Hi,
> maybe there is something beyond versions to make the transpareny
> unit work (or not work), I have the scanner connected via an USB
> hub, having only two USB-ports (USB 1.1), that might have some
> influence as well?
Well, it shouldn't, but I've seen stranger things happen. If the
scanner
Hi,
>
> Mine is version 1.14, dated 20040402, according to the end of the
> firmware file.
>
> Used to work fine for transparencies with 1.0.15.
I've got the 1.14/20040402 as well, that is not working for me with the 1.0.15
backend.
I just downloaded the 1.0.16 sources, and hope to get it compi
Ken Ramey wrote:
> Here's the identifier from my file:
>
> EPSON GT-F500 1.14.8
> Friday Apr 2 2004 15:47
> Julien Blache's file seems to have the same signature as mine. It's
> not clear to me if he is seeing the color banding problem or not.
> Julien?
Works for me with sane-backends 1.0.16
Olaf Meeuwissen wrote:
>> iscan 1.15.0 has version 1.16, dated 20041028. Not tested.
>
> That's the only version iscan ever had.
TBH, I didn't bother checking the previous versions ;)
> I can't seem to find any reference to the hardware Ken is using, but
> if not ix86 could this be endian relat
Here's the identifier from my file:
EPSON GT-F500 1.14.8
Friday Apr 2 2004 15:47
Simon Munton Sent me his firmware file and it has the following signature:
EPSON GT-F500 1.16 P
Thu Oct 28 2004 17:57 EPSON
Simon reports that his file appears to give good scans of both flatbed
materials and trans
Julien BLACHE writes:
> Simon Munton wrote:
>
>> EPSON GT-F500 1.16
>> Thu Oct 28 2004 17:57
>
> Mine is version 1.14, dated 20040402, according to the end of the
> firmware file.
>
> Used to work fine for transparencies with 1.0.15.
>
> iscan 1.15.0 has version 1.16, dated 20041028. N
Simon Munton wrote:
> EPSON GT-F500 1.16
> Thu Oct 28 2004 17:57
Mine is version 1.14, dated 20040402, according to the end of the
firmware file.
Used to work fine for transparencies with 1.0.15.
iscan 1.15.0 has version 1.16, dated 20041028. Not tested.
JB.
--
Julien BLACHE
On Thursday 11 August 2005 12:00 am, Ken Ramey wrote:
> JB Wrote:
> >Maybe it'd be interesting to compare the firmwares used.
>
> That's a good idea. I would be willing to upload my firmware for
> comparison or would even be willing to compare mine with one from
> someone who is having no problems
Reinald;
I was hoping to do an actual compare of the contents of the files. If
we find that the files have different instructions in them, that would
be a start.
BTW; is your 2480 working (including transparencies) or not? What
would be most useful would be to compare the firmware from a working
Reinald Kirchner wrote:
>> Maybe it'd be interesting to compare the firmwares used.
> ok, here is mine:
> esfw41.bin -> transparency does not work at all with 1.0.15 sane backend,
> using the snapscan interface.
>
> Is the difference in the firmware-versions in the filename or something
> "insi
Ken Ramey wrote:
>>Maybe it'd be interesting to compare the firmwares used.
>
> That's a good idea. I would be willing to upload my firmware for
> comparison or would even be willing to compare mine with one from
> someone who is having no problems with the color bands and post the
> results.
>
> Maybe it'd be interesting to compare the firmwares used.
ok, here is mine:
esfw41.bin -> transparency does not work at all with 1.0.15 sane backend,
using the snapscan interface.
Is the difference in the firmware-versions in the filename or something
"inside" the firmware? I think my filedate
/Oliver Wrote:
>There is always a third possibility: Fix the problem.
True... that _is_ a possibility. In fact, I couldn't bring myself to
buy a Winblows machine, so I am living with the problem for now.
I actually have been looking at the code trying to understand what
could be causing the col
JB Wrote:
>Maybe it'd be interesting to compare the firmwares used.
That's a good idea. I would be willing to upload my firmware for
comparison or would even be willing to compare mine with one from
someone who is having no problems with the color bands and post the
results.
Any takers?
ken
Oliver Schwartz wrote:
> I have no clue why this problem occurs for some users and not for
> others. As far as I know there is no correspondence to any version of
> the backend. In fact the code for scanning transparencies has hardly
> been changed in the last three years. I doubt that an earl
Hi,
> After several days of working on this problem, it seems obvious
> that the sane package will not support the transparency unit on the
> Epson 2480.
well, it does, at least for some versions of the 2480. Some people
have reported problems similar to yours (see, e.g.
http://alioth.debian.
Okay... Thanks, Henning.
Assuming that CVS becomes available in the near future, do you know
the release or date that I should check out?
Thaks again.
ken
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 05:35:06AM -0700, Ken Ramey wrote:
> After searching the sane-project ftp repository, I don't find any
> version of sane-backends or sane-backends-devel from "around March".
> sane-backends-1.0.16, the latest version was released in August. The
> version before that,
On 8/8/05, Ken Ramey wrote:
> After several days of working on this problem, it seems obvious that
> the sane package will not support the transparency unit on the Epson
> 2480. After working for two days with the latest sane-backends
> package (1.0.16) and having more problems than with the olde
After several days of working on this problem, it seems obvious that
the sane package will not support the transparency unit on the Epson
2480. After working for two days with the latest sane-backends
package (1.0.16) and having more problems than with the older version,
I have dropped back down t
20 matches
Mail list logo
