Guillaume Gastebois schrieb: > Hello, > > Yep, I write "for (j = 150; j...." instead of "for (i = 150; i....." > Now second set seems good. Result is on : > http://ggastebois.free.fr/lide90_snoop/20_test1.tar >
Hi, i am sorry, i actually wanted 450, but didn't realize until just now. I missed that the calibration dump images are really grayscale images, although stored in color pnms. 1 pixel in image is 3 pixels for the calibration... I hope this fixes that part of the calibration. Regards, Pierre > Regards > Guillaume > > Pierre Willenbrock a ?crit : >> Guillaume Gastebois schrieb: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I modified lines 4596 and 4712 and reenable SCAN_FLAG_DISABLE_LAMP flag. >>> Result can be found on : http://ggastebois.free.fr/lide90_snoop/19_test1.tar >> Okay, results look good so far: >> [genesys_gl841] gl841_offset_calibration: first set: 191/683,191/482,191/76 >> >> but there must be a little bug in the code: >> [genesys_gl841] gl841_offset_calibration: second set: >> 0/-1080773208,8/-1212144018,-1080773236/134721688 >> >> this very much looks like the variables for the second set are getting >> overwritten/not initialized. Please try to find the problem(misplaced >> brackets perhaps? copy+pasto when calculating the second set?), or send >> the source. >> >> Regards, >> Pierre >> >>> Regards >>> Guillaume >>> >>> Pierre Willenbrock a ?crit : >>>> Guillaume Gastebois schrieb: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> OK, I'll try this tonight. What is the best : WITH or WITHOUT >>>>> SCAN_FLAG_DISABLE_LAMP ? >>>> Not using SCAN_FLAG_DISABLE_LAMP is a bit counter productive when trying >>>> to get black levels on a white-only calibration area. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Pierre >>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Guillaume >>>>> >>>>> Selon Pierre Willenbrock <pierre at pirsoft.dnsalias.org>: >>>>> >>>>>> Guillaume Gastebois schrieb: >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I made two tests today : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> test 1 : too bright/too dard = 10/65525 WITH flag : >>>>>>> SCAN_FLAG_DISABLE_LAMP. Result can bee found on : >>>>>>> http://ggastebois.free.fr/lide90_snoop/18_test1.tar >>>>>>> >>>>>>> test 2 : too bright/too dard = 10/65525 WITHOUT flag : >>>>>>> SCAN_FLAG_DISABLE_LAMP. Result can bee found on : >>>>>>> http://ggastebois.free.fr/lide90_snoop/18_test2.tar >>>>>>> >>>>>> Not what i expected, although the debug images are looking good. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please try to change the first pixel used for minimum calculation to 200 >>>>>> at about lines 4596 and 4712: >>>>>> - for (i = 0; i < num_pixels; i++) >>>>>> + for (i = 150; i < num_pixels; i++) >>>>>> { >>>>>> if (dev->model->is_cis) >>>>>> val = >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Pierre >>>>>> >> >> >