vuescan and ICE

Does vuescan support Digital ICE on scanners like the epson 4990?

Yes, it is included with Vuescan. I would download a trial copy of Vuescan and try it out for yourself before you buy it though. Do some testing to make sure the infrared cleaning works well for you. I have seen posts saying it works well while others say it seems to be off a bit. The only way to know who to believe is to test it for yourself and closely examine the results.

<p> Doug<p>

<a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~dougfisher/holder/mainintro.html">Dougs

MF Film Holder for batch scanning of 120/220 medium format film with flatbeds</a>

It may support cleaning utilizing the infrared info, but I doubt it is ICE.

Mendel, ICE is a function of hardware, not software so no scanning app has ICE in it... all a SW programmer needs to do is write an app that will interface with the ICE component & vuescan has done that. Whether it has done it well is up for debate, but it works wonderfully on my scanner.

ICE is not just hardware but dust removal algorithm also. (ICE 3 has grain reduction and color restoration algorithm on top). Algorithm is software.

 

I believe Vuescan only make use of the infra hardware in the scanner but use their own dust removal algorithm. If they use the ICE algorithm then they have to pay royalty and the software will not be so cheap. Remember that Vuescan support a lot of scanners. If they have to support all the native algorithms they also need to pay royalty to Canon for FARE etc.

 

I am almost certain that Vuescan do not use the ICE GEM/ROC algorithm. The GEM result on my LS4000 is quite different by using Nikon Scan 4 and Vuescan.

ICE is software. Software designed to work with Infrared hardware, but still software.

Regardless of whether ICE is software, hardware, or both, Vuescan does support dust/scratch removal via the infrared channel of scanners that have the feature. Like previously mentioned, you can try it for free and see how you like it.

 

You will lose some sharpness when you use it, so it is better to dust the image prior to scanning and not use it, if possible. I use a foot pump. The air is as clean and dry as the air in the room, no residue, and the blast is powerful. The pump was intended to inflate air mattresses and can be found at outdoor supply stores.

FWIW, the results of ICE vs Vuescan cleaning with my Elite 5400 are poles apart. The Vuescan cleaning is currently buggy, incomplete to the point of being unusable, and adds obvious softening, not only to damaged areas, but to the overall image. ICE, in comparison, more or less does what it claims to do.

 

To his credit, the author of Vuescan is continuing to try to improve it.

Mendel,

 

Just curious, what version of Vuescan have you tried most recently? I've seen a tremendous improvement in the latest versions.

 

-John

I think .40 or .41 of the latest series. I don't think anything much has happened in .42 or .43 (would luv to be proved wrong) but I have told Ed my problems, he has acknowledged receipt, and even sent a follow-up email to say it's still on his list, so...

 

I always test new versions with the same slide, one that's in pretty sorry shape. Vuescan does poorly, AND does not output files that match the preview. This leads me to think something is buggy. ICE (through Minolta Scan Utility), on the other hand, does a fairly decent job with this slide. Leaves a FEW bits, but quite complete, and no overall softening, per the Vuescan output.

John, that footpump idea is quite clever.

Ok, checking when I got home, my last version tried was .39

I can't claim the footpump idea as original, I recently read about it in George Lepp's Outdoor Photographer column as a way to clean digital SLR scanners. It was so obvious I couldn't believe I hadn't thought of it myself. Much cheaper in the long run than canned air, environmentally friendly (except perhaps for the manufacture of the plastic?), and no worries about canned air propellant getting onto anything. It is bulky though.

 

I just did some scans from old slides on my Canon fs4000 to reverify vuescan's behavior. Both at 4000 dpi. One was with fujichrome 100, one was from kodachrome 200. I scanned each slide twice, once with 'light' infrared cleaning on, once without. No other edits were used aside from color balance. The scan from the fuji did not noticably soften with the cleaning. The scan from the kodachrome did soften, but as the film is grainy and resulted in a noisy scan, the infrared cleaning actually looks better to me since it removed some graininess. Interesting.

 

E6 is definitely easier to scan than kodachrome. Vuescan matches the original colors much more easily with E6, one of the reasons I stopped using my favorite film, K64.

here is a 100% crop from a scan of fujichrome 100, using vuescan at 4000dpi without infrared cleaning, no sharpening... no post processing except to convert to jpg.

same image as above, with infrared cleaning. They are different but I personally can't say one is better than the other.