konica minolta scan dual iv

[Cliff Tonkin]

Any opinions on this scanner. Does it lose much by not having ICE.


Thanks,

Cliff Tonkin

 

[Hecate]

Any opinions on this scanner. Does it lose much by not having ICE.


Thanks,

Cliff Tonkin

That depends. If you have lots of Kodachrome and B&W to scan, then no,
because you can't use ICE with B&W and generally not with Kodachrome
either. If you lots of negs and E transparencies then you'll be
cursing yourself for buying a scanner without ICE.

--

Hecate
(e-mail address removed)
Dogs are Man's Best Friend because
He needs a buddy who's dumber than him
Of course, women have men...

 

[Dps]

Hi all,

I am also considering buying the same scanner. I have few slides and many
negatives I want to scan. I do not particularly wish to get very large image
files, so ppi no is no problem, 3200 will do. In any case, if I need a
larger file, I go to the local store who have equipment of thousands $ and
do the job for me (1 out of 40 images). I simply need clean and descent
scans of my images, which, my flatbed will not produce. I am happy with its
resolution, but the equipment gets *very* dirty, it is slow and only accepts
4 negs a time, which may scratch 6-neg film strips that I usually get after
development (2 exposures are hanging out). I do not wish to give lots of
money for a scanner, since I believe that currently they are overpriced for
what they offer (SD IV costs about 390 euros over here, which is acceptable)
compared to the capabilities vs. price of dp technology. So, I am planning
for the SD IV, but I hear so much about ICE that I am confused. As far as
I've seen into it, minolta offers similar soft functionalities. Are these so
much worse? Also, is ICE combined with some hardware and this makes the
difference?

thanks

dimitris

 

[Hecate]

Hi all,

I am also considering buying the same scanner. I have few slides and many
negatives I want to scan. I do not particularly wish to get very large image
files, so ppi no is no problem, 3200 will do. In any case, if I need a
larger file, I go to the local store who have equipment of thousands $ and
do the job for me (1 out of 40 images). I simply need clean and descent
scans of my images, which, my flatbed will not produce. I am happy with its
resolution, but the equipment gets *very* dirty, it is slow and only accepts
4 negs a time, which may scratch 6-neg film strips that I usually get after
development (2 exposures are hanging out). I do not wish to give lots of
money for a scanner, since I believe that currently they are overpriced for
what they offer (SD IV costs about 390 euros over here, which is acceptable)
compared to the capabilities vs. price of dp technology. So, I am planning
for the SD IV, but I hear so much about ICE that I am confused. As far as
I've seen into it, minolta offers similar soft functionalities. Are these so
much worse? Also, is ICE combined with some hardware and this makes the
difference?

ICE is very different and it's the best of it's type. That's why
people are willing to pay for it. I've never seen any other method
that cleans up the image as well as ICE other than sitting there in
your imaging app, magnifying the image, and laboriously dealing with
each spot, one at a time.

 

[Kennedy McEwen]

I am planning
for the SD IV, but I hear so much about ICE that I am confused. As far as
I've seen into it, minolta offers similar soft functionalities.

ICE is not just software.

Are these so
much worse?

Yes! Do you really think you would hear as much about ICE if it was
only marginally or not at all better than the alternatives?

Also, is ICE combined with some hardware and this makes the
difference?

That is the whole point of ICE! You state above that you *hear* a lot
about ICE, yet by asking that question you clearly demonstrate that you
haven't *listened* ! There is no shortage of information on how ICE
works on the net, Google throws up 3 million hits, but you could do a
lot worse than start from its inventor's web site:
http://www.appliedsciencefiction.com/products/ice/FilmICEOverview.shtml