So, I know this isn't on the supported page, but I've seen in quite a few places that people report success in using them with sane.
Also, appologies if this is already answered in the mailing list archive, but it doesn't recognize phrase searches, and after about 30 pages of Scanmaker results that have nothing to do with the problem, or even this model of scanner, it seemed a rather large waste of time to continue looking. I have a Microtek Scanmake 4 rev. 01, it is picked up by sane, and it can go so far as to preview scan, but that is it. It goes up to: scsi_send_gamma: pos=0x808a360, size=8192, word=1, color=3 [microtek2] scsi_set_window: ms=0x8079220, wnd=1 [microtek2] scsi_read_image_info: ms=0x8079220 [microtek2] scsi_read_image_info: ppl=611, bpl=1836, lines=1007, remain=1848852 [microtek2] prepare_buffers: ms=0x0x8079220 [microtek2] calculate_sane_params: ms=0x8079220 [microtek2] scsi_wait_for_image: ms=0x8079220 [microtek2] scsi_read_image_status: ms=0x8079220 [microtek2] scsi_read_image_status: use old image status [microtek2] scsi_sense_handler: fd=3, sense=0xb768d060 arg=(nil) [microtek2] dump_area: SenseBuffer [microtek2] 0: f000090000000216 0000000060000000 ........ ....`... [microtek2] 16: 00004c616d702066 61696c7572 ..Lamp f ailur [microtek2] scsi_sense_handler: SENSE KEY (0x09), ASC (0x60), ASCQ (0x00) [microtek2] scsi_sense_handler: info: 'Lamp failure' [microtek2] scsi_sense_handler: Lamp failure [microtek2] scsi_read_image_status: 'Error during device I/O' [microtek2] scsi_wait_for_image: 'Error during device I/O' then stops. Ok, so, lamp failure, that sounds pretty self explanatory... but the preview still works, and the last time I used it in Windows (admittedly about a year ago) everything ran fine. Now, I'm not so much looking for someone else to solve my problem as much as informing me of a couple things. First, should the scanner still be capable of a preview scan if the lamp is failing? I've opened the thing up and everything *looks* to be working correctly (all the lights are still working). Second, will it damage the scanner in any way if I remove the failure check and force it to scan anyway, assuming the lamp actually is going out? Any help with this would be appreciated. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20060812/c65de1cb/attachment.htm From [email protected] Sun Aug 13 12:34:26 2006 From: [email protected] (abel deuring) Date: Sun Aug 13 12:29:11 2006 Subject: [sane-devel] Scanmaker 4 i/o errors In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> References: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Steven Hillis wrote: > [microtek2] scsi_sense_handler: fd=3, sense=0xb768d060 arg=(nil) > [microtek2] dump_area: SenseBuffer > [microtek2] 0: f000090000000216 0000000060000000 ........ ....`... > [microtek2] 16: 00004c616d702066 61696c7572 ..Lamp f ailur > [microtek2] scsi_sense_handler: SENSE KEY (0x09), ASC (0x60), ASCQ (0x00) > [microtek2] scsi_sense_handler: info: 'Lamp failure' > [microtek2] scsi_sense_handler: Lamp failure > [microtek2] scsi_read_image_status: 'Error during device I/O' > [microtek2] scsi_wait_for_image: 'Error during device I/O' > > then stops. > > Ok, so, lamp failure, that sounds pretty self explanatory... but the > preview still works, and the last time I used it in Windows (admittedly > about a year ago) everything ran fine. > > Now, I'm not so much looking for someone else to solve my problem as > much as informing me of a couple things. > > First, should the scanner still be capable of a preview scan if the lamp > is failing? I've opened the thing up and everything *looks* to be > working correctly (all the lights are still working). > > Second, will it damage the scanner in any way if I remove the failure > check and force it to scan anyway, assuming the lamp actually is going out? well, I'm not an expert for Microtek scanners or the microtec2 backend, but around line 3950 in microtec2.c the values of ms->fastscan and ms->quality are set depending on the value of the Sane option OPT_PREVIEW, and around line 4560 ms->fastscan and ms->quality are used to set some bits in the data of the SET WINDOW command. So it seems that these two parameters, or one of them, tell the scanner to be more picky regarding the "light quality". Before starting a scan, most scanners calibrate the lamp and the CCD sensor, typically by moving the scan head to positions where they "see" a white and a black area, so that they can measure the CCD output for these colours. If this fails, because there are maybe too large deviations in the signal returned by the CCD over the scan width, or if the CCD signal for "white" is too low, the scanner's firmware may complain. So, if scan quality is not that important for you, you could try to constantly set ms->fastscan and/or ms->quality resp. the corresponding bits in the SET WINDOW data to the values for the Preview mode and see, if this helps. Abel PS: Some time ago, I had a similar question for the Sharp backend: I am not sure about all details (only "indirect communication" between me and the end user), but a scanner complained about failed calibration in transparency scan mode. I believe that the user insisted to cover the calibration area with the quite large film to be scanned. In this case it helped to simply ignore the calibration error returned by the scanner, similar to what you suggested to do with your scanner.
