EdHamrick@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 12/17/2001 8:30:36 PM EST, jimhayes@jymis.com writes:
>
> > On my SS 4000, Win98SE version 7.33 worked fine. Using version 7.35 with b&w
> > Tmax film the following happens:
> >
> > 1) Scan takes 15 minutes instead of about 3 minutes.
>
> Is the film being physically scanned more than once?
Ed it looks as if the SS 4000 pulls the film holder in and out a few times or
more
during scan. Even more damning, the Vuescan progress bar on the right side says
"color" and "busy" at different times...and it repeats, as if it's going through
the "color-busy-etc" cycle two to four times(more or less). It doesn't repeat
the
"output crop0001" however. The preview cycle is well behaved however and both
preview and scan image looks like it fairly represents the histogram. In
photoshop-too bright, 1/2 the contrast range and my original "flipped" preview
reflips upside down again.
Here's something else, Ed, FWIW. Last time I found a bug it was due to my
setting
"Focus" from "on preview" to "always", which is I guess is a setting not many
people choose, and the bug slipped through the crack this way. The repeated
scanning cycles made me think of this oddball setting I use. I don't know if
that
is a good clue or not.
>
>
> Are you getting a message about insufficient virtual memory?
No. I have 512 mb RAM, am running just a few TSR's at same time. I give it 16 mb
instead of 2 to zoom in on preview, and the crop0001 tiffs come in at about 22mb
each. For the first time though I did change one thing- I finally checked
"release
memory"...that shoudn't hurt anything AFAIK. There is about 7 or 8 gigabytes
left
on my SCSI "c" drive...and I let windows 98SE manage it's own virtual memory.
>
>
> > 4) I see from the viewscan site, he no longer answers e-mails for tech
> > support!!! Is this really so? Then why is the log file option box still
> > available?
>
> I answer 100 e-mails every day. However, 90% of the e-mails
> I used to get could be answered by someone spending two
> minutes reading the release notes or searching using
> groups.google.com. Now that it isn't as simple to send me e-mail,
> I get a higher percentage of e-mail about actual problems.
Ed thank you for explaining that. My tone seems to have come off as angry, which
was not my intent. I did mean to convey confusion and puzzlement, and a desire
to
know why, when and to what extent we should be refraining from e-mailing you.
What
you say makes perfect sense. And I have made my share of bone-headed mistakes,
easily solvable. I have also worked through maybe four real problems with you
that resulted in a rev to software, so I just wanted to know when to e-mail you
and when not to. In this light, having a logfile is still very valuable. I just
wish I could upload it to you and this could be figured out fast. But I'm not
going to bomb you with an 11.8 mb file, and my ISP would not like it either<g>.
My last version I tried that worked was 7.2.8...I loaded ver 7.3.3 but didn't
get
a chance to use it, slight correction there.
Thanks,
>
>
> Regards,
> Ed Hamrick
--
Jim Hayes
Digital Surrealism
Images at
