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]

[filmscanners] RE: Minolta Dimage Scan Elite - any users here?



Oh yes, nothing comes free.
Obviously some serious percentage of IV ED price come for ICE cubed feature.
BTW IV ED doesn't seem to suffer from lots discussed DOF issue apparently
inherent into 4000ED design, neither I felt need to glass carriers.
Using the machine quite extensively since the purchase (about a half year
ago) I never came to usage of manual focusing feature. It's AF does the job
perfectly in either motorized strip feeder or slide adapter.

BTW,  don't dismiss GEM feature either. I found it particularly useful on
flat smooth patterns
(skies for instance) and portraits making face skin look really smooth and
nicely.
Well, again, you may come up with counter argument of exaggerated grain by
Nikon's lighting so
GEM brings it back but for the price of sharpness at some degree and perhaps
will be right.



Regards,
Alex Z

-----Original Message-----
From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 11:55 AM
To: alexz@zoran.co.il
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Minolta Dimage Scan Elite - any users here?




Alex Zabrovsky wrote:


>
> However it would interesting to see how, say, SS4000 would cope with
average
> dirty originals
> diminishing thee defects.
>
> Regards,
> Alex Z
>

I've been working with the SS4000+, and many others here have that or
the SS4000.

Most people I have corresponded with have indicated they do minimal
spotting with these units.

As you know they don't have dICE, and although there is a PC version of
a software cleaning program, I only used it when doing beta (I had to go
as far as gathering dust from the floor and damaging the image for
testing).  A greatly damaged image or one with fungus or mold damage
certainly will do better with dICE than the SS4000/+.

However, for my standard images, usually a minute or two of spotting,
and mainly when I am making larger or enlarged sections of prints, is
all that's required.

I don't find this any handicap, and considering other advantages (true
black and white with equal lack of major spotting, and no depth of field
problems, or need for glass carriers) I am pleased with the SS4000/+.

Unfortunately, due to the publicity surrounding dICE, GEM (another
hardly needed product with the SS4000/+) and such, particularly when
described by Nikon scanner users, who really notice the need for them,
it wouldn't surprise me if Polaroid and Microtek decide to integrate

some type of IR cleaning in their next machines, but it doesn't come

cheaply, and means either a more expensive scanner with not a lot

of improvement, or cuts in quality elsewhere.


I do wish my Minolta Scan Dual II had the dICE features, due to whatever
the problem is with that scanner's lighting or other aspects, but to get
it literally doubles the price of the unit.

Art

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.