On Wednesday 12 January 2011 21:05:09 you wrote: > Le Wednesday 12 January 2011 08:41:55 Heinz Wiesinger, vous avez ?crit : > > On Wednesday 12 January 2011 06:52:35 stef wrote: > > > Le Wednesday 12 January 2011 00:21:35 Heinz Wiesinger, vous avez ?crit : > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > I got myself a Canon LiDE 210 today and immediatly tried it with > > > > latest git (922a22e). It was detected fine and it seems to work > > > > pretty good as well. > > > > > > > > Preview works fine, but I noticed that after the actual scanning run, > > > > when the scanhead is parked again, it tries to go back too far. It > > > > does not happen after the preview run, only after the scan. > > > > > > > > If there is anything else I can provide to help get this bug fixed, > > > > don't hesitate to contact me :) > > > > > > > > Grs, > > > > Heinz > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > when you wait for the scanning head to park before each scans no mare > > > > > > motor noise), do you have the same issue ? > > > > Interesting, I thought I had tested that case as well, but apparently I > > didn't. > > It's true, if I wait between each scan nothing happens, the head is > > parked correctly. If I do not wait, or specify multiple scans from the > > beginning, it has issues. > > > > Grs, > > Heinz > > OK, > > thanks for the tests. I have just pushed a fixed for this bug to the git > source tree.
Thank you very much. Confirmed working now here as well :) > BTW, do you have a windows environment where you can run your LiDE 210? > Does the windows proposes a 2400 dpi resolution ? In this case I'd be much > interested by a log recorded with http://www.pcausa.com/Utilities/UsbSnoop/ > of a very small area scanned at 2400 dpi. Hmm, I'm not sure. The list only offered up to 1200 dpi, but it was editable. So I tried defining 2400 dpi and from what I can see it worked. At least gimp reports the scanned image with 2400 dpi. I did the same for 4800 dpi as well, don't know if it is useful or not. I tried to get as small as possible scans, maybe it ended up too small. If so tell me and I'll run it again. I uploaded the logs to my server, they are available here: http://www.liwjatan.at/files/logs/ Hope that helps! :) Grs, Heinz -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20110113/de42c678/attachment.htm> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20110113/de42c678/attachment.pgp>
