RE: filmscanners: New Nikon performance

["Hemingway, David J" <HEMINGD@POLAROID.COM>]

Ed,
I have been biting my tongue throughout this whole dust conversation but I
guess I am finally baited out. I have done actual scans on the scanner with
a LED light source and the SS4000. It was quite obvious to me that there was
considerably more dust shown on the scanner with the LED light source. I
also noticed the scans were more contrasty. I will leave it to others to
decide whether this is good or bad but in my view it is actual.
David

 -----Original Message-----
From:   EdHamrick@aol.com [mailto:EdHamrick@aol.com] 
Sent:   Friday, June 08, 2001 8:33 AM
To:     filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject:        Re: filmscanners: New Nikon performance

In a message dated 6/8/2001 6:14:53 AM EST, kingphoto@mindspring.com writes:

> Not quite sure how to answer this assertion since it goes against
>  everything I've read and my own personal experience.

Don't believe everything you read (including what I write <smile>).

> I guess all I
>  can say is scans on my LS-30 without ICE compared to scans on my Agfa
>  T-2500 are quite different in terms of dust and scratches.

My experience is that scanners with better focus show more dust
than scanners without good focus.  For instance, take a SprintScan 4000
and a Nikon LS-4000 and compare the raw scans.  They show exactly
the same dust spots if you use the same slide on both, and both have
excellent focus.  If you take the same slide and scan it on almost
any flatbed, it won't show as much dust, since the dust spots get
blurred.

The whole "Nikon scanners accentuate dust" thing is just FUD
(fear, uncertainty and doubt) from vendors competing with Nikon.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick