n Thu, 7 Oct 2004 09:01:59 +0200, Gerhard Jaeger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > let's try and shed some light on the plustek-backend and the LiDE30 > scanner: > > - The scanner is a USB1.1 device, as the used chipset, a LM9833 is only > capable to do USB1.1. > - The LM9833 is able to scan @ 8bit per color-channel or @ 16bit > where did you get the "full-color" from? You either scan with the > "color" option, then it's 8bit per channel or you scan with the > "color 42/48" option, then it's 16bit. > - The LiDE30 is able to scan @1200dpi in X direction, because it's the > native resolution of the sensor, and the motor is able to do 2400dpi > steps. Therefore X direction information is doubled. > - The backend does some calibration @ the start of each scan, this might > take a while. This time has also been increased from 1.0.13 up to 1.0.14 > This is necessary to avoid stripes. To reduce the time, it's now possible > to let the backend save the information of the coarse calibration > (option cacheCalData in the config file, or --calibration-cache=yes for > scanimage). This is working for the latest CVs snapshots. >
Thanks everyone for all your information! - I have gotten it all working, and just want to summarize (again) what was laerned found - yes the canon 30 is only 1.1USB - when moving from a 2.4 kernel to a 2.6 kernel the startup time for the scanner decreased significantly (I think the is a libusb v. scanner.o issue). I am now able to remote scan @ 1200 (it is however slow) - originally I had a generic USB2 card - that was causing me some grief in-and-of-itself with the scanner, dropping it to the onboard 1.1 solved at least some of the issue - I am using the stock kernel and libusb from SUSE 9.1 (2.6.5) - I am not having any issue thus far w/ 1.0.14 once again - thanks > Please note, all backend before 1.0.14 are not recommendend for use with the > LiDE devices, as the calibration does not work correctly! > Also using kernel 2.6.x (x < 8) might cause problems with the USB. > > Also note, that full-size scanning using the 2400dpi might not work. At least > I've never tested, because I've not that much memory in my boxes. > 2400dpi also create that much data, that a USB1.1 device really needs some > time to send the data to the box. Here the bandwidth is the limiting factor. > We might can tweak the motor settings for the 2400dpi to avoid backtracking. > > Before continuing, I suggest to use the latest CVS snapshots, a kernel > 2.6.7 > and the latests libusb. The next step will be to check if you really need to > do scans @2400dpi, at least full-size ones. > > Ciao, > Gerhard > > > > > -- > sane-devel mailing list: [email protected] > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel > Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject "unsubscribe your_password" > to [email protected] >
