Hi,
Please reply to the list, not to me personally. There are developers
that know much more about the plustek backend than me.
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 08:02:27PM -0600, Charles Mims wrote:
> I am sure you are correct about this. I just was trying to say that it
> is supposed to use the plustek
> To summarize, I think these changes are necessary:
>
> 4. ideally, we also want a (SANE-independent) tool for creating
>profiles based on scans from calibrated targets.
Does SCARSE sound like what is needed (http://www.scarse.org)? With a
name like "Scanner CAlibration ReaSonably Easy", it
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 08:44:51PM +, Major A wrote:
> > Can you give some details what has to be done for that? Are changes
> > necessary for the backends, frontends and/or the API?
>
> I don't think much has been done yet. I don't think we need to change
> any backends (the only thing w
Hi,
On Freitag, 21. März 2003 10:39, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please reply to the list, not to me personally. There are developers
> that know much more about the plustek backend than me.
really ;-)
[SNIPSNAP]
> > sane-backends identified as 1.0.8
>
> May be too old. But that's a d
