Film scanners?
 

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Thanks in advance

Steve

Film scanners?
 

In article , newshound
wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in
the "keen amateur" price bracket.

Hey, that's my bracket as well!

I use the Epson Perfection V750 Pro (now replaced with the 850 Pro) which
comes with inserts for 135 and 120 film as well as large format and slides.

Image quality is superb.

https://epson.com/For-Work/Scanners/...on-Perfection-
V850-Pro-Photo-Scanner/p/B11B224201

--
Sandman

Film scanners?
 

On 15 Apr 2017 in rec.photo.digital, newshound wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in
the "keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some
myself at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there
anything which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value
for money or ease of use?

I've been using a Canoscan 9000 for the past couple of years. It's
under US$200, and seems to scan reasonably well. It's not terribly
convenient for bulk use - it can do 4 slides, or a dozen uncut
negatives at a time.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/p...-9000f-mark-ii

Software seems to be okay. My usual workflow is to scan to a
..tif and work on that in Lightroom or Photoshop. I found a roughly 3
decade old Ektachrome a couple of days ago that's been sitting in a
box for most of that time. Here's a scan using pretty much default
settings to Irfanview 64 and saved as a .png (Photobucket won't accept
TIFs). No other work done on it:

http://i1281.photobucket.com/albums/...psutmdusvd.png

It's also portable enough to bring along in the car - fits
conveniently into one of the wheeled carry-on size bags, although
you'd probably want some extra padding - extra shirts, sweaters, etc.

--
Joe Makowiec
http://makowiec.org/
Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

Film scanners?
 

I too use the Canoscan 9000. I also have a Nikon Coolscan iv ED, which
is a dedicated film and slide scanner capable of outstanding scans,
but I always go to the Canoscan. Easy to use, much faster, and the
scans are beautiful with very adequate resolution.



On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 13:28:23 -0000 (UTC), Joe Makowiec
wrote:

On 15 Apr 2017 in rec.photo.digital, newshound wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in
the "keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some
myself at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there
anything which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value
for money or ease of use?

I've been using a Canoscan 9000 for the past couple of years. It's
under US$200, and seems to scan reasonably well. It's not terribly
convenient for bulk use - it can do 4 slides, or a dozen uncut
negatives at a time.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/p...-9000f-mark-ii

Software seems to be okay. My usual workflow is to scan to a
.tif and work on that in Lightroom or Photoshop. I found a roughly 3
decade old Ektachrome a couple of days ago that's been sitting in a
box for most of that time. Here's a scan using pretty much default
settings to Irfanview 64 and saved as a .png (Photobucket won't accept
TIFs). No other work done on it:

http://i1281.photobucket.com/albums/...psutmdusvd.png

It's also portable enough to bring along in the car - fits
conveniently into one of the wheeled carry-on size bags, although
you'd probably want some extra padding - extra shirts, sweaters, etc.

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
newshound wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

buy a used nikon coolscan, scan all of your film, then sell it when
you're done, as you won't be needing it anymore.

quality scanners hold their value, so you'll be able to sell it for
roughly what you paid for it (possibly even a bit more), making the
effective cost for the hardware close to zero (possibly a small
profit).

Film scanners?
 

On 4/15/2017 8:22 AM, newshound wrote:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Thanks in advance

Steve

You've gotten a few good suggestions, so I'll just expand on some of
them and add something to consider. I would suggest giving up on the
notion of getting a feel for what results you might get if you were to
farm the work out to a pro. Professional hardware, skill and experience
can make a big difference in the results.

What do you want to do with the scans? If only to view on a computer
screen, there will be little to gain from high-resolution dedicated film
scanners. The flatbed type will be more than adequate and easier to use.

How much time do you want to spend? Dedicated film scanners such as the
Nikon CoolScan models are not quick.

--
best regards,

Neil

Film scanners?
 

On 4/15/2017 7:16 PM, Neil wrote:
On 4/15/2017 8:22 AM, newshound wrote:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Thanks in advance

Steve

You've gotten a few good suggestions, so I'll just expand on some of
them and add something to consider. I would suggest giving up on the
notion of getting a feel for what results you might get if you were to
farm the work out to a pro. Professional hardware, skill and experience
can make a big difference in the results.

What do you want to do with the scans? If only to view on a computer
screen, there will be little to gain from high-resolution dedicated film
scanners. The flatbed type will be more than adequate and easier to use.

How much time do you want to spend? Dedicated film scanners such as the
Nikon CoolScan models are not quick.

Thanks Neil and everyone else who replied.

I guess most of my stuff will only be suitable for viewing on a screen,
but I'd probably do some A4 or A3 prints of the best 1%. I recognise
that dedicated scanners are not quick (I have used one in the past), it
sounds as though I should consider a flat-bed for speed. Very useful to
have some specific recommendations.

Film scanners?
 

On 15 Apr 2017 13:00:12 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , newshound
wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in
the "keen amateur" price bracket.

Hey, that's my bracket as well!

I use the Epson Perfection V750 Pro (now replaced with the 850 Pro) which
comes with inserts for 135 and 120 film as well as large format and slides.

Image quality is superb.

https://epson.com/For-Work/Scanners/...on-Perfection-
V850-Pro-Photo-Scanner/p/B11B224201

I have used an Epson V700 for years. This is basically the same as a
V750 but with a few less bells and whistles. I have scanned hundreds
(thousands?) of old films and slides and found it has done a better
than excellent job. It came with extensive software which enables
major corrections to be made at the scanning level. Highly
recommended.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
RichA wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Get a film holder and use a DSLR or other 10+ megapixel camera.

another option, but not a very good one, particularly for negatives.

Film scanning is dead.

film is dead.

Film scanners?
 

newshound:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Get past that DIY urge. This is backbreaking, mind-numbing labour.
http://www.scanmyphotos.com/ or equivalent in your neighbourhood.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

Film scanners?
 

On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 16:32:37 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

On Saturday, 15 April 2017 08:23:00 UTC-4, newshound wrote:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Thanks in advance

Steve

Get a film holder and use a DSLR or other 10+ megapixel camera. Film scanning is dead.

Consistent control of lighting is difficult if you do it that way.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Film scanners?
 

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


Get a film holder and use a DSLR or other 10+ megapixel camera. Film
scanning is dead.

Consistent control of lighting is difficult if you do it that way.

actually that aspect is very easy. trivial, in fact.

Film scanners?
 

On 04/15/2017 09:45 AM, nospam wrote:
In article ,
newshound wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

buy a used nikon coolscan, scan all of your film, then sell it when
you're done, as you won't be needing it anymore.

Exactly what I was thinking when I bought my CoolScan. Then I got bored
with digital and started shooting film again. Glad I didn't sell it.

quality scanners hold their value, so you'll be able to sell it for
roughly what you paid for it (possibly even a bit more), making the
effective cost for the hardware close to zero (possibly a small
profit).


True.

Film scanners?
 

On 04/15/2017 05:32 PM, RichA wrote:
On Saturday, 15 April 2017 08:23:00 UTC-4, newshound wrote:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Thanks in advance

Steve

Get a film holder and use a DSLR or other 10+ megapixel camera.

Another possibility.

Film scanning is dead.


Wrong.

Film scanners?
 

On 04/15/2017 05:35 PM, nospam wrote:
In article ,
RichA wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Get a film holder and use a DSLR or other 10+ megapixel camera.

another option, but not a very good one, particularly for negatives.

Film scanning is dead.

film is dead.

Really wrong.

Film scanners?
 

On 04/15/2017 06:52 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


Get a film holder and use a DSLR or other 10+ megapixel camera. Film
scanning is dead.

Consistent control of lighting is difficult if you do it that way.

actually that aspect is very easy. trivial, in fact.


Yup.

Film scanners?
 

On 04/15/2017 06:22 AM, newshound wrote:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Thanks in advance

Steve
The only thing that I can add to the mostly excellent advice already
given is to purchase VueScan. It is far superior to any of the software
that comes with scanners.

Russell

Film scanners?
 

On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 12:30:24 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 16:32:37 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

On Saturday, 15 April 2017 08:23:00 UTC-4, newshound wrote:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Thanks in advance

Steve

Get a film holder and use a DSLR or other 10+ megapixel camera. Film scanning is dead.

Consistent control of lighting is difficult if you do it that way.

I bought a light box specifically for this. I had a negative holder
from an enlarger, and attached that to the box, and then velcro'd the
whole thing to the wall. (A copy stand probably would have been a much
better choice.) The "scanning" itself was extremely fast - the
negatives slid easily through the holder, and I used a remote for the
shutter, but the processing took a long time. In fact, I never did
finish that part. I did do a negative conversion on all of them in LR
or something, so now I can see what the photos are, and I can finish
processing the individual photos that I think are worth it. I also
understand that 24 MP is recommended for the camera. I used 16, and
they came out fine, but the originals are really nothing special. They
were all taken with mediocre lenses, all handheld, and all taken by a
rank amateur.

Film scanners?
 

In article , Russell D.
wrote:


buy a used nikon coolscan, scan all of your film, then sell it when
you're done, as you won't be needing it anymore.

Exactly what I was thinking when I bought my CoolScan. Then I got bored
with digital and started shooting film again.

bored with digital? there's so much more it can do versus film. how can
anyone be bored with it?

Glad I didn't sell it.

ok.

Film scanners?
 

In article , Russell D.
wrote:

The only thing that I can add to the mostly excellent advice already
given is to purchase VueScan. It is far superior to any of the software
that comes with scanners.

definitely.

the bundled scanner software is mostly garbage.

Film scanners?
 

In article , Russell D.
wrote:


Film scanning is dead.

film is dead.

Really wrong.

really right.

film use may not be zero, but it's close to it and getting closer every
day.

film sales have dramatically dropped off (kodak filed for bankruptcy,
polaroid is just a name), many films are no longer made (kodachrome
being the prime example), film cameras are no longer made (with very
rare exception and very, very few are sold) and very few places to
process film remain.

digital blows away film in every respect, although it can be downgraded
to look exactly like film for those who want that effect.

Film scanners?
 

On 04/15/2017 05:03 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On 15 Apr 2017 13:00:12 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , newshound
wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in
the "keen amateur" price bracket.

Hey, that's my bracket as well!

I use the Epson Perfection V750 Pro (now replaced with the 850 Pro) which
comes with inserts for 135 and 120 film as well as large format and slides.

Image quality is superb.

https://epson.com/For-Work/Scanners/...on-Perfection-
V850-Pro-Photo-Scanner/p/B11B224201

I have used an Epson V700 for years. This is basically the same as a
V750 but with a few less bells and whistles. I have scanned hundreds
(thousands?) of old films and slides and found it has done a better
than excellent job. It came with extensive software which enables
major corrections to be made at the scanning level. Highly
recommended.




I use the Epson V600 it's less expensive and very high quality scans

Film scanners?
 

On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 22:02:10 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Russell D.
wrote:

The only thing that I can add to the mostly excellent advice already
given is to purchase VueScan. It is far superior to any of the software
that comes with scanners.

definitely.

the bundled scanner software is mostly garbage.

A good thing about the V700/750 (and probably others for all I know)
is that when you load a swag of 35mm film images (or slides) into the
negative holder for scanning, the scanner detects the 24 original
images and by scanning them individually (in parallel) presents them
as such rather than one gigantic scanner-bed sized image. While its
doing all this you have time to go and make a cup of coffee.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Film scanners?
 

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


A good thing about the V700/750 (and probably others for all I know)
is that when you load a swag of 35mm film images (or slides) into the
negative holder for scanning, the scanner detects the 24 original
images and by scanning them individually (in parallel) presents them
as such rather than one gigantic scanner-bed sized image. While its
doing all this you have time to go and make a cup of coffee.

that can also be done with a coolscan, either a roll of negative film:
http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xCsAAOSwB-1Yr8wQ/s-l1600.jpg

or a bunch of slides:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._Coolscan_slid
es.jpg

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
nospam wrote:

In article , Russell D.
wrote:

The only thing that I can add to the mostly excellent advice already
given is to purchase VueScan. It is far superior to any of the software
that comes with scanners.

definitely.

the bundled scanner software is mostly garbage.

Possible trouble and annoyance aside, can you *really* get better
results from "superior" scanner software vs. the supplied app followed
by a good dose of Photoshop or GIMP?

Some years back when I was converting my slides, I evaluated VueScan and
some other after-market tool, but the result wasn't anything to shout
about. Just moved the effort and twiddling from post-processing to
scan-time, where (for me) it was far less convenient.

Isaac

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
newshound wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

I have a Plustek Opticfilm for 35mm and have posted a sample link to my
blog somewhere*. Get the Vuescan scanner soft even if Silverfast is
included. Much faster and versatile.

* http://tinyurl.com/mrf3re3

I'm done with the slides now and plan to start on the BW negs the next
fall or so...
--
teleportation kills

Film scanners?
 

On 4/16/2017 12:35 AM, nospam wrote:
In article ,
RichA wrote:

I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Get a film holder and use a DSLR or other 10+ megapixel camera.

another option, but not a very good one, particularly for negatives.

Film scanning is dead.

film is dead.

But not forgotten. Which is exactly why it is (sometimes) worth copying
before it decays.

Film scanners?
 

On 2017-04-15 08:22, newshound wrote:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but it is
time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and negatives
(mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware in the
"keen amateur" price bracket.

I know I can also "farm it out" but I'm interested in doing some myself
at least to get a feel for what results to inspect. Is there anything
which stands out towards the budget end in terms of value for money or
ease of use?

Amidst the other suggestions also think about archival quality scans for
the "best of the best". So a dedicated scanner is the best choice.

Also "pre filter" your film and slides to select those that are worthy
due to content or quality.

Make sure the scanner had ICE (scratch, dust correction) - thought that
won't work on Kodachrome (not sure about B&W).

A lot of Minolta 5400 scanners out there as well on the used market.

--
"If war is God's way of teaching Americans geography, then
recession is His way of teaching everyone a little economics."
..Raj Patel, The Value of Nothing.

Film scanners?
 

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

newshound:
I realise that this question doesn't have a simple answer, but
it is time I started scanning some of my old 35 mm slides and
negatives (mostly b&w).

I would really welcome some comments or experience on hardware
in the "keen amateur" price bracket.

Sandman:
Hey, that's my bracket as well!

I use the Epson Perfection V750 Pro (now replaced with the 850
Pro) which comes with inserts for 135 and 120 film as well as
large format and slides.

Image quality is superb.

https://epson.com/For-Work/Scanners/...on-Perfection-
V850-Pro-Photo-Scanner/p/B11B224201

I have used an Epson V700 for years. This is basically the same as a
V750 but with a few less bells and whistles. I have scanned hundreds
(thousands?) of old films and slides and found it has done a better
than excellent job. It came with extensive software which enables
major corrections to be made at the scanning level. Highly
recommended.

Yeah, outside of specialised lab scanners, I think these are the best in the
class really.

--
Sandman

Film scanners?
 

In article , isw
wrote:

The only thing that I can add to the mostly excellent advice already
given is to purchase VueScan. It is far superior to any of the software
that comes with scanners.

definitely.

the bundled scanner software is mostly garbage.

Possible trouble and annoyance aside, can you *really* get better
results from "superior" scanner software vs. the supplied app followed
by a good dose of Photoshop

yes

or GIMP?

even easier to surpass.

Some years back when I was converting my slides, I evaluated VueScan and
some other after-market tool, but the result wasn't anything to shout
about. Just moved the effort and twiddling from post-processing to
scan-time, where (for me) it was far less convenient.

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
newshound wrote:

Film scanning is dead.

film is dead.

But not forgotten. Which is exactly why it is (sometimes) worth copying
before it decays.

definitely.

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
nospam wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support it.

http://www.vividlight.com/articles/1015.htm
--
teleportation kills

Film scanners?
 

In article , android
wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support it.

digital ice uses infrared light for dust removal, created by applied
science fiction (awesome company name), later bought by kodak.

vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
nospam wrote:

In article , android
wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support it.

digital ice uses infrared light for dust removal, created by applied
science fiction (awesome company name), later bought by kodak.

vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

It does not. Vuescan uses the infrared channel created by the scanner to
subtract dust. I.e. ICE...
--
teleportation kills

Film scanners?
 

In article , android
wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support it.

digital ice uses infrared light for dust removal, created by applied
science fiction (awesome company name), later bought by kodak.

vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

It does not. Vuescan uses the infrared channel created by the scanner to
subtract dust. I.e. ICE...

that's what i said:
vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
nospam wrote:

In article , android
wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's equivalent
of
digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support it.

digital ice uses infrared light for dust removal, created by applied
science fiction (awesome company name), later bought by kodak.

vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

It does not. Vuescan uses the infrared channel created by the scanner to
subtract dust. I.e. ICE...

that's what i said:
vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Your wording suggest that you think that it's not. Whatever...
--
teleportation kills

Film scanners?
 

In article , android
wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's
equivalent
of digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support it.

digital ice uses infrared light for dust removal, created by applied
science fiction (awesome company name), later bought by kodak.

vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

It does not. Vuescan uses the infrared channel created by the scanner to
subtract dust. I.e. ICE...

that's what i said:
vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Your wording suggest that you think that it's not. Whatever...

it's not exactly the same. it's equivalent.

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
nospam wrote:

In article , android
wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's
equivalent
of digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support it.

digital ice uses infrared light for dust removal, created by applied
science fiction (awesome company name), later bought by kodak.

vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

It does not. Vuescan uses the infrared channel created by the scanner
to
subtract dust. I.e. ICE...

that's what i said:
vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Your wording suggest that you think that it's not. Whatever...

it's not exactly the same. it's equivalent.

From the main wiki:

"The ICE technology works from within the scanner, so unlike the
software-only solutions it does not alter any underlying details of the
image. Subsequent to the original Digital ICE technology, which used
infrared cleaning, additional image enhancement technologies were
marketed by Applied Science Fiction and Kodak under similar and related
names, often as part of a suite of compatible technologies. The ICE
technology uses a scanner with a pair of light sources, a normal RGB
lamp and an infrared (IR) lamp, and scans twice, once with each lamp.
The IR lamp detects the dust locations with its unique detection method,
and then inpainting is applied based on this data afterwards. The
general concept is to subtract the position of scratches and dust from
the RGB image."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_ICE
--
teleportation kills

Film scanners?
 

In article , android
wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's
equivalent
of digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support it.

digital ice uses infrared light for dust removal, created by applied
science fiction (awesome company name), later bought by kodak.

vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

It does not. Vuescan uses the infrared channel created by the scanner
to
subtract dust. I.e. ICE...

that's what i said:
vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Your wording suggest that you think that it's not. Whatever...

it's not exactly the same. it's equivalent.

From the main wiki:

"The ICE technology works from within the scanner, so unlike the
software-only solutions it does not alter any underlying details of the
image. Subsequent to the original Digital ICE technology, which used
infrared cleaning, additional image enhancement technologies were
marketed by Applied Science Fiction and Kodak under similar and related
names, often as part of a suite of compatible technologies. The ICE
technology uses a scanner with a pair of light sources, a normal RGB
lamp and an infrared (IR) lamp, and scans twice, once with each lamp.
The IR lamp detects the dust locations with its unique detection method,
and then inpainting is applied based on this data afterwards. The
general concept is to subtract the position of scratches and dust from
the RGB image."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_ICE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_cleaning#Method
...Some software algorithms, such as the latest ICE implementation
(Nikon Super Coolscan LS-9000 ED with Digital ICE Professional[3]),
VueScan's[4] and SilverFast's,[5] claim to use infrared cleaning to
find dust spots even when scanning Kodachrome.

https://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc31.htm#filterinfraredclean
Filter | Infrared clean

When an infrared channel is available, use this option to remove dust
spots and scratches. It only causes image softening in the immediate
vicinity of the spots and scratches, except when this option is set
to "Heavy".

http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/isrd/en.html
...iSRD utilizes this behavior as follows. The image is scanned two
times - the first is the regular RGB scan and the second is the
additional infrared scan that captures defects like dust and
scratches only. Then the calculative dust and scratch removal takes
effect, only where the infrared channel has detected any defects
without losing any important details.

Film scanners?
 

In article ,
nospam wrote:

In article , android
wrote:

some things are best done at scan time, such as vuescan's
equivalent
of digital ice.

Digital ICE's in the hardware. The soft do or do not support
it.

digital ice uses infrared light for dust removal, created by
applied
science fiction (awesome company name), later bought by kodak.

vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

It does not. Vuescan uses the infrared channel created by the
scanner
to
subtract dust. I.e. ICE...

that's what i said:
vuescan has its own implementation of infrared dust removal.

such as vuescan's equivalent of
digital ice.

Your wording suggest that you think that it's not. Whatever...

it's not exactly the same. it's equivalent.

From the main wiki:

"The ICE technology works from within the scanner, so unlike the
software-only solutions it does not alter any underlying details of the
image. Subsequent to the original Digital ICE technology, which used
infrared cleaning, additional image enhancement technologies were
marketed by Applied Science Fiction and Kodak under similar and related
names, often as part of a suite of compatible technologies. The ICE
technology uses a scanner with a pair of light sources, a normal RGB
lamp and an infrared (IR) lamp, and scans twice, once with each lamp.
The IR lamp detects the dust locations with its unique detection method,
and then inpainting is applied based on this data afterwards. The
general concept is to subtract the position of scratches and dust from
the RGB image."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_ICE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_cleaning#Method
...Some software algorithms, such as the latest ICE implementation
(Nikon Super Coolscan LS-9000 ED with Digital ICE Professional[3]),
VueScan's[4] and SilverFast's,[5] claim to use infrared cleaning to
find dust spots even when scanning Kodachrome.

https://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc31.htm#filterinfraredclean
Filter | Infrared clean

When an infrared channel is available, use this option to remove dust
spots and scratches. It only causes image softening in the immediate
vicinity of the spots and scratches, except when this option is set
to "Heavy".

http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/isrd/en.html
...iSRD utilizes this behavior as follows. The image is scanned two
times - the first is the regular RGB scan and the second is the
additional infrared scan that captures defects like dust and
scratches only. Then the calculative dust and scratch removal takes
effect, only where the infrared channel has detected any defects
without losing any important details.

An equivalent to Digital ICE would not be that but something else.
Vuescan and the others above might have slightly implementations of
Digital ICE...

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/equivalent

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/implementation
--
teleportation kills