[sane-devel] How come ghostscript compresses so much better than xsane

[Julien Michielsen]

Scanning aa A4 through my xsane (xsane-0.995-79.1 with 
sane-backends-1.0.19-48.1 and iscan-free-2.10.0.1-26.1) to a pdf-file I 
end up with a file that is bigger than a Mb. I specified compress 
options under preferences as png compression level 9, and remain amazed 
that running the pdf-ourput file through gs reduces the file-size with a 
factor greater than twelve (a.pdf 4560401 , while test.pdf 370760) after 
the command
gs -q -sPAPERSIZE=a4 -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -sDEVICE=pdfwrite 
-sOutputFile=test.pdf a.pdf

I raised this point earlier on this list, but either I didn't formulate 
it right, or I didn't understand the answer. I still keep wondering that 
the compressing knowledge of gs is not incorporated in xsane.
-- 
Julien Michielsen
julien_at_michkloo.xs4all.nl