Coolscan V, ICE and Kodachrome?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Don Campbell
  • Start date Start date
D

Don Campbell

I've searched through the list and found out:

1) Early versions of IR-based ICE have had problems with Kodachrome.

2) Some Kodachromes have worse trouble than others.

3) Improvements might have made things better for more recently
designed scanners.

My question is, what are people's experiences with Kodachrome and
ICE with the Nikon Coolscan V? If I have a majority of slides that
are Kodachrome, am I making a mistake to go for the Coolscan V? Are
there other machines that are better for Kodachrome in a similar
price range?

TIA,
Don
 
I've searched through the list and found out:

1) Early versions of IR-based ICE have had problems with Kodachrome.
Click to expand...

So do the new versions.
2) Some Kodachromes have worse trouble than others.
Click to expand...
True, it varies from batch to batch.
3) Improvements might have made things better for more recently
designed scanners.
Click to expand...

I have Digital ICE and a Nikon LS 5000 ED. It doesn't do a whole lot
with most Kodachrome slides. However it doesn't make them look worse
which I understand is an improvement.
My question is, what are people's experiences with Kodachrome and
ICE with the Nikon Coolscan V? If I have a majority of slides that
are Kodachrome, am I making a mistake to go for the Coolscan V? Are
there other machines that are better for Kodachrome in a similar
price range?
Click to expand...

If you are comparing to the use of Digital ICE with Kodachrome, then
probably not.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
 
Don Campbell said:
I've searched through the list and found out:

1) Early versions of IR-based ICE have had problems with Kodachrome.

2) Some Kodachromes have worse trouble than others.

3) Improvements might have made things better for more recently
designed scanners.

My question is, what are people's experiences with Kodachrome and
ICE with the Nikon Coolscan V? If I have a majority of slides that
are Kodachrome, am I making a mistake to go for the Coolscan V? Are
there other machines that are better for Kodachrome in a similar
price range?
Click to expand...
I don't have the LS-50 to give you a direct comparison, but I do have
the LS-4000, which is the predecessor of the LS-5000 and is effectively
now the LS-50 in all aspects but the bulk scanning options and hardware
interface. I have also used several earlier Nikon scanners, from the
LS-20 onwards.

I have had no problems whatsoever scanning Kodachrome with the LS-4000,
including slides which were impossible to scan acceptably in earlier
scanners. You can't guarantee that all KC emulsions processed at all
times will have the same success, but most other users have reported
similar results although one or two folks still seem to have problems.
 
Thanks for the reply. You say that you "have had no problems"
scanning Kodachrome. Does that mean you find ICE will do
a good job of eliminating small defects?

Don
 
Don Campbell said:
Thanks for the reply. You say that you "have had no problems"
scanning Kodachrome. Does that mean you find ICE will do
a good job of eliminating small defects?
Click to expand...
Yes - I have Ice works just as well on my KC emulsions as it does on E6
but, as I said, some folks still seem to have problems.

There are two ICE settings, Normal and Fine. I find that "Fine" causes
too much image softening - although it gets rid of grain extremely well
too! It is almost as if ICE is picking up the film grain as defects and
trying to conceal that too. On normal setting it works extremely well
though, even on the KC slides I have used, with virtually no perceptible
image softening other than areas around known defects and I could not
imagine using any film scanner without ICE now.
 
Kennedy McEwen said:
Yes - I have Ice works just as well on my KC emulsions as it does on E6
but, as I said, some folks still seem to have problems.

There are two ICE settings, Normal and Fine. I find that "Fine" causes
too much image softening - although it gets rid of grain extremely well
too! It is almost as if ICE is picking up the film grain as defects and
trying to conceal that too. On normal setting it works extremely well
though, even on the KC slides I have used, with virtually no perceptible
image softening other than areas around known defects and I could not
imagine using any film scanner without ICE now.
Click to expand...

I use the Coolscan V and all my slides are Kodachrome. I find that ICE
used on the Kodachrome setting of NikonScan does very little. But if I
scan Kodachrome as a positive, ICE works perfectly on the "normal"
setting. It softens, as you say, on the fine setting.

However, used with Vuescan's infrared filtering on the "light"
setting, virtually all defects are perfectly eliminated from KCs with
almost no softening and I regard its filtering as better than ICE.

I love the infrared cleaning facility of the scanner so much that I
would not contemplate ever buying a scanner without it.

It was hard to find the best place in this thread to make this comment
as it relates to all other posts within it!
 
Stephen said:
I use the Coolscan V and all my slides are Kodachrome. I find that ICE
used on the Kodachrome setting of NikonScan does very little. But if I
scan Kodachrome as a positive, ICE works perfectly on the "normal"
setting. It softens, as you say, on the fine setting.

However, used with Vuescan's infrared filtering on the "light"
setting, virtually all defects are perfectly eliminated from KCs with
almost no softening and I regard its filtering as better than ICE.

I love the infrared cleaning facility of the scanner so much that I
would not contemplate ever buying a scanner without it.

It was hard to find the best place in this thread to make this comment
as it relates to all other posts within it!
Click to expand...



Hello
I find with ICE and Kodachrome on the LS50 that cleaning is pretty good,
BUT, it does affect the areas of sharp light/dark transitions.

In my limited experience of Vuescan, it tends to do the same.

Here is a link to a two layer PSD.

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/ICE.psd

Mike Engles
 
Mike Engles said:
I find with ICE and Kodachrome on the LS50 that cleaning is pretty good,
BUT, it does affect the areas of sharp light/dark transitions.

In my limited experience of Vuescan, it tends to do the same.

Here is a link to a two layer PSD.

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/ICE.psd
Click to expand...
Despite showing a preview of the image, Photoshop 7.01 only produces a
text file stating "This layered Photoshop file was not saved with a
composite image." when it is opened. :-(
 
Kennedy said:
Despite showing a preview of the image, Photoshop 7.01 only produces a
text file stating "This layered Photoshop file was not saved with a
composite image." when it is opened. :-(
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
Click to expand...


Hello


I forgot to convert the image to 8 bit, CS does 16 bit layers.

I will redo it.

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/ICED.psd

Mike Engles
 
Kennedy said:
Despite showing a preview of the image, Photoshop 7.01 only produces a
text file stating "This layered Photoshop file was not saved with a
composite image." when it is opened. :-(
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
Click to expand...


Hello

This is a comparison with a E6 film

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/E6ICED.psd

Mike Engles
 
Mike Engles said:
http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/ICED.psd
Click to expand...
Something strange going on here Mike. I can't explain why, but the
entire exposure appears to have changed between the ICE and non-ICE'd
images. Look at the individual histograms - the same features appear in
both, but at a higher level in the ICE version than in the non-ICE
version. I've never seen this effect on the LS-4000 with KC. Are you
sure you did not turn DEE on and off as well?
 
Kennedy said:
Something strange going on here Mike. I can't explain why, but the
entire exposure appears to have changed between the ICE and non-ICE'd
images. Look at the individual histograms - the same features appear in
both, but at a higher level in the ICE version than in the non-ICE
version. I've never seen this effect on the LS-4000 with KC. Are you
sure you did not turn DEE on and off as well?
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
Click to expand...


Hello

I don't think I did.I only used 1 stop of ROC and 3 GEM.
My LS40 had the same problem with Scan4

Here is another example of ICE no ICE. This time DEE is on in both
cases, with 1 stop of ROC and 3 GEM.
Ice seems to act like a 'Find Edges' with K'chromes. It does nothing to
E6 films.

Here are the links.

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/Kchrome.psd
http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/Kchrome2.psd

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/E6ICED.psd


Mike Engles
 
Back
Top