sane-project-website/old-archive/1999-09/0043.html

<!-- received="Wed Sep  8 04:19:14 1999 PDT" -->
<!-- sent="Wed, 8 Sep 1999 15:19:37 -0700 (MST)" -->
<!-- name="Nikolay N. Igotti" -->
<!-- email="inn@sparc.spb.su" -->
<!-- subject="Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane" -->
<!-- id="" -->
<!-- inreplyto="199909081105.MAA06095@mail.teleregion.co.uk" -->
<title>sane-devel: Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane</title>
<h1>Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane</h1>
<b>Nikolay N. Igotti</b> (<a href="mailto:inn@sparc.spb.su"><i>inn@sparc.spb.su</i></a>)<br>
<i>Wed, 8 Sep 1999 15:19:37 -0700 (MST)</i>
<p>
<ul>
<li> <b>Messages sorted by:</b> <a href="date.html#43">[ date ]</a><a href="index.html#43">[ thread ]</a><a href="subject.html#43">[ subject ]</a><a href="author.html#43">[ author ]</a>
<!-- next="start" -->
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0044.html">Alexey Zilber: "Re: ACARD scsi w/ 620S weirdness"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0042.html">Daniel James: "Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane"</a>
<li> <b>In reply to:</b> <a href="0042.html">Daniel James: "Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane"</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
<li> <b>Next in thread:</b> <a href="0047.html">Panos Katsaloulis: "Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane"</a>
<!-- reply="end" -->
</ul>
<!-- body="start" -->
On Wed, 8 Sep 1999, Daniel James wrote:<br>
<p>
<i>&gt; &gt; I should buy SCSI scanner and cheap SCSI card. I need</i><br>
<i>&gt; &gt; midrange scanner for about $120-$160.</i><br>
<i>&gt; </i><br>
<i>&gt; That depends on your experience, and what you want to use the </i><br>
<i>&gt; scanner for.  I'm much happier with a tier 1 Red Hat supported </i><br>
<i>&gt; SCSI card (an Adaptec 29xx) than I was with my old unsupported </i><br>
<i>&gt; card - autodetected first time.</i><br>
I have enough experience with SCSI cards to set it up, but not enough to<br>
write a driver myself :).<br>
Seriously, I need good home scanner for various reasons. Not professional,<br>
but good enough.<br>
<i>&gt; </i><br>
<i>&gt; As for the scanner, take a natural-looking photo of a person and </i><br>
<i>&gt; scan it on a cheap 'n nasty scanner.  Then scan it on the best one </i><br>
<i>&gt; you can find, and compare results.  It's no good buying a cheap </i><br>
<i>&gt; scanner if you then spend ages correcting the colour on each </i><br>
<i>&gt; picture, and there's only so much you can do to make a good </i><br>
<i>&gt; image out of a bad scan.</i><br>
You are quite right, but now I'm interesting not in the best scanner in<br>
the world, but in scanner supported by sane very well. No more.<br>
<p>
Thank for your responce.<br>
<p>
Nikolay.<br>
<p>
<p>
<pre>
--
Source code, list archive, and docs: <a href="http://www.mostang.com/sane/">http://www.mostang.com/sane/</a>
To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail <a href="mailto:majordomo@mostang.com">majordomo@mostang.com</a>
</pre>
<!-- body="end" -->
<p>
<ul>
<!-- next="start" -->
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0044.html">Alexey Zilber: "Re: ACARD scsi w/ 620S weirdness"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0042.html">Daniel James: "Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane"</a>
<li> <b>In reply to:</b> <a href="0042.html">Daniel James: "Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane"</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
<li> <b>Next in thread:</b> <a href="0047.html">Panos Katsaloulis: "Re: what scanner is supported better by current sane"</a>
<!-- reply="end" -->
</ul>