[filmscanners] Re: GRAIN/ICE SHOWDOWN: Nikon LS8000 vs.MinoltaScanMulti Pro!

["Arthur Entlich" <artistic-1@shaw.ca>]

Sorry, but that's not accurate.

The need for dICE is dependent upon the amount of the defects which show
up on the scan.

Hypothetically, if there were a scanner that produced a scan which
showed no dust, dirt, scratches, fungus, fingerprints or other more
severe defects, there would be no need for dICE.  In the real world, no
such scanner exists.

However, what does exist are scanners which tend to diminish almost to a
point of being invisible, dust, small dirt, and mild scratches, making
cloning touch up a simple couple of minute process.

If a person does not have films which suffer from fungus, crystallized
chemistry, fingerprints, or deep scratching on base side, those other
scanners can provide a reasonable scan with the need for dICE.

Some scanners accentuate dust dirt and scratches.  As we've seen these
include the Nikon and Minolta scanners.  For these dICE becomes nearly a
necessity.

Art

dickbo wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Simon Lamb" <simon@sclamb.com>
> To: <dickbo@btopenworld.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 4:31 PM
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: GRAIN/ICE SHOWDOWN: Nikon LS8000 vs.Minolta
> ScanMulti Pro!
>
>
> OK, thought I might try the SS 120.  Read a lot about it and the main issues
> seem to be fiddly holders (especially trying to line up the 35mm neg.
> strips) and no ICE.  Can any users let me know thoughts re. the holders and
> whether the need for ICE is less than the Nikon/Minolta due to the different
> type of light source.
>
> ICE is driven by original condition and not the condition of the scanner.
>
>
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body