Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems

[Barbara & Martin Greene <martbarb@earthlink.net>]

Bob

When you state that "Ice" at the Normal setting just barely softens the
images" or that "the effects are barley noticeable," you  are acknowledging
that there is a difference, no matter how slight that may be.  I spend lots
of money on excellent lenses and work to perfect my technique in order to
get images that are as sharp and detailed as possible, and I do not want to
lose any of it.

Martin
. 

> From: "Bob Kehl - Kvernstoen, Kehl & Assoc." <BobKehl@kvernkehl.com>
> Organization: Kvernstoen, Kehl & Associates
> Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 15:32:52 -0500
> To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
> 
> 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
>