what ICE does to your (my) image

[Pherdinand]

The V700 is a special case - try again with ICE set to 'speed' rather than 'quality' - the scan will be better.

Are you serious??
I'll have to try this.

 

[delft]

déja lu

déja lu

I have the following sympton with my Nikon Coolscan LS-40 ED (IV) :

When i turn ICE off to get the sharpest possible image i noticed that the Nikon exaggerated the corn-structure in the Fuji Velvia ISO50 slidefilm.
You can see that effect here clearly in the sky :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29504544@N08/3689267963/

The image looked much better with ICE turned on :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29504544@N08/3689243327/

I've just got a déja lu: Maybe this explains the corn-structure:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/fuji-pepper.shtml

greetings,

Dirk

 

[hlockwood]

Agreed. I've used ICE to good effect on my Minolta DS 5400 (I). Periodic a/b testing with several film types (including Portra and Fuji Pro 400/800) revealed no discernible artifacts in my experience. Then, too, my negs and slides are usually pretty clean, so ICE, ironically, probably isn't working all that hard from the get-go.


- Barrett

I use ICE, within NikonScan 4.02, routinely on Ilford XP2. This thread prompted me to do a comparison with and without ICE. I could find no difference whatsoever between the two scans at views up to 100%. These negs are also very clean and don't really need ICE. So if there is selective treatment only on the area of actual spots, then this test is not definitive. But I was unaware of such selectivity. Can someone knowledgeable confirm this selectivity?

Harry