comparative dust and scratch removal

[Chris Luneski]

I am using a Canon FS4000 with a version of Vuescan which works well with
the scanner. I have no problems with the quality of the scans. However, I am
not sure just how good is Canon's implementation of IR cleaning. It doesn't
sem to do much of anything with scratches. Even though slides are carefully
cleaned before scanning, I frequently end up with more dust specks to clean
up than I think should be there.

Looking at reviews of the Minolta 5400 II and Nikon Coolscan 5000, I get the
impression that their versions of digital ICE do a much better job. However,
I don't have firsthand evidence of this. So, my question is whether anyone
has made a hands on comparison between the Canon and the Nikon or Minolta.
The only comparisons of this type I have run across are just between the
Nikon and the Minolta, with the edge in sharpness, lack of noise and IR
cleaning leaning a bit toward the Nikon.

If the Minolta and Nikon are significantly better at dust and scratch
removal than the Canon, I would switch to one of them. On the other hand, if
there isn't much difference I would stay with the Canon.

Thanks for any help you can provide.

Chris Luneski





--
There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good
photographs. -Ansel Adams

(e-mail address removed)
Alamy: http://tinyurl.com/5alew
MyLoupe: http://tinyurl.com/7xwd5
Stock Connection: http://tinyurl.com/5uqjm

 

[Roger]

I use the same scanner. It isn't Canon's implementation of IR cleaning
that is the problem, but Vuescan's!
If you use the stock Canon Filmget software, cleaning is quite good and
has essentially no effect on image quality. Using Vuescan's light
cleaning works but you'll still need to clean up the scan a bit. Using
heavier than light turns your image into blurry mush.

A Scanhancer improves the cleaning and hides blemishes for slides and
the FS4000US but I had banding issues using it with negatives. I do
use the scanhancer for all my chromes.

 

[birdman]

I would agree that it is probably Vuescan.
Why not scan the image at the same dpi with Vuescan and the Canon software
and compare the 2?
Personally I have always found Vuescan a mixed bag with my now ancient
Canonscan. Vuescan tends to be more color accurate scanning transparencies
but the Canon software is far more reliable scanning negative material.