Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000 ED or Polaroid Sprintscan 120 ??

["Dicky" <corbettr@dircon.co.uk>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Hemingway, David J" <HEMINGD@POLAROID.COM>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 4:44 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000 ED or Polaroid Sprintscan 120 ??


> In researching for the SS120 we asked medium format users about features
> including the various dust and scratch solutions. They said pretty much to
> the person they took excellent care of their film and did not consider
dust
> to be a problem. They said they would rather address dust with localized
> Photoshop work rather than a global system they perceive as softening the
> entire image.
> Polacolor Insight has software based dust removal. My personal testing has
> shown if I take a tremendously dirty slide which I have made no attempt to
> clean the Insight dust removal appears to be about 80% as effective as
ICE.
> If I take a more realistic slide which has be cared and cleaned the
results
> are much closer.
>  I also polled several Imacon d
> dealers to see if any of their customers have requested hardware dust
> removal solution. They responded they have never had a single request. I
> don't think Heidleburg has it on their drum scanners. I also noticed at
PMA
> that Imacon was  demo'ing dust removal in Photoshop using the history
> palette. Pretty neat.
> All that being said if we did have ICE it would be easier at the point of
> sale but I don't know how much better a scanner it would be..> David Hemingway
> Polaroid Corporation

It all depends on the purpose for which the scanner was purchased.
High end drum scanners such as the Hell, Dainippon or Crosfield, remove
scratches by mounting the original in a glycerine solution. Dust is removed
at the picture editing stage, post scanning.
The reason for this system is that scanner productivity is the key to system
output levels and therefore anything that slows down output is avoided.
The amateur, on the other hand, has rarely such a need and usually likes
their equipment to embrace as many functions as possible in a single
product.
This is seen as good value for money, which I would suggest is the case.
He is not likely to be selling his scans for profit and therefore has little
need for high output of digitised images and is also not likely to have any
time deadlines to meet.

Richard Corbett