sane-project-website/old-archive/1999-03/0239.html

101 wiersze
5.5 KiB
HTML

<!-- received="Fri Mar 26 11:29:11 1999 PST" -->
<!-- sent="Fri, 26 Mar 1999 11:28:41 -0800" -->
<!-- name="Dean Martin Townsley" -->
<!-- email="townsley@physics.ucsb.edu" -->
<!-- subject="Re: Calibration problem on UMAX Astra 1220S" -->
<!-- id="199903261928.LAA17903@spacecase.physics.ucsb.edu" -->
<!-- inreplyto="36FB3F36.740EA8EB@wolfsburg.de" -->
<title>sane-devel: Re: Calibration problem on UMAX Astra 1220S</title>
<h1>Re: Calibration problem on UMAX Astra 1220S</h1>
<b>Dean Martin Townsley</b> (<a href="mailto:townsley@physics.ucsb.edu"><i>townsley@physics.ucsb.edu</i></a>)<br>
<i>Fri, 26 Mar 1999 11:28:41 -0800</i>
<p>
<ul>
<li> <b>Messages sorted by:</b> <a href="date.html#239">[ date ]</a><a href="index.html#239">[ thread ]</a><a href="subject.html#239">[ subject ]</a><a href="author.html#239">[ author ]</a>
<!-- next="start" -->
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0240.html">Oliver Rauch: "Re: Calibration problem on UMAX Astra 1220S"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0238.html">Luigi Rizzo: "Re: Dexxa / Artec AS6E scanner."</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
<!-- reply="end" -->
</ul>
<!-- body="start" -->
<i>&gt; It has nothing to do with you problem!</i><br>
<i>&gt; </i><br>
<i>&gt; What you are looking for is higlight and shadow (or black and white point)</i><br>
<i>&gt; definition.</i><br>
<i>&gt; The Astra 1220S only can do this via gamma correction, there are no seperate</i><br>
<i>&gt; functions</i><br>
<i>&gt; for this.</i><br>
<p>
Is it possible to make the popup help more informative on this point? Like maybe:<br>
"Do a quality (rather than quick) internal white-calibration"<br>
The point is to distiguish it from calibration on the image. You can decide if<br>
this is necessary since the real problem here is that my scanner just<br>
doesn't have a very good white point whether it's calibrated carefully or not.<br>
Sounds like this option adresses the problem of vertical streaks more than my<br>
problem, so maybe it should say something more along those lines, I don't know.<br>
<p>
<i>&gt; Xsane makes available the highlight and shadow function via the hystogram window.</i><br>
<i>&gt; Open the histogram window, between the two histograms there are some colored blocks.</i><br>
<i>&gt; In the recent version there are three sliders in the gray block. Move the mid slider</i><br>
<i>&gt; and</i><br>
<i>&gt; the left slider to the right, as far as possible. Then do a real scan of the image.</i><br>
<i>&gt; On a preview</i><br>
<i>&gt; you will not see any differences, because the preview is always done in 24bpp, the</i><br>
<i>&gt; real</i><br>
<i>&gt; scan uses a 36bpp and afterwards converts it to a 24bpp image.</i><br>
<i>&gt; </i><br>
<i>&gt; I hope this works for you!</i><br>
<p>
Actually this helps a lot! Thanks for the pointer. The scan comes out actually<br>
useful though it's still not as good as the one done on another scanner. I'm kinda<br>
new to scanning so I don't know many tricks yet.<br>
<p>
<i>&gt; &gt; I think I could do better if I had an idea what I was looking for. What is</i><br>
<i>&gt; &gt; the Quality Calibration supposed to work like? Should it happen at the</i><br>
<i>&gt; &gt; beginning of each scan when the button is checked? Should the scan process</i><br>
<i>&gt; &gt; be different? A two pass scan maybe? If it's not working is this because</i><br>
<i>&gt; &gt; the driver is just not telling the scanner to do it properly? Is this</i><br>
<i>&gt; &gt; documented anywhere or is this a trial and error type thing?</i><br>
<i>&gt; &gt;</i><br>
<i>&gt; </i><br>
<i>&gt; The difference is in the short time before the real scan begins.</i><br>
<i>&gt; If you don`t see any differences, it is possible that the scanner</i><br>
<i>&gt; always does a quality calibration independent from the quality bit.</i><br>
<i>&gt; </i><br>
<i>&gt; May be you see/hear a difference between a preview scan and a</i><br>
<i>&gt; real scan.</i><br>
<p>
I see now it now. It's like a really short scan just before the actual scan. I<br>
wasn't seeing it before because it only does it the first time you scan with it on<br>
after a scan with it off. I was always checking in the wrong order by doing a<br>
scan with it on (after having just done one with it on) and then one with it off.<br>
Apparently the firmware is intelligent and doesn't redo the quality calibration if<br>
it has just been done on the previous scan, or something like that.<br>
<p>
In the end I have decided the white point on this scanner is just not so good for<br>
whetever reason. I can put in something white and something slightly off-white<br>
and even using only the top half of the values as described above they both come<br>
out completely white, indicating the scanner can't see the difference between<br>
them. Oh well that's why it's not an expensive scanner I suppose (I use it mostly<br>
for 1-bit scans of text anyhow), though I really have no way of knowing if it's<br>
the model or just this one scanner.<br>
<p>
Thanks for all of your help Oliver, and thanks for your work on the software!<br>
-Dean Townsley<br>
<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="0240.html">Oliver Rauch: "Re: Calibration problem on UMAX Astra 1220S"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0238.html">Luigi Rizzo: "Re: Dexxa / Artec AS6E scanner."</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
<!-- reply="end" -->
</ul>