[sane-devel] Digital ICE support

Laurent-jan Dullaart ljm@xs4all.nl
Mon, 22 Dec 2003 18:43:33 +0100

Sorry for the late reaction, but:

On Monday 01 December 2003 15:29, Major A wrote:
> > I think that IR cleaning is a front end task personally. For starters
> > you can tweek the IR cleaning parameters after the image has been
> > scanned if you are not happy with the default ones, without having
> > to scan the image again.
> Agreed. I think there should be a sanei_* library that allows the code
> to be used in frontends or meta-backends, whichever solution is
> best. (Just think of a network scanner that is accessed by a handheld
> device -- you don't want the IR cleaning to be done on the handheld.)

I recall that someone suggested that there should be something like a 
"mid-end" (like saned) that does the correction.  This would keep front-ends 
simple and provide a moer uniform way to access  features like IR-correction. 

> > Which is why IR cleaning should be a front end operation, with a set of
> > default parameters for the most common scenario. I note that Vuescan
> > only provides light, medium and heavy options in the front end for
> > this. Clearly there is not a lot of need to twiddle parameters.

I do not agree that there is little need for correction. When I try to correct 
using the simple GIMP-plugin, I find that both brightness and contrast of the 
IR-chanel are critcal and they must be set for each image separately. Also, 
the exposure for the IR-chanel seems important.


Another reason why a mid-end could be better than the front-end is, that the 
mid-end can scan always at full bit-resolution (12 bits on my LS-2000), do 
the calculations and then round to 8 bits.

hm... maybe it's time for me to pick-up programming again...


(c) ljm ( xs4all)    No part of this copyright message may be 
reproduced, read or seen, dead or alive or by any means, including
but not limited to telepathy  without the benevolence of the author.