RE: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE

2001-07-10 Thread Vladislav Jurco

With clean film, ICE shouldn't have anything to do.

Regards

Tony Sleep


Tony there IS a difference - less apparent grain and slightly less contrast
at highest picture frequencies (app. 60 lp/mm). Whole picture is affected.

Vlad



---
Odchozí  zpráva neobsahuje viry.
Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz).
Verze: 6.0.256 / Virová báze: 129 - datum vydání: 31.5.2001




RE: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE

2001-07-09 Thread James Grove


I havent (yet) notved any differnece between scans with ICE and
without. Maybe I am not doing something right?!


James Grove
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.jamesgrove.co.uk
http://www.mountain-photos.co.uk
ICQ 99737573 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jawed Ashraf
Sent: 09 July 2001 20:59
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE


Does anyone understand the difference between Normal and Fine mode?  Is
it a resolution thing?  Or a time-to-compute thing?

I'm using an LS40.  Is fine a waste of time, because my scanner isn't of
a high-enough resolution?

Jawed




RE: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE

2001-07-09 Thread Jawed Ashraf

LOL!  Maybe your film has no scratches!  You should see a slight blurring
across the image with ICE on.

I bought this scanner because of the ICE (dust and scratch removal).  I have
a large set of old negs that are mostly scratched - sometimes so wilfully
that it beggars belief (and I archived them at the time into paper/plastic
sleeves, in a binder - so it's the labs that have done the damage, I
reckon).

Trying to repair the damage myself using the clone tool in PS was proving to
be more and more sickeningly tedious with my old scanner.

I'm just curious, now, as to the difference between the two settings.  (I'm
not talking about ROC and GEM.)

I could try to find differences by scanning different types of damage - but
if someone knows, that'll save me some effort.

Ta!
Jawed

(hmm, I fancy some Ambrosia Cream Rice - hmm, wonder if the shop across the
road has any)

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of James Grove
 Sent: 09 July 2001 22:08
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE



   I havent (yet) notved any differnece between scans with ICE and
 without. Maybe I am not doing something right?!


 James Grove
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.jamesgrove.co.uk
 http://www.mountain-photos.co.uk
 ICQ 99737573

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jawed Ashraf
 Sent: 09 July 2001 20:59
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE


 Does anyone understand the difference between Normal and Fine mode?  Is
 it a resolution thing?  Or a time-to-compute thing?

 I'm using an LS40.  Is fine a waste of time, because my scanner isn't of
 a high-enough resolution?

 Jawed






RE: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE

2001-07-09 Thread Tony Sleep

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 22:08:05 +0100  James Grove ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 
wrote:

   I havent (yet) notved any differnece between scans with ICE and
 without. Maybe I am not doing something right?!

Drop your film in the ashtray, and try again :)

With clean film, ICE shouldn't have anything to do.

Regards 

Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio  exhibit; + film scanner 
info  comparisons