[filmscanners] Re: Scan Dual IV vs Scan Dual II

["Preston Earle" <PEarle@triad.rr.com>]

"LAURIE SOLOMON"  wrote: "Preston, I have to wonder if time were money
if you would actually save a whole lot by using dICE since using it
often slows down the scan speed a great deal.  If one cleaned one's film
and dust out of the scanner, would one have to spend more than a minimal
amount of time touching up dust on the film scans without dICE as
compared to the amount of time a dICE scan would take?  It make (might)
be a toss up."
---------------------

I have my film processed at a one-hour lab, have prints made, and then
scan the negatives. (I ask the lab not to cut the negatives and to be
careful in handling them. The operators seem to be conscientious in
trying to keep the negs clean and scratch-free.) I don't clean the negs
beyond perhaps wiping them with a lint-free cloth, and I don't always do
that. (It doesn't seem to make any difference.) Most rolls I have gotten
back from a variety of labs seem dust-free, but the scanner still picks
up a lot of tiny-to-small spots. The Polaroid D&SR filter takes care of
the tiny ones, but it still takes a couple of minutes to clone or heal
the larger ones. Plus, with the D&SR, I have to be conscious of
artifacts created in the cleaning process, particularly in the specular
highlights of the image. I don't know whether dICE would be faster or
not, but I expect it would be a lot more fun.

I did have one roll of old (circa. 2000) negatives I uncovered the other
day, and when I scanned them, there were virtually no spots to be
cleaned on any of the scans. It was so nice to be able to concentrate on
color (and other image) issues only, and not have to go through each
scan fixing the spots.

Preston Earle
PEarle@triad.rr.com


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