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: RE: filmscanners: New Nikon performance

> Dave wrote:
> >Nikon scanners.  Specifically, I'd like to find out whether scans
> >performed *without* ICE on the new scanners have the same problems
> >with excessive dust and scratches as on the old scanners, or if
> >has been improved, and if so, by how much.
> What problems did the old scanners have with excessive dust and
>  I haven't seen anything with my LS30 I'd describe as a problem with
> to dust and scratches on chromogenic film.  The only problem I've
had with
> the the Nikon I'd describe as a fault is the jaggies produced by
> (which Vuescan cures).  Do you mean the collimated light
highlighting dust
> and scratches?  I wouldn't expect that to change either.
> > In addition, I'd like to know if performance *with* ICE has
> > improved when scanning Kodachrome and B&W films.
> Presumably the behaviour would be identical with Kodachrome
> and B&W film because the behaviour with IR is the same.
> Rob

Nikon appears to claim improved performance in these regards in their
literature, and there is now a specific Kodachrome setting, (but not
B&W?).  The problems are documented in many of the more thorough
reviews, so I don't think I'm alone here.  I'm wondering if anyone
has, or wouldn't mind, testing the difference and reporting the
result, as I have many Kodachromes to scan and print, and 'm trying to
decide between the 4000 dpi Polaroid and Nikon.



Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.