Hi, Henning Meier-Geinitz schrieb: > Hi, > > Thanks for all your work! > As far as I know, you use a LiDE 35. So i marked this scanner's > support as "good". If you think the level of support is different, > please change it in genesys.desc. >
It is working for me in daily use, so "good" seems to be okay. > I tested a Canon LiDE 50. To get it running, I had to uncomment its > id in genesys.conf. I changed this in CVS. I Also changed the name of > the scanners to also show the Canon LiDE 40. Also I used a build > number of 7, because the last one in CVS was already 6. > > The test results for my Canon Lide 50: > > Generelly: Sometimes I have a dark vertical stripe near the left > border (about 1 cm width, over the complete image). This happens in > Preview but very seldomly. Also I have vertical stripes, especially in > medium-bright areas. > > Color: > 75: Works, images are a bit too bright (over-imposed). Black > looks grayish and some brighter colors are nearly white. > Seems like the shading calibration does not work correctly for you. Grayish black is okay, i don't want to cut the color range. But brighter colors getting near white is not. When using SANE_DEBUG_GENESYS=255 there should be an image named "black_white_shading.pnm" in the current working directory. It contains a scan of the calibration area. Please send it to me. > 150: Sometimes works, most of the time the scan hangs at about 95%. > I.e. there is a normal scan but the scan head stops and xsane never > displays the image. Also tested with scanimage. When it works, the > image looks like at 75 dpi. The problem depends on image width. E.g. > at a width of 20 mm, it always works at 150 dpi but not with the full > width. Sledomly, I also get a segmentation fault. > Mine does not expose such behaviour. Could you please send a complete log with SANE_DEBUG_GENESYS=255 and SANE_DEBUG_GENESYS_GL841=255? I already see one problem: The result of "genesys_fill_read_buffer" really should not be ignored. > The log shows that this part is repeated endlessly in case of a freeze: [log] > > After the freeze or segmentation fault, the scanner is sometimes not found > anymore. Replugging fixes that. > > 300, 600 dpi: Works (overimposed) in full width. Doesn't work at e.g. width > 100 mm (see above). > > 1200 dpi: Doesn't work in full width (see above). Works at e.g. a > width of 20 mm. This is much darker and has vertical stripes > (calibration problem?) > > 2400 dpi: Same as 1200 dpi. In addition, the image is too long (factor > 2). I.e., in modes like 1200x2400 dpi the x resolution must be > "inflated" by either just duplicating pixels or, better yet, > interpolating them. > I must admit that i never tested 2400dpi. But looking at my logs, i see that scanimage requests 1200x2400dpi, and we are delivering that. So, the correct behaviour if we get different resolutions for x and y is to use them internally, and interpolate to create an image with the maximum of x and y resolution(2400dpi in that case)? > Gray: > 75 dpi: Works, but is over-imposed. > 150-600: see color > 1200, 2400: see color 1200/2400 > > Lineart: similar to gray > > I also did a spot check on color 16 bit and this seems to be less > over-imposed. 16 bit doesn't use any gamma. For 8 bit there is a gamma of 2.2 or 0.4(don't remember which one), which should match what Canon does(at least i am sending a very similar gamma table). Thanks for your testing. Regards, Pierre