[sane-devel] terrible (systematically corrupted) jpg at 1200dpi

[m. allan noah]

I just looked at the top couple inches of both images in your
launchpad bug report, and I dont see anything wrong with the files.

allan

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 1:53 PM, ken <gebser at mousecar.com> wrote:
> I already opened up a bug report on this:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/hplip/+bug/1415121, if anyone's interested.
>
>
> On 01/28/2015 01:44 PM, ken wrote:
>>
>> What I wrote already in the prior email makes it clear this is a 1200dpi
>> scanner.
>>
>> "4 pixels per dot" would correspond to 3 colors + a B/W bit for each
>> dot-- what would be required for color scanning at 1200dpi.  "Pixel" is
>> a rather slippery term.  Perhaps the tech should have said "sensel". But
>> this was tier-one tech support after all, not a developer I was talking
>> with.  And she had to look up that much.
>>
>> On 01/28/2015 10:33 AM, m. allan noah wrote:
>>>
>>> "4 pixels per dot" is a meaningless statement. A dot is a pixel. You
>>> would have to ask the hplip guys if they can get 1200 dpi out of this
>>> scanner.
>>>
>>> allan
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:39 AM, ken <gebser at mousecar.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 01/28/2015 07:23 AM, m. allan noah wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> at least in lineart mode, the scanner maximum is 300dpi. Try scanimage
>>>>> --mode=color --help
>>>>>
>>>>> allan
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> According to specifications published by HP, this scanner's hardware and
>>>> optical resolution is 1200x1200 dpi.  I just called HP tech support to
>>>> confirm this and was told this is correct and that, further, there
>>>> are "4
>>>> pixels per dot", meaning that the scanner handles both color and B/W
>>>> at that
>>>> resolution.  So I don't know why scanimage would report that 300dpi
>>>> is the
>>>> maximum resolution.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>



-- 
"well, I stand up next to a mountain- and I chop it down with the edge
of my hand"