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

["Brad Davis" <DocBradd@mac.com>]

Preston,

At one time I had all my color negatives ( and B&W, I use XP2) done at one
hour labs and I spent a lot of time spotting - I don't like the dust removal
programs (I've tried various instances) as it reduces the sharpness of the
image - I already feel that I am not able to truly use the near perfection
of my Contax lenses.

Then, for various reasons, I went to a pro lab for processing and found that
the negatives were nearly clean, much cleaner than what I had been getting.
The spots that I got on my "one hour" processing negs were so small that
they didn't show up on 4X6 prints and I have difficulty seeing them.  They
also seem to be nearly impossible to clean off - as though they are in the
emulsion, rather than dust that has landed on the film.

I don't believe that this problem has to be present at all "one hour"
processors, but I have seen it over and over since I like the idea of being
able to get my film processed more conveniently.  I now take all my film to
a pro lab as I am tired of removing spots.  It seems that at 4000 dpi, the
Polaroid scanner picks up every little thing.

Good luck


-Brad


-To those who do not know mathematics it is difficult to get across a real
feeling as to the beauty, the deepest beauty, of nature ... If you want to
learn about nature, to appreciate nature, it is necessary to understand the
language that she speaks in. Richard Feynman  -The Character of Physical Law
-


> "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

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