Mark wrote:
>I thought that ICE used infrared simply to image the dust and other
>physical imperfections, and that the normal photographic image is
>relatively transparent to IR. Then (I assumed) it lined up the defects
>with those on the non-IR scan, and used some sort of 'intelligent
>interpolation' to remove the defect. If that is how it is done, you would
>expect some softening at the defect, but there need not be softening
>elsewhere.
This may be what you would expect logically, but it isn't what happens in
practice, probably because the image itself is *not* totally invisible in
IR. I don't know what the reasons are, but on my Nikon LS30 both ICE and
Vuescan's dust removal components soften the image slightly overall (ICE
more than Vuescan at the lower settings of Vuescan).
Rob
Rob Geraghty harper@wordweb.com
