Re: Probable Bugs & Suggestions

David Mosberger-Tang (David.Mosberger@acm.org)
Wed, 14 Jan 1998 16:00:44 -0800

>>>>> On Wed, 14 Jan 1998 20:43:14 +0100 (MET), becka@rz.uni-duesseldorf.de said:

>> I don't particular like this solution. A reasonably technical
>> argument against it is that it would be slow to gray out options
>> when talking to a scanner over a high-latency/high-bandwidth
>> link. This is because for each option a dummy set-option call
>> would have to be performed, which costs a network roundtrip.

Andy> Ahem - I may sound a bit heretic here, but :

Andy> Who actually needs that ?

Andy> What sense does it make to tune options in the middle of a
Andy> scan ?

Andy> Do you want to produce a fade-effect by sliding the
Andy> brightness slider during the scan ? If so, I'd suggest you
Andy> seek help at either an image manipulation program or a
Andy> therapist.

Andy> What is wrong about waiting for the scan to complete and then
Andy> set the new options ? Do you need the 2 seconds you save ? Or
Andy> do you want to scan triangle shaped areas by adjusting the
Andy> width ?

Andy> Sorry, but I do not understand this thread. Someone enlighten
Andy> me, please !

You forget that SANE is not limited to scanners. Consider xcam and
video cameras.

Also, changing options in the middle of a scan can make perfect sense
(assuming the changed option takes effect when the current scan is
over). E.g., try to scan the same image four times in a row with
gamma values 0.5, 0.75, 1.25, and 1.5 and see what works better/faster
for you.

--david

--
Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/
To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com