Hi Gene, On Saturday, 11. January 2003 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 11 January 2003 10:05, Jaeger, Gerhard wrote: > Announcing a 45-1 release. > > I unpacked it over the old 45 in sane-backends-1.0.9, did a make > clean && make && make install, which apparently went well. > > Fireing up xsane from the icon, I had it do a preview, which ran as > far as the end of the forward travel of the carriage, at which time > it cleared Olivers logo from the preview window, and the whole > thing went away about 1 second later. The carriage went back home > as it should have, but the lamp was left on.
Quite a strange behaviour! I recommend to check the .conf file each time you make an update. > > Running it from a shell, it did the same thing, and reported a > "segfault" to the shell window as it exited. I remember this behaviour a long time ago, but after a complete source code review and cleanup of my environment there are no problems left here! > > The epson iscan-1.40 derived backend still works ok though. It should do so;-) > > I'm going to do another make clean and get rid of the config.cache > etc stuffs and try it again, as I've re-arranged the order in > ld.so.conf a bit since that configure was done. > > Humm, that might have done something, in 2 restarts it hasn't > crashed yet. See above! > > However, the returned image seems to be quite dark in the 600 dpi > mode, with the raw histogram only occupying about the left hand 25% > of that window. Also, all the britness and contrast sliders for > both overall and rgb are pegged at the right border of the slider, > and labeled 100 at that point. The initial image doesn't look that > bad in the preview window, but 1/2 second later when the autoadjust > kicks in, the image drops to be dark enough to be obvious. It can > only be rescued by the options window britness slider being set for > about +4 and a new scan done. > > Also, the white line artifact is (hooray!) gone when at 600 dpi. > However, at 300dpi, its back and the output is too dark as before. > Then at 1200 dpi, the inverse appears to be true, I'm on the third > scan right now with the britness slider in the option window now at > -15 and its still quite a bit too bright. Not making too much > progress, I'm trying -30 now. Still too bright in the whites, but > the darker colors are now all black, but the histograms haven't > changed. Now the contrast is set for -30 also, but its still too > bright and contrasty. Final settings for a decent scan are > brightness=0 and contrast = -65. So thats a bit off. > > I also tried a 2400dpi scan (can we say slow?) at those settings and > it looked pretty close to the 1200 dpi result except its beginnng > to look like it was jpegged a wee bit too much. Is this mode by > interpolation? Even the white line artifact is fuzzy. > > Then at 150dpi, the inverse is true, the usable setting is +7 and > +50. Ditto for the 75dpi setting. > > I don't recall this change dpi, change everything else as being this > obvious before, and ISTR the main control windows sliders all were > centered at 100.0 prior to this. The motor you'll be glad to hear > is running very quietly, only noticable at 150 and 300 dpi. > > This is odd indeed, I went back to do one more check at 600dpi, and > had to virtually zero those sliders to get a decent scan again. I > think I've got ghosts or something... Should this not be > repeatable? Well XSANE is a powerful tool, but there are per default too much things that will be applied to the aquiered image... For first tests, I recommend xscanimage or disabling all of the automatic xsane stuff... Anyway, I tweaked the driver using the information and register settings I got from my EPSON 1260. When having a look at the 1250 and at least at ISCAN, there seem to be some differences which we should pin down... Cheers Gerhard
