Just to save others the exercise, my "slide from hell", which cleans up
quite nicely with ICE, looks about the same as usual with this latest
version of Vuescan. In short, not very clean.

On 24 Jul 2005 21:28:20 -0700, "Mendel Leisk"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Just to save others the exercise, my "slide from hell", which cleans up
>quite nicely with ICE, looks about the same as usual with this latest
>version of Vuescan. In short, not very clean.

I take it you're not surprised?

--

Hecate - The Real One
(E-Mail Removed)
Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
you don't have, to impress people you don't like...

Well, I live in hope I suppose unless there is some breakthrough,
say Ed adding ICE, it's not gonna happen.

On 25 Jul 2005 19:39:20 -0700, "Mendel Leisk"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>say Ed adding ICE, it's not gonna happen.

Very unlikely, since ICE is not an OpenSource software or common
public algorithm but a complete technology from Applied Science
Fiction, who are now part of Kodak.

If every user of Vuescan would be alright paying up for it, though ...

Any luck with 8.2.25?
Reports "Improved infrared cleaning" again...

Fernando

Evo2Me wrote:
> On 25 Jul 2005 19:39:20 -0700, "Mendel Leisk"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >say Ed adding ICE, it's not gonna happen.
>
> Very unlikely, since ICE is not an OpenSource software or common
> public algorithm but a complete technology from Applied Science
> Fiction, who are now part of Kodak.
>
> If every user of Vuescan would be alright paying up for it, though ...

I would, within reason.

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:44:34 +0200, Evo2Me <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On 25 Jul 2005 19:39:20 -0700, "Mendel Leisk"
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>say Ed adding ICE, it's not gonna happen.
>
>Very unlikely, since ICE is not an OpenSource software or common
>public algorithm but a complete technology from Applied Science
>Fiction, who are now part of Kodak.

Careful, you'll be accused of Vuescan "bashing" next because the above
seems to imply that Vuescan only incorporates features stolen from
Open Source or ripped off from publicly available algorithms.

That's not the case, of course, because if it were then at least those
stolen portions of Vuescan may actually work (sometimes); assuming the
author didn't bungle the copy too much which is a big assumption...

It's all academic, anyway, because I can't imagine Kodak bringing its
products in disrepute by allowing something as unreliable and buggy as
Vuescan to mutilate them.

Don.

On 26 Jul 2005 05:41:36 -0700, "Fernando" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Any luck with 8.2.25?
>Reports "Improved infrared cleaning" again...

Which is as credible as reports of flying pigs!

Don.

P.S. To be fair, a pig-shaped UFO may actually land one day... ;o)

Take turns?

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:44:34 +0200, Evo2Me <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On 25 Jul 2005 19:39:20 -0700, "Mendel Leisk"
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>say Ed adding ICE, it's not gonna happen.
>
>Very unlikely, since ICE is not an OpenSource software or common
>public algorithm but a complete technology from Applied Science
>Fiction, who are now part of Kodak.
>
>If every user of Vuescan would be alright paying up for it, though ...

Then, of course, it would about the same price as Silverfast - and
guess what? - Silverfast works.

--

Hecate - The Real One
(E-Mail Removed)
Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
you don't have, to impress people you don't like...