Martin,
There is a "roller" manufactured by a UK company called TekNek. They have a
Chicago office in the US. These rollers are mainly used by companies coating
or processing wide web sheets. Polaroid uses them in some of their coating
operations.
They also have a small hand held version that is used by photographers, and
in the PCB industry. They cost about $100 and come with "sticky" paper to
remove the dust from the roller . They last nearly forever. I have one and
really like it.
One dealer is:
Wish you had bought a better scanner that would give that good OD in a
single pass. But glad to help anyway. Say you could probably buy 2 better
scanners after rebate!!! :)
Regards
David
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barbara & Martin Greene [mailto:martbarb@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 1:24 PM
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
>
>
> Have my new scanner less than a week and have a couple of
> serious problems
> that I'd like help with. Up until now, I've scanned all of
> my slides using
> Photo Cds and had anticipated a vast improvement in quality.
> I keep my
> slides as clean as possible. When I scan using Digital Ice,
> I get clean
> scans, but I feel they are on the soft side, particularly
> when compared to
> the amount of detail present when Digital Ice is turned off. But, the
> dilemma is, that when Digital Ice is off, the amount of junk
> covering every
> part of the scan is horrendous. I checked with Nikon tech
> support, and
> the recommendation was to clean it out with canned air. I
> did this and the
> result was some reduction in junk, but still lots left over. They
> recommended I return it for cleaning. Strange, that there
> should have been
> so much dirt in it. I bought it from Ritz camera, and, so far
> as I could
> tell, it was freshly boxed. I can still return it to them.
>
> But I am distressed that Digital Ice so softens the scan,
> forcing me to do
> without it and have to deal with dust through Photoshop,
> however little
> there may if I get a new machine. Also, I've found that
> getting a sharp
> scan, even when I auto-focus on the sharpest part of an
> image, does not
> occur with consistency. Without making a few scans of an
> image, it can be
> difficult to know when you get the best results. I'm
> wondering whether or
> not I got a lemon? Feeling that maybe I'd do better with the
> new Canonscan
> 4000, whose sharpness has been praised and the Fast software
> is supposed to
> have little or no softening effect. Also, at this point, the main
> difference I see between the Photo CD and the Nikon scan is
> that the Photo
> CD color is way off, requiring lots of correction in Photoshop and the
> Nikon scan is color-perfect. I'd appreciate assistance from
> those who are
> using the above scanners.
>
> Martin
>
