smaller with:
"Peeling the tattered book apart, she marveled at the ancient crimson glyphs."
Perhaps not the best example (and yes, that's Shanoa
), but... In this case simply stating that the book is "tattered" will likely instill the image of it being old in the reader's mind anyway; thus dusty, worn... all that good stuff.
Give the reader credit. Try to get in their head and assume what they would feel at anytime when reading a sentence.
Less is more because you still achieve the imagery without losing the attention of your reader. This is why, despite the classic novels of the 19th century being very good, they can be so hard to read. They usually contain superfluous imagery; not to mention descriptions of things that're confusing to our times.