St?phane,
When I tried the default maximum scan size at 150dpi I got blue streaks
down the middle of the scan. Also, it had the wrong initial y position
as it scanned the area off the glass and didn't scan to the maximum y
coordinate. It also rewound to far.
When I tried smaller scans at 75 dpi, the colours were really wrong! The
gain and offset registers are very different than the ones set by the
Windows driver, so I assume something funny is happening in the
calibration. When I took a quick look through the code a few questions
came up:
1. In the sanei_lexmark_x1100_offset_calibration function there is a
while loop that loops through the ranges while its not the null range
and the average is more than the offset_threshold. However, I can't find
where the offset_threshold is being set. Is
dev->sensor->offset_threshold set anywhere?
2. In the function sanei_lexmark_x1100_calibration you set the registers
like this:
dev->shadow_regs[0x02] = dev->offset.red;
dev->shadow_regs[0x03] = dev->offset.red;
dev->shadow_regs[0x04] = dev->offset.green;
dev->shadow_regs[0x05] = dev->offset.green;
dev->shadow_regs[0x06] = dev->offset.blue;
dev->shadow_regs[0x07] = dev->offset.blue;
Are you sure this is correct? For my scanner the:
red offset is for shadow_regs[0x02] and shadow_regs[0x05]
green offset is for shadow_regs[0x03] and shadow_regs[0x06]
blue offset is for shadow_regs[0x04] and shadow_regs[0x07]
Fred.
St?phane VOLTZ wrote:
> Le Vendredi 19 Mai 2006 05:11, Fred Odendaal a ?crit :
>
>> St?phane,
>>
>> I tested it on my Lexmark X1185.
>>
>> It is broken really badly. It hangs in the function
>> sanei_lexmark_x1100_search_home_fwd - infinite read loop in a poll after
>> trying to move the scan head. I did a register compare from usb dumps of
>> a good scan (sane-backends-1.0.17) and a bad scan (experimental) and
>> none of the lexmark register defaults are set! There are 35 registers
>> that used to have non-zero default values and now have 0x00 and one
>> register that was 0x01 and is now 0x81.
>>
>> Fred
>>
>>
>
> Hello,
>
> after checking I only got register 0xC3 different. however while
> commiting
> this change, I noticed that more files were updated than I'd expected. I
> think I did my previous commit wrongly.
> Things should be much better now. But in case there are other problems
> I'd
> like to have the logs. I can override model detection to make the regular
> backend to think my A920 is a X1100, and so get registers values before the
> chnages, but I won't be able to do it past
> sanei_lexmark_x1100_search_home_bwd().
>
> Regards,
> Stef
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20060520/c8c97e34/attachment.htm
From [email protected] Mon May 22 07:39:49 2006
From: [email protected] (Jose Paulo Moitinho de Almeida)
Date: Mon May 22 07:40:25 2006
Subject: [sane-devel] Re: Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II and sane
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
On Monday 22 May 2006 07:39, you wrote:
> Hello,
>
>...
> I have bought an old Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II.
The scanner worked fine for me in 8 bit mode and it should also theoretically
work in 12 bit mode, though I never managed to.
> My linux system is a slackware 10.2 with kernel 2.4.31. The sane version is
> 1.0.17cvs from may 2006.
> If i plug the scanner in, it will be detect from sane-findscanner and
> scanimage -L. The hpusbscsi modul ist loaded.
You must use a recent version of sane, with libusb, which doesn't need the
hpusbscsi module. if it is loaded you must remove it with
$ rmmod hpusbscsi
In order to facilitate debuging please do (in sh/bash)
$ export SANE_DEBUG_AVISION=7
or (in csh/tcsh)
$ setenv SANE_DEBUG_AVISION 7
before scanning.
You can find the sources for the latest version of the avision backend (which
is the one used by the scanner) and about compiling at
http://www.exactcode.de/oss/avision/index.html
Regards
ZP
