Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems

["Bob Kehl - Kvernstoen, Kehl & Assoc." <BobKehl@kvernkehl.com>]

I'm confused.

On my Nikon LS-4000 "Ice" at the Normal setting just barely softens the
images.  "Ice" at the Fine setting seems to add noticeable softening, but at
Normal the effects are barely noticeable at 400% in Photoshop.  I leave
"Ice" on all the time.  Any softening effects are not noticeable at all in
an 8x10 print.  I've not yet tried in a 13x19.

When I heard all the talk about "Ice" softening images I thought perhaps my
photos are just not sharp enough for me to see the difference, especially
since I seldom use a tripod.  But my latest test photos are images taken
with my new Canon L lens with optical image stabilization.

What do you think?






----- Original Message -----
From: Barbara & Martin Greene <martbarb@earthlink.net>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 12:24 PM
Subject: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems


> Have my new scanner less than a week and have a couple of serious problems
> that I'd like help with.  Up until now, I've scanned all of my slides
using
> Photo Cds and had anticipated a vast improvement in quality.  I keep my
> slides as clean as possible.  When I scan using Digital Ice, I get clean
> scans, but I feel they are on the soft side, particularly when compared to
> the amount of detail present when Digital Ice is turned off.  But, the
> dilemma is, that when Digital  Ice is off, the amount of junk covering
every
> part of the scan is horrendous.  I  checked with Nikon tech support,  and
> the recommendation was to clean it out with canned air.  I did this and
the
> result was some reduction in junk, but still lots left over.  They
> recommended I return it for cleaning.  Strange, that there should have
been
> so much dirt in it. I bought it from Ritz camera, and, so far as I could
> tell, it was freshly  boxed.  I can still return it to them.
>
> But I am distressed that Digital Ice so softens the scan, forcing me to do
> without it and have to deal with dust through Photoshop, however little
> there may if I get a new machine.  Also, I've found that getting a sharp
> scan, even when I auto-focus on the sharpest part of an image, does not
> occur with consistency.  Without making a few scans of an image, it can be
> difficult to know when you get the best results.  I'm wondering whether or
> not I got a lemon?  Feeling that maybe I'd do better with the new
Canonscan
> 4000, whose sharpness has been praised and the Fast software is supposed
to
> have little or no softening effect.  Also, at this point, the main
> difference I see between the Photo CD and the Nikon scan is that the Photo
> CD color is way off, requiring lots of correction in Photoshop and the
> Nikon scan is color-perfect.  I'd appreciate assistance from those who are
> using the above scanners.
>
> Martin