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: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems



That's exactly my findings as well.  I have had my Nikon 8000 for about a
month and I was anxious to try it with ICE.  The first negative I scanned
without ICE and I scanned the exact negative with ICE.  The only changes
that I made was the ICE portion.  In my opinion there was noticeable quality
difference between the two.  I preferred the scan WITHOUT ICE and have not
used it since.

Just my viewpoint.

Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barbara & Martin Greene" <martbarb@earthlink.net>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 3:10 PM
Subject: filmscanners: Re: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems


> Jawed
>
> I am using Ice on Nomal and using Nikon Scan 3.1.  My slides are very
clean
> and exposures on slides I scan are all excellent.  With Photo CD scans, I
> easily cleaned up spots with the Photoshop rubber stamp.  Clearly, there
is
> a problem with dust in the scanner.  I am getting the impression that the
> cost of using Digital Ice is some loss of definition and sharpness which
> can't be restored by using unsharp mask in Photoshop.  In fact, I compared
> scans with Digital Ice on Normal and turned off, then sharpened in
> Photoshop, and the scan without Ice was far superior.
>
> Martin




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.