To ICE or not to ICE?

BetterSense · 03-12-2009, 10:17 PM

I just bought an Epson V500 which I am using for 35mm slides, some 35mm color negative and medium format B&W+colorneg+slide

I don't mind the time penalty, so ignoring that factor, is there any downside to using ICE? I prefer darkroom work and do not like sitting in front of the computer in particular. Skipping the clone tool step in digital post seems appealing to me, but I don't want my images to suffer.

I'm scanning even the 35mm at only 2400DPI because I heard online that there is no increase in real resolution beyond that with this scanner.

*Wheatfield* · 03-13-2009, 07:43 AM

You can't use ICE for B&W or Kodachrome because of the way the films react with infrared light. Other than that, I think it's wonderful.
It can save hours of cleaning film and retouching dust.

*k100d* · 03-13-2009, 08:08 AM

ice ice baby!

mithrandir · 03-13-2009, 09:29 AM

The time you wait for ICE to do its magic is more than paid back in PP time saved.

BetterSense · 03-13-2009, 05:29 PM

I guess the biggest thing at this point, is it doesn't seem like ICE is actualyl working at all. I mean, look at this. Could it possibly be worse without ICE?

**J.Scott** · 03-14-2009, 03:55 AM

I'm also not so convinced it is worth the wait. I usually use 'VueScan' software rather than the Epson. Then I play with the image in Photoshop.
ICE does make some improvements but not enough to make me not use Photoshop to correct all the boo-boo's.

Here's a couple images for example.

Without ICE:

With ICE applied:

Gooshin · 03-14-2009, 09:09 AM

the ICE function in my Nikon makes my images indistinguishable from digital.

*Wheatfield* · 03-14-2009, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted by Gooshin

the ICE function in my Nikon makes my images indistinguishable from digital.

I'm not seeing this as a good thing.....

Gooshin · 03-14-2009, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by Wheatfield

I'm not seeing this as a good thing.....

let me rephrase, those that know what to look for (colours/grain/feel) will know it is film

but to the untrained eye the image looks clean, i would never get white specs left over after ice like the image above. The only thing that mine has trouble with are hard line scratches that go through the entire frame, but even then those are masked pretty well. (and actually i have never used ice on its maximum setting yet...)

*janosh* · 03-23-2009, 11:17 AM

I've carefully tested Nikon and Minolta ICE and Vuescan's un-branded same-thing ("Infared") for sharpness/grain issues. They're equally good IMO. There's no softening at all at mid or light settings, and only flaws of truly badly handled/stored film (see examples above) call for heavy settings (which do slightly soften grain).

You can have great ICE results with any C41 film, including B&W C41, and you CAN scan and ICE many versions of Kodachrome (there is no such one thing as "Kodachrome," it has historically varied quite a bit over the years...some of the oldest scan and ICE perfectly well. If you're dealing with a large old collection of Kodachromes you MAY find that 1/3 Ice very well.

For 35mm I use a Nikon V...some say the Nikon 5000 uses ICE more effectively on Kodachrome (I don't think its other advantages are significant unless you're doing high volume or wanting to scan entire rolls badly enough to spend another $500 for the roll carrier).