Re: filmscanners: Infrared scan

["Richard N. Moyer" <dickmoyer@mail.earthlink.net>]

If you purchase a high resolution scanner which now is prone to give 
you image artifacts generated by a micro bleb or dust particle (see 
ragged edges - below) on the film, and then negate the high dpi by 
applying ICE which - in effect - smoothes (or smears) the entire 
image (like blurring in PS), what have you got for all that effort 
and expense? Something doesn't compute. It would seem that you don't 
want a scanner or scanner settings which resolve and portray 
non-image details. You do want higher dynamic range (unrelated to 
high dpi?) to get shadow detail, but what do you really get beyond 
that? Except huge files.

And then you hear that with these huge files you can print huge 
pictures. With smeared pixels? With dust artifacts?

Someone please comment on this with more common sense than I appear 
to have this morning.


>In a message dated 6/9/2001 10:31:44 AM EST, michael@shaffer.net writes:
>
>>  Exactly ... and the softening can be obvious with the Nikonscan
>>   version of ICE.
>
>The root of the problem with NikonScan is that there are ragged
>edges around dust spots after applying the ICE correction using
>the infrared channel.  The ICE algorithm applies a smoothing
>filter over the whole image to smooth out these ragged edges
>around dust spots, while VueScan only does the smoothing in
>the immediate vicinity of the dust spots.
>
>>   it seems to me someone complained
>>   about Vuescan's "clean" function again softening in early versions of
>>   v.7.  I believe Ed admitted as much and promised a fix.
>
>I fixed this quite a while ago.
>
>Regards,
>Ed Hamrick