>At 8:38 PM +0200 30-9-01, Alex Z wrote: >>Currently I see several choices: Nikon CoolScan IV ED, Minolta Elite (or >>Elite II being released now) for 2900 and 2820 dpi resolutions respectively >>or Polaroid 4000 and Nikon CoolScan 4000ED (which is actually out of my >>budget even for the future :-( ). > > >BF: The CoolScan IV uses the same software as the CoolScan 4000 ED. >It's very slow on my 500MHz G3 PowerMac, but generally I like it's >features.
I have a 233MHz G3 with 640 MB. My CoolScan IV is fast. I turn off GEM & ICE during preview which dramatically speeds up previews, exposure (Master Gain) and curve redraws. I especially love the batch scan feature which allows optimizing each frame before starting final scan. . > >BF: The good thing about the CoolScan 4000 ED is that it has GEM to >remove grain. The bad thing is that you really need it! Grain isn't >too bad on Kodachrome 64 scans, but very bad on Kodak Gold 200 scans. >Don't know if the Coolscan IV is as bad at bringing out the grain. Same for Kodak Max 400 on the IV (fixed with GEM &/or ICE). Ektachrome (200 or 400?) and Kodachrome 64 have low grain . >BF: I have one image (Kodak Gold 200) where ICE and GEM did an >incredible job of removing scratches and grain with no visible >reduction in sharpness. I have another image (Kodachrome 64) where >ICE and GEM made the entire image VERY soft. So apparently they can >work for you or against you depending on the image and/or film. I've had excellent results with GEM on Kodachrome 64, but results with ICE vary from batch to batch. Mike Duncan