Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000

["Steve Greenbank" <steve@gccl.fsbusiness.co.uk>]

Apart from the one slide at a time I have said it before too and it does
work. I also prefer the clean slide output from the SS4000/A4000T to the
Nikon 4000 (from examples I've seen) which seems to add loads of grain -
which leaves a softer image if it is removed. On the other hand, I also have
many older slides that are a disaster for dust - I could do to borrow a
Nikon for a few months.

I will have to try the one slide at a time - I was thinking of building a
shelf just above the scanner to hopefully reduce the air flow. Given the way
the machine (rather annoyingly) trundles the slide carrier backwards and
forwards for ages before scanning, I don't suppose one slide at a time is
much slower anyway.

Steve

----- Original Message -----
From: <RogerMillerPhoto@aol.com>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 5:31 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000


> I've added my two cents worth on this dust subject before, but I'm willing
to
> do it again.  "If you store your slides/negatives unprotected on the floor
of
> a well traveled hallway, you're going to want Nikon's automatic dust
removing
> system."  But with a little care on your part, it shouldn't be necessary.
I
> use a professional lab that returns dust free transparencies and
negatives.
> I leave them in their package until I'm ready to work with them or scan
them.
>  My working environment is by no means a "clean room," but for the short
time
> that my slides are out of the box being inspected for dust and mounted in
the
> scanner's carrier, they collect virtually no dust.  A Staticmaster brush
is
> needed on 20 to 30 percent of the slides to remove an occasional piece of
> dust.  It takes 10 seconds to inspect for and remove the dust.  I
generally
> scan one slide at a time so I don't have slides in the carrier that are
> exposed to "outside" air where they can collect dust.  The single slide
being
> scanned is inside the scanner where it's protected from dust settling on
it.
> (Those of you complaining about dust with the SS4000, are you batch
> scanning?)
>
> Well, I guess you got a bit more than two cents worth.  But I can
guarantee
> you it's 100 per cent certifiable personal opinion backed up by a certain
> amount of logic from a person who has no experience with Nikon scanners.
If
> you like Nikon scanners, you don't have to justify it to me.  And some
people
> may actually benefit from an automatic dust removal system because of
their
> work flow or work habits.  But it's easier to prevent dust in the first
place
> that to fight it after the fact.  Anyone who's worked in a conventional
> darkroom knows how to manage the dust problem.  And they didn't have
> Photoshop to easily repair the damage; all they had were diffusion (as
> opposed to condenser) enlargers.
>
> In a message dated 8/11/2001 7:33:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> darkroom@ix.netcom.com writes:
>
>
> > > Guess what, as I
> > > was ready to
> > > launch into my dust and scratch story these folks stopped me in my
tricks
> > > saying they were not interested. It seems in some photographic
segments it
> > > is not a valued feature.
> >
> > I use a Leafscan...and I have never, except for one negative that was
> > mis-handled, had the need for any dust and scratch removal.  I guess if
it
> > was there, I might use it...but then again, I might not...
> >
> > I make sure my film is dust free...BUT...I do believe that the design of
the
> > Leafscan is such that dust is minimized.  The chamber is pressurized
with
> > filtered air.  I do not believe either the Nikon or the Polaroid 120
> > scanner(s) do that.  My Polaroid SS4k DID have a dust problem...dust
settled
> > on the film, no matter what I did.
> >
> >
>
>
>