I consider features like ICE essential for scanning C-41 negatives, as I have
never received a roll of C-41 from the lab that did not contain a forest of dust
and scratches, and it's either spend hours in Photoshop cleaning the scans, or
let ICE wash all that away.
However, I don't even use ICE for slides, as they are usually very clean, even
from one-hour labs, and I don't use them for B&W negatives, either, because I
develop most B&W myself and take enough care with it that it is free of dust and
scratches and thus requires no special processing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrea de Polo" <andrea@alinari.it>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 16:19
Subject: filmscanners: Nikon 8000 and ICE/ROC: are they really so bad???
> Hello,
>
> as you can see from the post below from another mailing list,
> DIGITALSILVER, bad reports are giving to the Nikon 8000 and the ICE
> cleaning sw. It is really true also on some of you, or this matter
> has now been fixed? I would like to know that since I would like to
> consider to buy the Nikon 8000 REALLY for the ICE and ROC features!!!!
>
> Cheers; Andrea
> ----------------------
> B2E
> B2B
> THE NEW IMAGING SERVICE NEAR YOU!
> ----------------------
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> From: Moreno Polloni <mp@dccnet.com>
>
> The ICE and GEM features didn't seem very important to me either, but now
> that I have the scanner, I use them often enough to consider them essential.
> They really do save a lot of time. No matter how well I clean the images
> beforehand, there's always a few specks that sneak in.
>
> The banding with the 8000 (in my experience) has never occured during
> straight scans, but only when ICE or multi-sampling is enabled. NikonScan
> 3.2 is due soon and hopefully that will help.
>
> ------------------------
>
> From: Tim Spragens <t.spragens@cityweb.de>
>
> Bad news, Lawrence, sorry to hear it. Has anyone had difficulties
> with the Polaroid? The cleanup hardware/software of the Nikon
> aren't so much of an interest to me, but good, reliable straight
> scans are. I was hoping the Nikons would be flowing out now,
> allowing more comparisons between the two.
>
> Tim
>
> > I can't speak for anyone else but I've had 2 8000's and they both had
> > banding issues. The second one has been at Nikon repair for almost 2
> > weeks now and is as they say 'still on the bench'. needless to say,
> > I'm not too happy at this point. That damn thing had better work
> > correctly when it get returned to me or Nikon is going to get more
> > than an ear full...
> >
