# 16 bit images

Robert Schwebel (robert@schwebel.de)
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 00:22:48 +0200

- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
- Next message: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"
- Previous message: joakim verona: "Re: problem getting a snapscan to work"
- Next in thread: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"
- Reply: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"
- Reply: Robert Schwebel: "Re: 16 bit images"
- Reply: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"
- Reply: Robert Schwebel: "Re: 16 bit images"
- Reply: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"

Hi!

Could anyone point out to me what the result of the 16 bit per pixel
discussion was? I find the discussion in my mail archive but not the
conclusion ;-) Did you agree on a possibility for the frontend to find
out about the original bit depth?

It seems to me that all backends available today have problems with 16
bit gray images as they report that this was not a supported depth. I
looked into some of the sources and it seems that 16 bit is treated as
"unknown" at least in scanimage and xsane(0.39). Any idea for a quick
fix (for the software or my brain) ;-) ?

Robert

    --
     +----------------------------------------------------------+
      Robert Schwebel, Luedemannstrasse 25, 24114 Kiel, Germany
        Public Observatory Rothwesten  (near Kassel, Germany)
          Phone: +49-431-6794138, email: robert@schwebel.de

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

     Next message: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"
     Previous message: joakim verona: "Re: problem getting a snapscan to work"

     Next in thread: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"
     Reply: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"
     Reply: Robert Schwebel: "Re: 16 bit images"
     Reply: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"
     Reply: Robert Schwebel: "Re: 16 bit images"
     Reply: Oliver Rauch: "Re: 16 bit images"