Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[filmscanners] RE: Nikon's GEM vs.NeatImage
Hello!
I wuz a beta tester on the GEM plugin, so I am a bit biased, but I like
it a lot. You DO sometimes need to apply it on a duplicate layer and
adjust with Blend If, or Opacity settings, but it is quite wonderful
when it is used carefully. I cannot compare it with NeatImage, as I
don't own the latter.
Les
> -----Original Message-----
> From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Alex Z
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 3:19 PM
> To: wogears@fast.net
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Nikon's GEM vs.NeatImage
>
>
> Thanks for the link.
> The GEM is basically softwware only solution, unlike ICE that
> indeed requires certain hardware such as IR channel.
>
> I'll try their demo as soon as time permits and will report back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
|
