* "m. allan noah" <kitno455 at gmail.com>: >> It's close enough for me. Who knows how they measure these things. >> My measurement was "time scanadf", basically. It was done actually >> feeding the papers through the scanner before scanadf exited, so >> it's not entirely unimaginable that there is a bit of overhead in >> actually transferring and writing the scans to disk. > I wonder how fast it will go if you enable jpeg compression? You > might need updated scanadf (or the scanimage that comes with > sane-backends cvs)
About the same as uncompressed PNM. (Also tried 200 DPI now, with no noticeable difference in speed from 300 DPI.) The computer I'm testing this on is a Core 2 E8500 3.16GHz, by the way. -- Johannes Gr?dem
