Arthur writes: > The dust, or defect is above the jet streak > at the very top of the image. It is a gray > smudge, which seems to be dust or a defect in the > slide.
So there is. You must have spent a lot of time examining the sky. Remind me to shoot only on days with scattered clouds henceforth. > Well, you may still be able to reduce the > pressure on the film by placing a thin border > material around the edges, as an example. There is a spacer included with the holder, but I haven't figured out how or if I should use it with 3-exposure strips of 6x6. Also, there is only one such spacer, and it looks very fragile, and knowing Nikon, additional spacers probably cost $240 each. The manual says that the spacer is for use when there are less than three exposures on the strip. > Yes, I am aware of that. I was suggesting > that your "hurricane blasts of wind" might > cause dampness if the air wasn't dry ... I use canned air, so it should be dry and dust-free. > I was suggesting that since the dust can be > handled via dICE, that it might be detrimental > to over clean the film with air, because it > may make it more apt to show Newton rings. Well, this scan had dICE turned on, and you still saw dust (or something) on the transparency. I've tried 6x6 scans with dICE turned off, but unlike 35mm scans, getting a complete scan with no trace of visible dust or dirt over a 6x6 area seems only slightly more difficult than initiating cold fusion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
