[filmscanners] Re: Nikon LS-40 vs Polaroid SS4000

["Preben S. Kristensen" <krille@tin.it>]

I have scanned 12.000 slides on three Polaroid SS4000 scanners over the last
8 months.  The images were taken during the last 12-14 years and not treated
nor kept fanatically well...

On average, I estimate that it has taken me about two minutes per slide to
clean pre-scanning and do the final clean in PS.

The result have been very fast scans with very low noise in the shadows and
great sharpness - even all the way out to the edges.

I may be biased because I own the SS4000s, but even if I was hired by
Applied Science fiction I would not change to an inferior scanner for the
sake of digital ICE. :-)

Good luck with your scanning too!

Greetings    Preben

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Phipps" <JPhipps@asf.com>
To: <krille@tin.it>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 4:34 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Nikon LS-40 vs Polaroid SS4000


Hi Dave, I can't resist commenting on your statements about Digital ICE. I
frequently see images that have surface defects, even when it is "reasonably
well stored and cared for". Many times the film has factory defects (bubbles
and scratches), scratches from "quality" cameras, and "don't get me started
:)" on dust. I love oil emersion, but it is so time consuming, you really
have to have an important image to justify its use.

Also preparing an image for scanning, doing the aggressive cleaning and
handling necessary, can shorten the life of the image. Using Digital ICE is
simple. I use air to quickly clean most of the dust and I scan. Done.

As far as Kodachrome is concerned, I rarely have problems scanning it with
the newest versions of the scanners. When there is a problem there is a
simple work around I've outlined in previous posts. You are mostly right
about B&W. Simply, Digital ICE doesn't work on silver based B&W, it does
work on chromagenic B&W.

Obviously, the fact that I work for Applied Science Fiction biases my
comments. However, if I were to leave ASF today, I wouldn't consider a
scanner that didn't have Digital ICE. Not just infrared detection, but
Digital ICE, there is a difference.

Good luck with your scanning!

Jack Phipps
Applied Science Fiction



-----Original Message-----
From: Dave King [mailto:kingphoto@mindspring.com]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 11:03 PM
To: Jack Phipps
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Nikon LS-40 vs Polaroid SS4000


The current 4000 dpi Polaroid scanners (in my opinion) are about as good as
CCD scanners get.  I scan Kodachromes frequently with my (elderly) SS4000
and get all the shadow detail I see on the light table, with very little
noise.  A drum scan may be a bit more open at the bottom, but the Polaroid
does get all the detail, and a little Photoshop work brings it up where you
want it.

If you're scanning your own film and it's reasonably well stored and cared
for, ICE is of questionable benefit.  If you're scanning old film that's
been attacked by fungus, or has been stored carelessly, ICE is a miracle
worker.  That excludes Kodachrome work unfortunately since ICE doesn't work
well with B&W or Kodachrome.  That eliminates the Nikon scanners for my
purposes.

The latest version of Insight Pro is great with chromes, still only so-so
with negs.  I use Vuescan for negs and Insight for chromes.  Silverfast is
still hobbled with 8-bit output and a silly overly complex interface.  It
has potential, but not quite there yet as far as I'm concerned.

Dave

----- Original Message -----
From: <al@greenspace.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <kingphoto@mindspring.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 5:45 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Nikon LS-40 vs Polaroid SS4000


Hi folks,

After problems with 2 separate Minolta Elite IIs (which I won't bother
repeating in this post), I'm contemplating jumping ship and going for
either for a Nikon LS-40 or a Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 (some dealers
here in the UK are still advertising it).  In my price range, these seem to
be the best 2 scanners.  (The Canon FS4000 appears to have poor
shadow performance and I've had enough of this with the Elite II.)

I'm attracted by the extra resolution, low shadow noise, good depth of
field and SCSI interface of the SS4000 (and Polaroids general customer
service) but I have found ICE invaluable at times.  Also, the SS4000 is
now quite elderly in scanner terms.  Has anyone had direct experience
of both these scanners, preferably on dense slides like Kodachrome?



Thanks,



Al Bond

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body