Re: Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?

"Noons" <wizofoz2k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sep 10, 6:06 am, Toni Nikkanen <t...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> I thank you and everyone else for the good suggestions, but I, ah,
>> might have just purchased a Nikon 8000 and hope it will arrive soon so
>> I can find out if this was a good decision or not.
>
> Congratulations!  I've gone with a 9000 last year and
> have never looked back even though it was hideously
> expensive: bought it new, not from ebay.

Yep. They're wonderful gismos.

> I'm sure you will enjoy your 8000 a lot.  It's an amazing
> piece of machinery.  One hint: never be afraid of using
> GEM/ICE/other software paraphernalia that comes with
> Nikonscan.  and get the latest versions.

I disagree with this, though. Things like GEM and ROC make changes that
one 
may later want to reconsider. ICE is, of course, wonderful. But you are 
better off just using ICE to make your archive file, and then working from

there.

> there is no reason why one should not use software
> corrections on film scans.  I'm currently using a mix of
> Neat Image and Focus Magic in the workflow after the
> scans and the results are absolutely stunning.

But I'll agree here. I've been quite successful at persuading Neat Image
to 
clean up the grain on negative scans. I can't speak for Focus Magic, but
as 
long as you keep a clean archived original, whatever you do is fine. (I
say 
this because I found that over the years I was using less and less and
less 
sharpening. YMMV here, of course. But sharpening can be overdone, and your

opinion on where the necessary/overdone boundary falls will change over 
time.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan