When I have to copy lots of notes which cannot be put in the ADF
(Automatic Document Feeder), I do it manually. However, let's say that
you copy (manually, and thus without the ADF) one page of a given
document. Once the light of the scanning light is at the end of its
course,
* It goes back as slowly as it was going when it was scanning, but it
is not scanning anymore. Why is it so slow if it does not scan
anything? I used to have a ScanJet 6xxx... and it was really fast!
* I open the lid, place the other page, then immediately push the
"Copy" button. However, nothing happens: it appears to be necessary to
wait for the last scanned page to be totally printed (okay, it does
not take a lot of time, but if you scan 100 pages like this, you lose
1 sec * 100 pg. = 1'40'', and that is too much for me). I can actually
see when it has been printed, for two reasons:
1. the page is (obviously) out of the printer;
2. the green LED does not twinkle anymore.
Can somebody tell me if these issues can be solved?
Thanks.
- --
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> When I have to copy lots of notes which cannot be put in the ADF
> (Automatic Document Feeder), I do it manually. However, let's say that
> you copy (manually, and thus without the ADF) one page of a given
> document. Once the light of the scanning light is at the end of its
> course,
> * It goes back as slowly as it was going when it was scanning, but it
> is not scanning anymore. Why is it so slow if it does not scan
> anything? I used to have a ScanJet 6xxx... and it was really fast!
> * I open the lid, place the other page, then immediately push the
> "Copy" button. However, nothing happens: it appears to be necessary to
> wait for the last scanned page to be totally printed (okay, it does
> not take a lot of time, but if you scan 100 pages like this, you lose
> 1 sec * 100 pg. = 1'40'', and that is too much for me). I can actually
> see when it has been printed, for two reasons:
> 1. the page is (obviously) out of the printer;
> 2. the green LED does not twinkle anymore.
>
> Can somebody tell me if these issues can be solved?
>
> Thanks.
> - --
> Merciadri Luca
> See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
Which scanner are you using now? Which version of scanning software?
HP's scanning software has gotten worse and worse over the years. I
have a SCSI Scanjet 8250 that needs a 200MB install file. All that crap
to scan, copy and print documents and photos. And it fails to work
sometimes. Today, I wanted to scan a piece of newsprint and the ****ed
thing kept asking me to install software that was already installed,
then it would scan without a complaint. HP has fallen victim to the
same
let's-make-it-really-complicated-to-show-everyone-how-incredibly-clever-we-are
syndrome that afflicts Micro$oft.
The HP install also inserts a program into startup supposedly to see if
there are any updates. There never are, but a client's all-in-one gets
nagging messages to order ink cartridges, when the carts are still half
full. The "update" is a way to call home to receive yet more sales pitches.
Maybe you want to use the ScanJet 6200 again?
I am close to investigating 3rd party scanning software, and paying what
is necessary for the reliability... Ben Myers
> Merciadri Luca wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> When I have to copy lots of notes which cannot be put in the ADF
>> (Automatic Document Feeder), I do it manually. However, let's say that
>> you copy (manually, and thus without the ADF) one page of a given
>> document. Once the light of the scanning light is at the end of its
>> course, * It goes back as slowly as it was going when it was
>> scanning, but it
>> is not scanning anymore. Why is it so slow if it does not scan
>> anything? I used to have a ScanJet 6xxx... and it was really fast!
>> * I open the lid, place the other page, then immediately push the
>> "Copy" button. However, nothing happens: it appears to be necessary to
>> wait for the last scanned page to be totally printed (okay, it does
>> not take a lot of time, but if you scan 100 pages like this, you lose
>> 1 sec * 100 pg. = 1'40'', and that is too much for me). I can actually
>> see when it has been printed, for two reasons:
>> 1. the page is (obviously) out of the printer;
>> 2. the green LED does not twinkle anymore.
>>
>> Can somebody tell me if these issues can be solved?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> - --
>> Merciadri Luca
>> See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
>
> Which scanner are you using now? Which version of scanning
> software?
Sorry, I thought I had mentioned it, but actually no. I use the Hp
OfficeJet L7500 Pro. It is an officejet and is thus a device which
supports printing, scanning, and faxing. My problem is not related to
any software at all: what I am speaking about is related to my
OfficeJet: I am able to copy documents without any link with a
computer. Thus, anything I said in my first message is about copying
from the OfficeJet to the OfficeJet; there is no gateway, or anything
else. What happens is thus *only* related to my device, and not to any
of my computers.
>
> HP's scanning software has gotten worse and worse over the years. I
> have a SCSI Scanjet 8250 that needs a 200MB install file. All that
> crap to scan, copy and print documents and photos. And it fails to
> work sometimes. Today, I wanted to scan a piece of newsprint and the
> ****ed thing kept asking me to install software that was already
> installed, then it would scan without a complaint. HP has fallen
> victim to the same
> let's-make-it-really-complicated-to-show-everyone-how-incredibly-clever-we-are
> syndrome that afflicts Micro$oft.
>
> The HP install also inserts a program into startup supposedly to see
> if there are any updates. There never are, but a client's all-in-one
> gets nagging messages to order ink cartridges, when the carts are
> still half full. The "update" is a way to call home to receive yet
> more sales pitches.
I agree so much with you. If I had to tell you all the problems I had
with my HP scanners... I think that HP provides good devices, but the
softwares are always so ... miserable.
My first HP scanner was something like the HP ScanJet 6*** (and was at
a price ~500€ if you speak in Euros; it is actually not that
cheap!). I had an electric problem with the lamp, and it *really*
ignited (I was on its side, and I solved the problem before any other
bad thing happened). It was partially due to the shop, which had given
me a AC/DC radio cable, at the place of the one which was optimized
for my scanner.
I then bought a HP ScanJet 5***. With the 6***, the HP Precision
ScanPro software was really exciting. It was practical, easy to use,
and without any frills like image albums, etc.
But, with this 5***, I had to install a lot of unuseful software, and
my documents were more difficult to scan and to save on my computer,
because the software was built for a family-use (you see, no practical
menus, only beautiful colors, lot of really unuseful stuff which makes
the software more and more difficult to cope with, and also to load,
assuming you keep calm when using it). I then tried to use my mere HP
Precision ScanPro software, but it did not recognize my scanner. (It
was not done for this, but I was really sad to learn that I would have
to stay with the family software.)
But my problems disappeared after only two years: the scanner decided
not to work anymore. There was a little screen in front of it to
indicate what it was doing, and this screen was, on 90% of the time,
twinkling, with strange characters (you see, when you look at it and
you think `Erm, what did I do? What the heck is that due to?'). These
problems became more and more common, and it became completely
disfonctioning. It never worked correctly anymore: even if, when
plugging AC, it was sometimes working, when scanning, the screen
became the same, and the light was twinkling like mad.
As I have to have reliable devices, I decided to buy this OfficeJet,
which has still no problem (thanks God!).
>
> Maybe you want to use the ScanJet 6200 again?
See before, it is completely dead.
>
> I am close to investigating 3rd party scanning software, and paying
> what is necessary for the reliability...
With Linux-based OS'es, there is no problem with the unuseful
shipped-with scanning softwares. Try it, you won't believe your eyes.
- ---
Any idea for my slow OfficeJet? Thanks.
- --
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
> HP's scanning software has gotten worse and worse over the years. I
> have a SCSI Scanjet 8250 that needs a 200MB install file.
>
> I am close to investigating 3rd party scanning software, and paying what
> is necessary for the reliability... Ben Myers
SANE seems to be available for Windows, and supports the 8250... but
only via USB.
Warren Block wrote:
> Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> HP's scanning software has gotten worse and worse over the years. I
>> have a SCSI Scanjet 8250 that needs a 200MB install file.
>>
>> I am close to investigating 3rd party scanning software, and paying what
>> is necessary for the reliability... Ben Myers
>
> SANE seems to be available for Windows, and supports the 8250... but
> only via USB.
>
> http://www.sane-project.org/
>
Thanks for the tip. I did not realize that SANE had made its way to the
wonderful world of Windows. Definitely a more SANE way to scan than the
HP clutter.
I'm willing to take a risk and install the SANE software with my SCSI
8250. I think that the list contains the devices with which SANE has
been tested. SCSI is SCSI is SCSI, and if SANE works OK with older HP
SCSI scanners, it oughta be OK with the 8250. That's the theory. Will
report back after some practical experience... Ben Myers
Ben Myers wrote:
> Warren Block wrote:
>> Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>> HP's scanning software has gotten worse and worse over the years. I
>>> have a SCSI Scanjet 8250 that needs a 200MB install file.
>>>
>>> I am close to investigating 3rd party scanning software, and paying
>>> what is necessary for the reliability... Ben Myers
>>
>> SANE seems to be available for Windows, and supports the 8250... but
>> only via USB.
>>
>> http://www.sane-project.org/
>>
>
> Thanks for the tip. I did not realize that SANE had made its way to the
> wonderful world of Windows. Definitely a more SANE way to scan than the
> HP clutter.
>
> I'm willing to take a risk and install the SANE software with my SCSI
> 8250. I think that the list contains the devices with which SANE has
> been tested. SCSI is SCSI is SCSI, and if SANE works OK with older HP
> SCSI scanners, it oughta be OK with the 8250. That's the theory. Will
> report back after some practical experience... Ben Myers
Nope. A Windows PC needs a Linux SANE server to run. I'm not going to
dedicate a computer to scanning here. Not that much scanning going on.
Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote:
> Ben Myers wrote:
>> Warren Block wrote:
>>> Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> HP's scanning software has gotten worse and worse over the years. I
>>>> have a SCSI Scanjet 8250 that needs a 200MB install file.
>>>>
>>>> I am close to investigating 3rd party scanning software, and paying
>>>> what is necessary for the reliability... Ben Myers
>>>
>>> SANE seems to be available for Windows, and supports the 8250... but
>>> only via USB.
>>>
>>> http://www.sane-project.org/
>>
>> Thanks for the tip. I did not realize that SANE had made its way to the
>> wonderful world of Windows. Definitely a more SANE way to scan than the
>> HP clutter.
>>
>> I'm willing to take a risk and install the SANE software with my SCSI
>> 8250. I think that the list contains the devices with which SANE has
>> been tested. SCSI is SCSI is SCSI, and if SANE works OK with older HP
>> SCSI scanners, it oughta be OK with the 8250. That's the theory. Will
>> report back after some practical experience... Ben Myers
>
> Nope. A Windows PC needs a Linux SANE server to run. I'm not going to
> dedicate a computer to scanning here. Not that much scanning going on.
Sorry about that, I did not investigate it far enough. Turns out there
are SANE Windows frontends but not backends at present.
There is a "HP Scanjet Basic Feature Driver" on the HP site that is 2.5M
instead of the 217M "I can't believe it's not just a scanner driver"
version.
> Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote:
>> Ben Myers wrote:
>>> Warren Block wrote:
>>>> Ben Myers <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> HP's scanning software has gotten worse and worse over the years. I
>>>>> have a SCSI Scanjet 8250 that needs a 200MB install file.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am close to investigating 3rd party scanning software, and paying
>>>>> what is necessary for the reliability... Ben Myers
>>>>
>>>> SANE seems to be available for Windows, and supports the 8250... but
>>>> only via USB.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.sane-project.org/
>>>
>>> Thanks for the tip. I did not realize that SANE had made its way to the
>>> wonderful world of Windows. Definitely a more SANE way to scan than the
>>> HP clutter.
>>>
>>> I'm willing to take a risk and install the SANE software with my SCSI
>>> 8250. I think that the list contains the devices with which SANE has
>>> been tested. SCSI is SCSI is SCSI, and if SANE works OK with older HP
>>> SCSI scanners, it oughta be OK with the 8250. That's the theory. Will
>>> report back after some practical experience... Ben Myers
>>
>> Nope. A Windows PC needs a Linux SANE server to run. I'm not going to
>> dedicate a computer to scanning here. Not that much scanning going on.
>
> Sorry about that, I did not investigate it far enough. Turns out there
> are SANE Windows frontends but not backends at present.
>
> There is a "HP Scanjet Basic Feature Driver" on the HP site that is 2.5M
> instead of the 217M "I can't believe it's not just a scanner driver"
> version.
>
> http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport...5&swEnvOID=228
>
> --
> Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA
Thanks for all your answers, but it does not answer to my main question!
- --
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
Copying really quicky 
Linear Mode
