[sane-devel] cvs daily snapshot
Hello, i have looked for the last daily snapshot of sane-backends, but the last cvs snapshot ist from 2005/10/11. I can i find a newer snpshot? Regards. Dietmar
[sane-devel] offtopic 35-mm scanner question
I'd have to pretty much agree with breacher even though I'm not familiar with the Epson Perfection 2400 and I'm a newbie with SANE. I've got one flatbed scanner with a transparency adapter built in, and it makes me wonder why they bothered except as a marketing tactic. It's about useless. Negative/slide scanners are expensive, and probably always will be since there's a fairly small market for them which is getting smaller with digital cameras getting better. I have a Minolta film scanner, and I'd say you really want 4800 DPI or better for 35mm. On the other hand, because of the development cycle involved with open source software I've found it's often a good match with the used equipment market. Look over the SANE supported devices and research some of the models that are well-supported that do what you want. Then go to eBay and look around, maybe even set up some searches by model number to email you when one becomes available. There are other used equipment sources as well of course. My biggest disappointment in scanning negatives and slides my family left has been mildew. If these have ever been stored any place even slightly damp, take a look at some of them with a magnifying glass before you invest in a scanner for them. There's about no way to remove it once it gets into the emulsion of the film, and each speck of mildew makes a really big blob in a scan to try to fix in an image editor like Gimp or Photoshop. Mildew is opaque, so whatever is behind it is totally masked. You get what you pay for, but a cheap film scanner is no bargain. Alan --- d...@offspringnet.net wrote: I know this is off topic but please don't stop reading. I was hoping to get some advice on what scanner to purchase which is supported fully in linux that will do 35-mm negatives. Looking at the supported list the most decent pricewise which is completely supported seems to be the epson perfection 2400 which has a builtin adapter for 35mm/slides. This seems to sell for a little under 200$ and it's 2400dpi. This is for the wife for christmas so she can do her family's large library of negatives, but of course I don't want to have to deal with windows for this. Does anyone else use linux for 35mm with a scanner that is around 200$ tops which is fully supported? (Also hoping to stick with usb) Thanks in advance! Don -- sane-devel mailing list: sane-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject unsubscribe your_password to sane-devel-requ...@lists.alioth.debian.org __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
[sane-devel] offtopic 35-mm scanner question
On 10/20/05, Alan Corey alanco...@yahoo.com wrote: I'd have to pretty much agree with breacher even though I'm not familiar with the Epson Perfection 2400 and I'm a newbie with SANE. I've got one flatbed scanner with a transparency adapter built in, and it makes me wonder why they bothered except as a marketing tactic. It's about useless. I have an Epson 2480 and I'm quite satisfied with it. I haven't used it for negatives, only slides; for many purposes the results are quite good. Some random thoughts: * Sane support is very good, but native support (in windows) is still better. In particular: The windows driver detects and crops the slide area; under sane, you have to manually crop the slide mount. The windows driver supports 16 bit per channel, and this really makes a difference for high-quality scans. * Having said that, working in xsane is infinitely more comfortable than the obnoxious Epson software under windows. * Flatbed scanning is slow. Not just the scan itself, but the process of placing the slides, cleaning the scan surface, opening and closing the lid it quickly adds up. If the archive is very large, the time savings of a batch scanner could be worth the extra money. * For a large archive, I'd even look into spending the money in having somebody else do the scanning, a large photo shop or somebody else who can do a high-quality job. In short, for web posting and small prints I find the 2480+sane to be an exceptionally good combination for the money. Just my 2 centavos, -- Miguel Bazdresch
[sane-devel] offtopic 35-mm scanner question
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:03:09 -0700 (PDT) Alan Corey alanco...@yahoo.com wrote: On the other hand, because of the development cycle involved with open source software I've found it's often a good match with the used equipment market. Look over the SANE supported devices and research some of the models that are well-supported that do what you want. Then go to eBay and look around, maybe even set up some searches by model number to email you when one becomes available. There are other used equipment sources as well of course. A used Nikon is a good bet. They have models with batch loaders. Also check out vuescan at www.hamrick.com it has better support for film scanners than sane and is good value for money. Martin
[sane-devel] off-topic 25 mm scanner
Genuine slide scanners usually have - or should have - additional features like focus control (you need that if you have framed slides). I am not sure that such a feature is built into an add-on to a flatbed scanner, unless it is a really expensive model. I think the resolution of commercial fine-grain slide film is about 5000 dpi. There may be higher resolutions possible, but you have to ask the CIA or the KGB about them. :-) But these 5000 dpi can only be realized if you write on the film with a specialized optical system. If you use a lens that is not made of calcium fluoride, if you are not restricting yourself to taking pictures at infinite distance, and if you are not using monochromatic light, you are most likely down to 3000 dpi. If you use a zoom lens, 2500 dpi is more likely. My advice would be to look for a used slide scanner (Canon 2710F) is OK, for instance). Or photograph your slides with a digital camera! Regards, Ulrich Deiters
[sane-devel] offtopic 35-mm scanner question
Miguel Bazdresch wrote: On 10/20/05, Alan Corey alanco...@yahoo.com wrote: I'd have to pretty much agree with breacher even though I'm not familiar with the Epson Perfection 2400 and I'm a newbie with SANE. I've got one flatbed scanner with a transparency adapter built in, and it makes me wonder why they bothered except as a marketing tactic. It's about useless. I have an Epson 2480 and I'm quite satisfied with it. I haven't used it for negatives, only slides; for many purposes the results are quite good. Some random thoughts: * Sane support is very good, but native support (in windows) is still better. In particular: The windows driver detects and crops the slide area; under sane, you have to manually crop the slide mount. The windows driver supports 16 bit per channel, and this really makes a difference for high-quality scans. * Having said that, working in xsane is infinitely more comfortable than the obnoxious Epson software under windows. * Flatbed scanning is slow. Not just the scan itself, but the process of placing the slides, cleaning the scan surface, opening and closing the lid it quickly adds up. If the archive is very large, the time savings of a batch scanner could be worth the extra money. * For a large archive, I'd even look into spending the money in having somebody else do the scanning, a large photo shop or somebody else who can do a high-quality job. In short, for web posting and small prints I find the 2480+sane to be an exceptionally good combination for the money. I'd like to comment on this also, as I am currently working on making the Canon CanoScan 8400F, work as a negative scanner in Linux. The thing with scanning in negatives is this, first due to the small size of negatives, in order to print of a decent picture requires considerable magnification. This is a lesser problem with medium format negatives. Negatives generally have a dpi resolution of around 3-5000. Hence you'll want nothing less than a 3200x3200 dpi capable scanner for decent output if you plan on printing anything over 4x6. Secondly, it will take you a very long time to scan in a collection with even a dedicated film scanner. Scans at high resolution are huge (100MB+) and slow. The best solution is to take your negatives to a professional and have them scanned and put on CD. It's much faster and possibly more cost effective. Thirdly, most of the windows software with the better quality film scanning scanners has lots of enhancement capabilities built in, that clean up negatives as they are scanned in. While this can be done in Linux after scanning, it is not trivial. So even if you get a professional quality scanner that works in Linux, the quality of the raw scans will likely be less than an equivalent in Windows. If I haven't yet deterred your interest, your best bet is to go with an Epson. Expect to pay around $200 - $400 for one that will be satisfactory for film scanning. There are a number of reviews on the Internet by photographers. Try googling for them. BTW, the CanoScan 8400F and 9950F can both create near original quality scans, unfortunately, neither works in Linux yet, and Canon is not Linux friendly. The Epson 4870 and 4990 are also very excellent. $0.02, Brian JD
[sane-devel] Reporting an unlisted/unsupported printer
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20051020/6a151223/attachment-0001.html -- next part -- T: Bus=05 Lev=00 Prnt=00 Port=00 Cnt=00 Dev#= 1 Spd=12 MxCh= 2 B: Alloc= 0/900 us ( 0%), #Int= 0, #Iso= 0 D: Ver= 1.10 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 MxPS= 8 #Cfgs= 1 P: Vendor= ProdID= Rev= 2.06 S: Manufacturer=Linux 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4 uhci_hcd S: Product=UHCI Host Controller S: SerialNumber=:00:1d.3 C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1 Atr=c0 MxPwr= 0mA I: If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 1 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=hub E: Ad=81(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 2 Ivl=255ms T: Bus=05 Lev=01 Prnt=01 Port=00 Cnt=01 Dev#= 2 Spd=12 MxCh= 0 D: Ver= 2.00 Cls=00(ifc ) Sub=00 Prot=00 MxPS= 8 #Cfgs= 1 P: Vendor=03f0 ProdID=4811 Rev= 1.00 S: Manufacturer=HP S: Product=PSC 1600 series S: SerialNumber=MY57GF4081L0 C:* #Ifs= 4 Cfg#= 1 Atr=c0 MxPwr= 2mA I: If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 3 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=cc Prot=00 Driver=(none) E: Ad=01(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=81(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=82(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 8 Ivl=10ms I: If#= 1 Alt= 0 #EPs= 3 Cls=07(print) Sub=01 Prot=02 Driver=usblp E: Ad=03(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=83(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=84(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 8 Ivl=10ms I: If#= 2 Alt= 0 #EPs= 3 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=ff Prot=ff Driver=(none) E: Ad=05(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=85(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=86(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 8 Ivl=10ms I: If#= 2 Alt= 1 #EPs= 3 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=d4 Prot=00 Driver=(none) E: Ad=05(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=85(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=86(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 8 Ivl=10ms I: If#= 3 Alt= 0 #EPs= 2 Cls=08(stor.) Sub=06 Prot=50 Driver=usb-storage E: Ad=07(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms E: Ad=87(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms T: Bus=04 Lev=00 Prnt=00 Port=00 Cnt=00 Dev#= 1 Spd=12 MxCh= 2 B: Alloc= 0/900 us ( 0%), #Int= 0, #Iso= 0 D: Ver= 1.10 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 MxPS= 8 #Cfgs= 1 P: Vendor= ProdID= Rev= 2.06 S: Manufacturer=Linux 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4 uhci_hcd S: Product=UHCI Host Controller S: SerialNumber=:00:1d.2 C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1 Atr=c0 MxPwr= 0mA I: If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 1 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=hub E: Ad=81(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 2 Ivl=255ms T: Bus=03 Lev=00 Prnt=00 Port=00 Cnt=00 Dev#= 1 Spd=12 MxCh= 2 B: Alloc= 0/900 us ( 0%), #Int= 0, #Iso= 0 D: Ver= 1.10 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 MxPS= 8 #Cfgs= 1 P: Vendor= ProdID= Rev= 2.06 S: Manufacturer=Linux 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4 uhci_hcd S: Product=UHCI Host Controller S: SerialNumber=:00:1d.1 C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1 Atr=c0 MxPwr= 0mA I: If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 1 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=hub E: Ad=81(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 2 Ivl=255ms T: Bus=02 Lev=00 Prnt=00 Port=00 Cnt=00 Dev#= 1 Spd=12 MxCh= 2 B: Alloc= 0/900 us ( 0%), #Int= 0, #Iso= 0 D: Ver= 1.10 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 MxPS= 8 #Cfgs= 1 P: Vendor= ProdID= Rev= 2.06 S: Manufacturer=Linux 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4 uhci_hcd S: Product=UHCI Host Controller S: SerialNumber=:00:1d.0 C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1 Atr=c0 MxPwr= 0mA I: If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 1 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=hub E: Ad=81(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 2 Ivl=255ms T: Bus=01 Lev=00 Prnt=00 Port=00 Cnt=00 Dev#= 1 Spd=480 MxCh= 8 B: Alloc= 0/800 us ( 0%), #Int= 0, #Iso= 0 D: Ver= 2.00 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=01 MxPS= 8 #Cfgs= 1 P: Vendor= ProdID= Rev= 2.06 S: Manufacturer=Linux 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4 ehci_hcd S: Product=EHCI Host Controller S: SerialNumber=:00:1d.7 C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1 Atr=e0 MxPwr= 0mA I: If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 1 Cls=09(hub ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=hub E: Ad=81(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 2 Ivl=256ms -- next part -- This is sane-find-scanner from sane-backends 1.0.15 searching for SCSI scanners: checking /dev/scanner... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg0... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg1... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg2... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg3... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg4... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg5... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg6... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg7... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg8... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sg9... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sga... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sgb... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sgc... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sgd... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sge... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sgf... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sgg... failed to open (Invalid argument) checking /dev/sgh... failed to open (Invalid argument
[sane-devel] Reporting an unlisted/unsupported printer
Hi, On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 11:11:35AM -0400, lhs wrote: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN Please avoid sending HTML mails. font face=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serifMakenbsp;nbsp; HPbr Modelnbsp; PSC 1610 All-in-One, PSC 1600 seriesbr At least according to the hpaio web page, the PSC 1600 series is supported: http://hpinkjet.sourceforge.net/hplip_readme.html#Device Have you tried this backend? When you enter psc into the scanner search engine, you'll get the link to this page. HP all-in-ones are not listed in out own lists becasue the lists of the external hpaio/hpoj backends are usually current. Bye, Henning
[sane-devel] hp3900-series at sourceforge
Hi, On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 09:06:20PM +0200, JKD wrote: I write this mail only to announce that I've registered the project to create hp scanjet 3900 series (chipset Realtek RTS8822) backend at sourceforge. Thanks for your effort! I added a link to your website to the unsupported page of the ScanJet 3970c. Which other scanners in the 3900 series do exist? According to our lists, also the HP 4070 and 4370 use the RTS8822 chipset. Bye, Henning
[sane-devel] Acer ScanWit 2720S
Hi, On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 12:49:09AM +0200, Erik P. Olsen wrote: I have an Acer ScanWit 2720S negative filmscanner which works very well under Windows 2000. I like, however, to have it running under Linux (Fedora Core 3). According to our scanner search engine this scanner is supported by the external scanwit backend: http://www.sane-project.org/cgi-bin/driver.pl?manu=model=scanwitbus=any ftp://ftp.mccme.ru/users/ushakov/scanwit Bye, Henning
[sane-devel] Reporting an unlisted/unsupported printer
On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 11:11 -0400, lhs wrote: Make HP Model PSC 1610 All-in-One, PSC 1600 series Bus USB V ID 03f0 P ID 4811 Chip? lines deleted Did you check the hpiao (externel backend) http://hpinkjet.sourceforge.net/hplip_readme.html#Device The PSC 1600 is reported to be supported, so the 1610 maybe also or in a next release. -- m.vr.gr. Gerard Klaver
[sane-devel] Reporting an unlisted/unsupported printer
gerard klaver wrote: On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 11:11 -0400, lhs wrote: Make HP Model PSC 1610 All-in-One, PSC 1600 series Bus USB V ID 03f0 P ID 4811 Chip? lines deleted Did you check the hpiao (externel backend) http://hpinkjet.sourceforge.net/hplip_readme.html#Device The PSC 1600 is reported to be supported, so the 1610 maybe also or in a next release. This model works with HPLIP. I have it here and scanning works without problems. Till
[sane-devel] hp3900-series at sourceforge
Which other scanners in the 3900 series do exist? I don't really know if other scanners than hp3970c exist. But HP's software indicates in cd's cover clearly hp scanjet 3900 series and as I can see, driver sends different parameters to rts8822 chipset depending on ccd type (toshiba or sony) and depending on usb version (1.1 or 2.0) so I think it covers the most options needed in other scanners managed by this chipset. According to our lists, also the HP 4070 and 4370 use the RTS8822 chipset. I'm testing on hp3970c scanner. I'll modify application to set usb product and usb vendor as app's argument (silly lapse) Jonathan Bravo (JKD)
[sane-devel] offtopic 35-mm scanner question
Hi, I have an Epson 2480 and I'm quite satisfied with it. I haven't used it for negatives, only slides; for many purposes the results are quite good. Some random thoughts: * Sane support is very good, but native support (in windows) is still better. In particular: The windows driver detects and crops the slide area; under sane, you have to manually crop the slide mount. The windows driver supports 16 bit per channel, and this really makes a difference for high-quality scans. 16 bit support for the 2480 has just been added in CVS, thanks to the effort of Simon Munton. It's going to be included in the next release of sane-backends. For the impatient there's also the CVS snapshot :-) /Oliver
