[sane-devel] Digital ICE support
Laurent-jan Dullaart
ljm at xs4all.nl
Mon Dec 22 17:43:33 GMT 2003
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...
ljm
--
(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.
More information about the sane-devel
mailing list