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: GEM



The Canon 4000 doesn't use any ASF software, but has its own equivalent of 
ICE called FARE and some auto colour correction.

rafeb@channel1.com (rafeb) wrote:

> At 04:20 PM 6/19/01 -0400, Norman Quinn wrote:
> 
> >   "GEM and ROC do not require hardware, but have to be "tuned" to the 
> >   So, in theory, any scanner could have GEM  >  but it requires that 
> > > Applied  >Science Fiction be hired to make the profiles, and that 
> the scanner  >company pay a licensing fee to them."
> >
> >What  scanners come with GEM and ROC. Is Nikon the only scanner with 
> ICE?  
> 
> 
> I believe the Canon 4000 (or was it the newly 
> announced Minolta MF scanner?) that also had 
> ROC and GEM.
> 
> IMO, these two aren't nearly as useful as ICE.
> They're OK if you want to fix a *really* bad 
> slide or negative in a hurry.  But they don't 
> really accomplish anything that couldn't be 
> done by hand, by a skilled operator.  If used 
> blindly, they can create ugly artifacts.
> 
> You could even argue that ICE is that way also 
> (ie., scans can be retouched "by hand.")  But the 
> time required to do that, on a really mangled 
> image, would be prohibitive.  What impresses 
> me most is that there seems to be little or no 
> penalty (in terms of image sharpness) for using 
> ICE.
> 
> 
> rafe b.
> 
> 
> 




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.