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: comments on using NikonScan/PC



>From Al Bond:
> The loss of detail can be quite subtle and, if the result with ICE
still looks good, it
might not be noticed.  I noticed it when looking at the fine detail of a
jacket zip:
without ICE, the shape of the teeth can be made out but once ICE is
applied the
teeth merge together.  I tried this on both a Minolta Elite (which has
the original
version of ICE) and the Elite II (which has ICE3) and the result was the
same.

I think the loss of fine detail is unacceptable - why go to the expense
of getting
high resolution lenses for your camera and a scanner which can resolve a
good
part of the detail just to have ICE throw some of it away?
>

Very interesting. I would really like to get to the truth on this, darn
it!  I hope Jack Phipps will comment further on your specific example,
because I want to know ONCE-AND-FOR-ALL whether ICE (as implemented in
the 4000ED) set to "notmal" will or will not degrade an image.

Ed Verkaik





------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
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.