A question for Minolta Scan Dual IV owners only.

[manuel_garcia5]

The Minolta Scan Dual IV would fit my scanning needs perfectly except

it doesn't have Digital ICE. I would like to hear input from current

Scan Dual IV owners on how much time they spend on cleaning dust and

scratches? Is it a major pain? I understand it will take some time

however from what I've read scanning with ICE takes time too and I've

also read that ICE softens images. If so then by how much? I want

to scan my entire 35mm (color print film) archive, which I'm sure

will have scratches and dust on them. This is my only reservation

about this scanner. I really don?t want to buy a used scanner with

ICE because there's no way to tell how many times it's been used and

more importantly how much time it has left before needing service. I

would like to be able to print up to 8x10 with good detail. Thanks!

[bernard_korites]

I have the Scan Dual IV. It has something called "Dust Brush" which I assume does the same thing as Ice. It has various levels of retouching. I have used it a couple of time but for the most part I usually don't need it, I just dust the slides off first with a soft brush.

[doug andrews]

I have owned a Minolta Scan Dual IV for six months now. I've read where others think Digital ICE is worth the cost and that the Auto Dust Brush feature is a poor performer. This is my first film scanner and I have no basis for comparing the two, but IMHO the Auto Dust Brush feature on my Scan Dual IV does an acceptable job. I have also not seen where a scanned slide was appreciably softer post Auto Dust Brush. Most of the time Auto Dust Brush does a fine job removing dust from a slide. Occasionaly, it doesn't do so well and only once or twice did it seem to do nothing at all. The most time I've spent removing dust and scratches from a scanned slide was about 10-15 minutes, and that was only once. The overwhelming majority of the time, it takes me a few minutes. Lets say two minutes. Maybe I do a better job of storing and dusting the slides before scanning than others. Maybe I'm not as particular or anal about removing dust and scratches from the scanned slide. However, the 8x10 prints I make from my scans satisfy me as to the lack of dust and scratches left behind. Of course, YMMV.

[bill_crenshaw1]

I've had mine now for over a month and don't really spend all that much time cleanning negitives. Along with the scanner I bought a staticmaster dust brush. That with a can of compressed air and fairly clean negitives to begin with make for quite a clean scan. The odd dust speck comes through but the clone tool takes care of it quickly. So far I've been happy with the results.

[frank_a._bridges]

i dont have a problem with dust on newly processed negs.

[billy_sprague]

I just got mine for Xmas so don't have much experience to rely on, although I have scanned a lot of negatives in that time.

 

I used to work in a photo lab in the army. That was more years ago than I care to admit. My point in mentioning that is I really don't get the big deal with digital dust removal. What the hell is wrong with brushing your negatives or slides with a static master brush just like we did 20+ years ago before enlarging them? That is what I do and, again in my limited experience, dust is not an issue. All that being said, I may change my mind when I start scanning negatives that are over 20 years old, which I plan to do shortly.

[malcolmdwyer]

Two points of info...</p>

 

The auto dust brush feature seems to only appear in the Windows version of the software. I used it briefly on my dad's mac and that tab in the tool was grayed out (could be user error -- or it could be included in a newer version of the software).</p>

 

When I did use the auto dust brush (on Windows - as a plugin to Photoshop), I noticed it ate some text in my image that it thought was dust. I don't have a blown up version handy... but in <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/2534848">this</a> image, the yellow text on the sign in the foreground was partly blocked out by the Auto Dust Brush software. The text completely filled the sign, so the few spots of solid yellow were words that got elminated as dust. No big deal... but interesting.</p>

 

Digital ICE may have done the same thing -- I don't know.</p>

[catcher]

If I scan right after processing (either negatives or slide) I don't have any problems. A blast of compressed air takes care of most of the dust. Any left over takes just a couple of minutes to fix in photoshop. However, on older negatives or slides that have been mishandled or that have collected lots of dust and grime (should have been protected but weren't), they can be a real pain. I've never used ICE so can't speak for it. But 99% of my scanning is newly processed images, and I've never missed ICE.

[roger_smith4]

Maybe it's my lab, but it seems like as soon as I put the film in the scanner holder it's got dust on it, and sometimes smaller scratches. FARE/ICE works wonders on dust and scratches. Maybe less dust is visible at the Scan Dual's resolution, but I find it noticable on my 4000dpi scanner. I find slides to be less of an issue than negative film- it seems hardier and more scratch-resistant.

[nick_bryans3]

I have just begun to use an SDIV, which has replaced a broken Nikon LS-30, which did have ICE. I shoot mostly digital these days so didn't want to make a big investment in a scanner & the SDIV fitted the bill.

 

I can only say I was horrified at the amount of dust specks on my, OK probably badly stored, and OK, old, slides. I never noticed this using the Nikon over the past 5 years or so, the occasional blobs but nothing like I'm seeing now. For my own purposes it doesn't bother me much as I'll not be scanning large numbers & the price differential was too much for the use I'll be making of the unit. The dust brush also seems pretty useless to me so far, but I may need to practice more to get the best results.

 

One thing that does occur to me though is that if you're just going to be archiving, do you really need to remove all the dust right now? Why not just archive the raw scans & clean up as & when required, if it's a few years from now there will probably be better software for dust removal available.

 

Comapring the two scanners on other respects I can't see a lot of difference, SDIV has higher resolution but it seems to me has a bit more nasty digital noise. I can only assume that a current Nikon would be better than the aging LS-30, how much better I've no idea.

 

If you take a look at my folders the HongKong shots are from the SDIV, Philippines shots from LS30. I know this won't tell you a lot at these low resolutions but you're welcome to draw any conclusions you like.

[babette_ross]

I've had the scanner for awhile... i didn't like the dust brush at all. I found results better selectively using the dust and noise filer in PS. And found myself even more often using the clone tool to rid myself of dust.... If ICE is as good as they say with regard to effectiveness and low image degradation i think its worth the investment.

[manuel_garcia5]

I want to thank all of you who took the time to reply. After going back and fourth between the 5400 & the Scan Dual IV I was on the phone ready to place the order for the 5400 (had my Credit Card in hand) but just could not justify the cost. I ended up purchasing a used Nikon Coolscan IV from KEH figuring that it would be just a shade behind what the Scan Dual IV can do with the exception of ICE. I really stopped to think how I would use a film scanner. The only thing I could think of was archiving my entire 35mm print library (99% family and 1% attempted pro photos). If I wanted something enlarged I would just have it made from the original negative and let the photo lab deal with dust and scratches.

 

Being that the Nikon Coolscan IV is used how should I test it to make sure it's functioning properly? I have a 14 day return policy (to get my money back) and a 60 day operational warranty. And if some reason I don't like the scans then I'll really bite the bullet and order my 5400. But I think I'll do just fine.