Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 




      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] RE: large scanning project


I think you are for the most part correct in you analysis of VS.
However, two points need to be made with respect to Windows XP and the
future Vista.

First, with the introduction of Windows XP (Microsoft, at the time was
in a battle with Adaptec over licensing), Microsoft introduced its own
version of an ASPI layer in XP and dropped the Adaptec version from its
software.  To use the Adaptec version, which many devices required to
work well and which VS supported, the user had to get and install the
Adaptec version, which sometimes did not install smoothly and came into
conflict with the Microsoft version (which could not be uninstalled).
Even after Microsoft and Adaptec made up, this has tended to be the case
and probably will be true in Vista.

Secondly, it is also the case that the new Vista will not be including
or, as far as I know and understand, twain drivers for anything - 32 or
64 bit.  Microsoft will be moving away from twain to their WIA (Windows
Imaging Architecture) as their plug and play recognition process and the
means by which applications make calls to imaging peripherals. It will
employ its own user device drivers and kernel drivers as well as use its
own form of automation or ASPI layer (different from the Adaptec ASPI
layer).  It will support WIA compatible USB, Firewire, and SCSI devices.
It will not support Twain or parallel port devices.

----Original Message----
From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Tony Sleep
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 8:42 AM
To: laurie@advancenet.net
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: large scanning project

> On 31/05/2006 lotusm50@sprynet.com wrote:
>> Vuescan won't know that the scanner is there because the computer OS
>> won't know the scanner is there -- or it might know something is
>> there, but won't know what exactly it is or how to deal or
>> communicate with it.
> Are you sure? My understanding is :-
> - the scanner must be able to talk SCSI commands, or USB. or Firewire.
> That capability is hard wired, in its firmware
> - Ed's difficulty has been reverse-engineering the precise
> commands used, which are generally undocumented by mfrs. But
> where he has been able to figure which commands are used and
> in what sequence (from sniffing the SCSI/USB/Firewire using
> OEM software), VS is able to talk to the scanner.
> It just squirts commands out onto the data bus. He hasn't
> been able to do this with parallel-port scanners because the
> commands are non-standard, bespoke things that vary from mfr
> to mfr. That isn't the case with USB/SCSI/Firewire - they use
> fixed protocols.
> - So far as I can see, there's no requirement for a driver in
> this transaction, except a driver that interfaces the data bus
> (SCSI/Firewire/USB) to the computer hardware via the PCI bus.
> That provides the translation layer needed.
> - I would therefore expect that so long as SCSI/USB/Firewire
> drivers are available for 64 bit (of course they are:), VS
> will be able to communicate with the scanner and deal with
> the data it gets back. Each data bus has its own protocol.
> Once the commands or data are on the bus, there will be no
> difference between 32 and 64 bit.
> I may very well be hopelessly wrong about all this, but I am 1000%
>   certain the LS1000 works just fine with XP with no Nikon driver
> ever having been produced for that OS (W98 was the last), and
> nor does it need any driver installed. It just needs the ASPI
> layer, which is the SCSI driver. As far as I know, VS itself
> is 'driverless' - it talks directly to the scanner hardware,
> via the data bus. Else he'd have to bundle tons of mfr.
> driver with it, and he couldn't and doesn't.
> I would suggest you ask Ed about 64bit support for all the
> scanners he currently supports in 32bit. I suspect he'll
> smile and say 'of course'.
> And actually it won't present him with any work, because the
> only issue is 64bit drivers for the data bus used, and they
> exist. Maybe he'll rewrite VS to *be* 64bit for speed
> reasons, but that still won't affect the situation. As long
> as VS can talk to the data bus, the data bus will talk to the scanner.
> What you aren't ever going to get is 64bit TWAIN drivers that
> scan directly into the graphics application. That would need
> scanner-specific drivers, but VS doesn't do TWAIN anyway.
> Personally I prefer standalone scan s/w anyhow.
> Regards
> Tony Sleep
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
> filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate)
> in the
> message title or body

Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.