JD750 Loc: SoCal

Im a dummy. Had to look up Digital ICE.

Digital ICE = Digital Image Correction and Enhancement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_ICE

Epson Digital ICE Technology "is a hardware-based dust removal method that is more accurate than the Dust Removal feature. Digital ICE Technology can remove dust or scratch marks without affecting the image composition. However, it takes longer to scan using Digital ICE Technology and also uses more of your system resources."
http://files.support.epson.com/htmldocs/prv5ph/prv5phug/featr_3.htm

JeffR Loc: Rehoboth Beach, Delaware

Any recommendations on using Digital ICE vs processing in LR or PS?

JD750 Loc: SoCal

I'm a dummy when it comes to Digital ICE.

Maybe some of the other UHHers will post their experience with it.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Yes it does and well worth it.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

ICE gives you a huge head start then your work in LR and PS is much easier.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

ICE is not exactly unique to Epson.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Do they make one that you could recommend that would also scan 120?

Snoopypood

In reality, the choice is yours and yours alone. I would offer a word of caution: make sure your selection considers how much you will use the scanner. I've always been an ardent Canon fan and always purchased their top of the line equipment. I've also been a big Mac user. With Mac continually "upgrading" their OS, some of my equipment has simply become obsolete because Canon and many other manufacturers don't want to invest in firmware or drivers for their older equipment trying to keep up with Mac. I don't know if this applies to Windows users as well but I've been stuck with some high end outstanding equipment that no longer functions with my computer. If you are going to use it until the gears fall off, go for it but, if it will only be used occasionally, you might be better off with a less costly model. Remember, as far as the results go - there's always Photoshop.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Scan Cafe is supposed to be both good and reasonable. I have the same decision to make—but I think I’ll outsource it. The tedium of doing that many slides is just not something I want to endure. I have some paint to watch dry and some grass to watch grow.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Yes! Any head start you can get is worth it! I've been working on my scanning project since 2009. I began with an Epson flatbed scanner with ICE, then "fixed" using a variant of PhotoShop; even with ICE, I spent many hours fixing every little issue with each image. These days I scan using a 16-multi-scan Nikon LS-2000. The multi-scan eliminates what I call 'flare', places where bright areas bleed into dark areas, and further reduces number of scratches, etc, but some edit work will always be needed if you inspect as I do at 200%.

PeterBergh

When I was in the same boat, I bought a PlusTek 120; it scans 35 mm and 120 but nothing smaller or bigger. It is not cheap ($1700 to $1900) but it cost a lot less than having my transparencies scanned commercially. For the few (40+) 4x5 internegatives I have, I had them scanned commercially.

The only downside to the PlusTek is that the software (SilverFast) is not well-enough tested. As long as you don't use SilverFast to modify your images (except for cropping), you're OK. Only use SilverFast to control the scanning and save modifications for LightRoom or equivalent.