[filmscanners] Re: 'Cheap' film scanner recommendations

["Arthur Entlich" <artistik@shaw.ca>]

Hi Jack,

Nice to hear from you again. With axes falling at many of the high tech
and image corporations (both HP and Kodak are eliminating something like
10-15,000 employees worldwide) it must be a difficult period.

Regarding the improved response of dICE to Kodachrome, does it involve
honing in on the IR frequencies for the specific dye sets used in
Kodachrome so that the IR light waves go through the dyes transparently?
  Considering how many times Kodachrome (and other) films have changed
their dye sets (I realize Kodachrome is probably one of the most
difficult, since the dye was added at time of development via dye baths,
rather than creating dye from chemistry already within the film), it
must be quite the battle.

Art



Jack Phipps wrote:

> Actually, Digital ICE works quite well with most Kodachrome film.
> There are certain images that are troublesome. Certain batches of film
> with a lot of cyan are the most serious cuprites. For example I
> scanned an image of a man wearing a dark navy colored cap. Of course
> there was a high density of cyan in the cap. Unfortunately the cap had
> yellow lettering on it. The yellow lettering was the only part of the
> image that was affected when correcting the image using the infrared
> defect map. It was also unfortunate that the image was covered with
> many fine scratches and other very visible surface defects. The
> fastest way to solve the problem was to scan the image twice and
> "bring back" the lettering on the cap with a layer mask in an image
> editor. The lettering on the cap was an important part of the image
> otherwise I would have left it alone.
>
> My workflow is to scan Kodachrome with Digital ICE on. If I notice
> artifacts around high densities of cyan, rescan with Digital ICE off.
> If there are a lot of defects, I combine the two (or I go down the
> hall and use a Nikon 9000). If there is any fading or color imbalance,
> then I apply Digital ROC.
>
> The other choice is to purchase a new Nikon 9000 that does scan
> Kodachrome quite effectively. However, I don't think that the Nikon
> 9000 meets the requirement of inexpensive. The Nikon 5000 and the
> Nikon V also perform better with Kodachrome than the older models but
> not as well at the 9000.
>
> Jack Phipps
> Kodak's Austin Development Center
> Formerly, Applied Science Fiction
>

>
>
>

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