Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 




      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: scanner dilemma

Rob:  First, I too welcome back Ed.  His input has really helped clear
things up in a lot of different threads and not just those related to

Second, I do not think that anyone without an IR channel will get optimal
dust and scratch removal from Vuescan and that is not a major reason for
separating them.  Separating them lets people know that Vuescan has a GEM
capability, will reduce confusion, and will allow a user to NOT use the
dust and scratch filter if it is not needed, and vice versa.  Even if
dust and scratch filters do nothing if there aren't any dust or
scratches, some feel that implementing GEM will soften an image more than
is desires when cleaning the dust or scratches.  Whether their feeling
are justified or not is immaterial.

Third, I knew that ICE (dust and scratch removal) required the IR channel
and that GEM did not.  However, this supports my reasoning above on
separating them.  It reduces confusion and senior moments.


Rob Geraghty wrote:

> So is there any chance you'll separate cleaning from grain reduction?
> That way people without an IR channel could use it without the
> dust and scratch filter.
> Rob


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.