LOL! Maybe your film has no scratches! You should see a slight blurring
across the image with ICE on.
I bought this scanner because of the ICE (dust and scratch removal). I have
a large set of old negs that are mostly scratched - sometimes so wilfully
that it beggars belief (and I "archived" them at the time into paper/plastic
sleeves, in a binder - so it's the labs that have done the damage, I
reckon).
Trying to repair the damage myself using the clone tool in PS was proving to
be more and more sickeningly tedious with my old scanner.
I'm just curious, now, as to the difference between the two settings. (I'm
not talking about ROC and GEM.)
I could try to find differences by scanning different types of damage - but
if someone knows, that'll save me some effort.
Ta!
Jawed
(hmm, I fancy some Ambrosia Cream Rice - hmm, wonder if the shop across the
road has any)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of James Grove
> Sent: 09 July 2001 22:08
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE
>
>
>
> I havent (yet) notved any differnece between scans with ICE and
> without. Maybe I am not doing something right?!
>
>
> James Grove
> james@jamesgrove.co.uk
>
>
> ICQ 99737573
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Jawed Ashraf
> Sent: 09 July 2001 20:59
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE
>
>
> Does anyone understand the difference between Normal and Fine mode? Is
> it a resolution thing? Or a time-to-compute thing?
>
> I'm using an LS40. Is fine a waste of time, because my scanner isn't of
> a high-enough resolution?
>
> Jawed
>
>
