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

I find it very interesting just how defensive most of the Nikon scanner 
owners are on this list.

The question below was a reasonable one.  Do the new Nikon scanners tend 
to amplify the dust and dirt when dICE is off, as they do on the older 

All the sudden all these Nikon scanner owners are in love with dust, 
dirt, fingerprints and scratches, and want to see them as clearly as 
possible. ;-)

When the LS 2000 and LS 30 came out MANY of the owners mentioned that it 
was a good thing the Nikon's has dICE because the scans without them so 
amplified the dust, etc, that the scanner would be very difficult to use 
without the dICE feature, compared to other scanners they had used.

Somehow, dust and dirt and scratches have become some sort of virtue, or 
badge of courage that Nikon scanner owners proudly wear.

When lighting sources for photographic enlargers were introduced that 
reduced these bugaboos with minimal loss of resolution, everyone was 
happy to have them (well, except a few that preferred to spend half 
their lives doing retouching in color, and were using condenser lighting 
for color) but somehow its not the same with scanners.

The Nikons do slightly improve resolution (at least in the middle of the 
image) by using LED light sources and a unfiltered CCD, but, in so doing 
they make dust, et al, more obvious, unless you turn on the dICE, at 
which point you have a result that is likely softer than the equivalent 
scanner with a non-LED light source.

So, it appears there's no free lunch, but that doesn't mean my menu is 
better or worse than yours.  I do know that yours is more expensive.


Isaac Crawford wrote:

> Rob Geraghty wrote:
>> 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 this
>>> has been improved, and if so, by how much.
>       Hmmm... was the scanner *adding* the dust and scratches? I would rather
> have a scanner that gets as much info off of the film as possible, and
> if there are dust and scratches on the film, they should be resolved...
> I'm funny that way...;-)
> Isaac


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.