The only scanner I ever bought, an ancient scsi/Umax Vista s6e which I had
from new, has broken down.  Using xsane I never had to use anything other
than the default settings and the colours were, to my eye, just fine.  The
scanner was also quite quick.

So, I borrowed my wife's, cheap, work-supplied usb/Canoscan Lide30,
thinking I would just confirm it worked then buy one for my own use.  I
believe I am using the correct (plustek), back-end but the result is
horrible. There is a pronounced pink tint to photographs, and documents
which I can just about nullify by a lot of manual tinkering, only to find
that the same settings do not work for maps, which I can't get right no
matter how hard I try - if the colours are OK then the contrast/brightness
are lousy. Of course, the damn thing works fine under XP.

Was I just lucky with the Umax?  Does it normally take a lot of adjustment
to get scanners working under linux?  Do you have any hints /
recommendations for not-too-expensive models that are known to work well?

TIA

Geoff

In comp.os.linux.hardware Geoff <capsthorne@yahoo.co.uk>:
> The only scanner I ever bought, an ancient scsi/Umax Vista s6e which I had
> from new, has broken down.  Using xsane I never had to use anything other
> than the default settings and the colours were, to my eye, just fine.  The
> scanner was also quite quick.

> So, I borrowed my wife's, cheap, work-supplied usb/Canoscan Lide30,
> thinking I would just confirm it worked then buy one for my own use.  I
> believe I am using the correct (plustek), back-end but the result is
> horrible. There is a pronounced pink tint to photographs, and documents
> which I can just about nullify by a lot of manual tinkering, only to find
> that the same settings do not work for maps, which I can't get right no
> matter how hard I try - if the colours are OK then the contrast/brightness
> are lousy. Of course, the damn thing works fine under XP.

;(

> Was I just lucky with the Umax?  Does it normally take a lot of adjustment
> to get scanners working under linux?  Do you have any hints /
> recommendations for not-too-expensive models that are known to work well?

I'd recommend taking a look at http://www.sane-project.org/ and
supported devices. With a little fiddling you can print the
large list on a few pages and simply go shopping for some scanner.

Personally I'm quite happy with Epson scanners, own a "perfection
1260" and an all-in-one RX600, the later can only make full
advantage of the photo-like printing capabilities with quite recent
gimp-print installed. Thx to USB2 the RX600 scanner is quite
fast.;)

There's some sw (sadly not all GPL) from epson if you don't like
the sane provided sw or want to try/use both:

http://www.epkowa.co.jp/english/linux_e/index.html

Good luck

-- 
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 203: Write-only-memory subsystem too slow for
this machine. Contact your local dealer.

Geoff wrote:

> The only scanner I ever bought, an ancient scsi/Umax Vista s6e which I had
> from new, has broken down.  Using xsane I never had to use anything other
> than the default settings and the colours were, to my eye, just fine.  The
> scanner was also quite quick.
> 
> So, I borrowed my wife's, cheap, work-supplied usb/Canoscan Lide30,
> thinking I would just confirm it worked then buy one for my own use.  I
> believe I am using the correct (plustek), back-end but the result is
> horrible. There is a pronounced pink tint to photographs, and documents
> which I can just about nullify by a lot of manual tinkering, only to find
> that the same settings do not work for maps, which I can't get right no
> matter how hard I try - if the colours are OK then the contrast/brightness
> are lousy. Of course, the damn thing works fine under XP.
> 
> Was I just lucky with the Umax?  Does it normally take a lot of adjustment
> to get scanners working under linux?  Do you have any hints /
> recommendations for not-too-expensive models that are known to work well?
> 
> TIA
> 
> Geoff
Are you using the lastest driver.There were problems with earlier ones.

On 2004-10-31, Geoff <capsthorne@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Was I just lucky with the Umax?  Does it normally take a lot of adjustment
> to get scanners working under linux?  Do you have any hints /
> recommendations for not-too-expensive models that are known to work well?

Epson scanners are well-supported in linux; Epson is one of the few 
companies that has actively collaborated with open-source developers to 
provide support for their products.

-- 

-John (john@os2.dhs.org)

Geoff (capsthorne@yahoo.co.uk) writes:
> The only scanner I ever bought, an ancient scsi/Umax Vista s6e which I had
> from new, has broken down.  Using xsane I never had to use anything other
> than the default settings and the colours were, to my eye, just fine.  The
> scanner was also quite quick.
> 
> So, I borrowed my wife's, cheap, work-supplied usb/Canoscan Lide30,
> thinking I would just confirm it worked then buy one for my own use.  I
> believe I am using the correct (plustek), back-end but the result is
> horrible. There is a pronounced pink tint to photographs, and documents
> which I can just about nullify by a lot of manual tinkering, only to find
> that the same settings do not work for maps, which I can't get right no
> matter how hard I try - if the colours are OK then the contrast/brightness
> are lousy. Of course, the damn thing works fine under XP.
> 
> Was I just lucky with the Umax?  Does it normally take a lot of adjustment
> to get scanners working under linux?  Do you have any hints /
> recommendations for not-too-expensive models that are known to work well?
> 
> TIA
> 
> Geoff

I have a Canon LID2E0, and it works fine.  Unfortunately, I'm t really sure
how to get it to work fine.

I bought it back in June, and it was my first scanner, and the first thing
I've ever had that used USB.  I couldn't get it to work, but more important,
I had no experience with USB to know what was supposed to happen.

The immediate need passed, so I put it aside.  In late August, I put
another distribution on a spare partition, thinking a different vantage point
might help.  Immediately I figured out what had to be set, and it worked,
though I was getting that pink you speak of.  I just figured I didn't have
something set right, since I'd never had a scanner.

Then I got a newer version of my distribution, Slackware 10, and I think
that fixed it.  I say "I think" because I can't remember if the problem
was still there.  I know I scanned something last week, and was really
surprised that it was "perfect".  But I'm not absolutely certain that this
was the first time I scanned soemthing since I installed this latest version.
I do know I unplugged a USB webcam that I'd not yet set things up for
and moved the scanner physically (including unplugging it and plugging
it back in) and I can't rule out any of that since I don't remember the
full sequence.

But now that it works, I'm quite happy with it.

   Michael

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:08:56 +0000, mike wrote:

<snip>

> Are you using the lastest driver.There were problems with earlier ones.

Sheesh .. the ONE time I post a question w/o updating my drivers, and that
turns out to be the problem.  I was using the default slackware 9.1 sane
backends (1-10.12), which uses plustek 0.45.  Current is sane 1.10.14 with
plustek 0.47 and it solves the pink cast problem.

Thanks,

Geoff

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:28:21 +0000, Michael Black wrote:

<snip>
> 
> Then I got a newer version of my distribution, Slackware 10, and I think
> that fixed it.  I say "I think" because I can't remember if the problem
> was still there.  I know I scanned something last week, and was really
> surprised that it was "perfect".  But I'm not absolutely certain that
> this was the first time I scanned soemthing since I installed this
> latest version. I do know I unplugged a USB webcam that I'd not yet set
> things up for and moved the scanner physically (including unplugging it
> and plugging it back in) and I can't rule out any of that since I don't
> remember the full sequence.
> 
> 
Thanks Michael,

As you will see from my reply to mike, I am on Slack 9.1 and the
combination of his response and yours gave me the clue I needed.

Geoff

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:54:07 +0100, Michael Heiming wrote:

<snip>
> 
> Personally I'm quite happy with Epson scanners, own a "perfection 1260"
> and an all-in-one RX600, the later can only make full advantage of the
> photo-like printing capabilities with quite recent gimp-print installed.
> Thx to USB2 the RX600 scanner is quite fast.;)
> 
> There's some sw (sadly not all GPL) from epson if you don't like the
> sane provided sw or want to try/use both:

<snip>

Thanks Michael,

As you will see from my replies to mike and Michael Black, it was a driver
problem.  The Lide 20 is working, but it feels very flimsy by comparison
with the heavy old Umax.  I will look into Epsons at my leisure now that
the itch has been scratched.

Geoff

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:59:08 +0000, John Thompson wrote:

> On 2004-10-31, Geoff <capsthorne@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> 
> Epson scanners are well-supported in linux; Epson is one of the few
> companies that has actively collaborated with open-source developers to
> provide support for their products.

Thanks John,

You will see from my other replies that I managed to get the Canon working
- but I am not at all sure I want one for my own.  Apart from the fact
that there was one available for me to test, I was looking at it only
because it is stocked by my local stores (and I like to go out and buy in
person), which do not seem to favour Epsons.  Now I have at least got
something working to fall back on, I will do some more looking.

Geoff