Vuescan 8.1.36 - preview broken

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andrey Tarasevich
  • Start date Start date
A

Andrey Tarasevich

Hello

I'm using VueScan with Canon FS4000US over SCSI connection. Just
upgraded from 8.1.32 to 8.1.36 and noticed a problem with "Preview"
command. In version 36 it takes forever, compared to version 32.
Apparently, version 36 does preview at full resolution (4000dpi) even
though the "Input | Preview resolution" is manually set to mere 500dpi.
I reverted to version 32 and everything got back to normal - 500dpi
previews are as fast as they used to be. I wonder whether the problem is
local to FS4000US, to all SCSI scanners or all scanners at all? Anyone
else notice something like this?

Best regards,
Andrey Tarasevich
 
Me too noticed some slowdown in Preview mode, but not as much as if it
was scanning at full resolution.

Tried a bug report to Ed Hamrick? He no longer follows this NG.

Fernando
 
Andrey Tarasevich said:
Hello

I'm using VueScan with Canon FS4000US over SCSI connection. Just
upgraded from 8.1.32 to 8.1.36 and noticed a problem with "Preview"
command. In version 36 it takes forever, compared to version 32.
Apparently, version 36 does preview at full resolution (4000dpi) even
though the "Input | Preview resolution" is manually set to mere 500dpi.
I reverted to version 32 and everything got back to normal - 500dpi
previews are as fast as they used to be. I wonder whether the problem is
local to FS4000US, to all SCSI scanners or all scanners at all? Anyone
else notice something like this?

Best regards,
Andrey Tarasevich
Have you got Prefs|Display Raw Scan enabled? If so, try disabling it.
 
Me too noticed some slowdown in Preview mode, but not as much as if it
was scanning at full resolution.

Well, I warned you... ;o)

First slow, then fast, now slow again... Time to get those backups
out.

Don.
 
Well, I warned you... ;o)

First slow, then fast, now slow again... Time to get those backups
out.
Hey, no, that's good programming.... when else are you going to get a
coffee break otherwise? ;-)
 
Cool!

-- After I switched to this latest version, the stepper motor (Coolscan
V) was moving a little sluggishly (stop and go all the way for both
previews and full scans).

Unchecking this option fixed the problem, and I didn't have to delete
my ini file. Thanks John!!!!
 
You're welcome! I had the exact same problem with my Coolscan 4000. Some
colourful language was spoken until I figured out how to disable that
particular 'feature'.
 
You're welcome! I had the exact same problem with my Coolscan 4000. Some
colourful language was spoken until I figured out how to disable that
particular 'feature'.
 
The distinction between user error and program error is apparently
alien to some biased individuals.
Hey, no, that's good programming.... when else are you going to get
a
coffee break otherwise? ;-)

And it's even built-in functionality (introduced in V 8.1.31)!
It could even help some people to get a life ...

Bart
 
Hey, no, that's good programming.... when else are you going to get a
coffee break otherwise? ;-)

It looks like the author has been taking too many coffee breaks... ;o)

Don.
 
The distinction between user error and program error is apparently
alien to some biased individuals.

And other (really) biased individuals close their eyes to a UI bug,
preferring to blame the user and ignore the facts.

Not surprising, since the same biased individuals have been forced to
use different software for two years because of another VueScam bug.

And yet they continue to defend the buggy software they can't even
use.

Now *that's* biased!

Don.
 
Don said:
It looks like the author has been taking too many coffee breaks... ;o)

Don.

Don,
your behaviour is really ridiculous.
As Bart allready stated, a new feature was implemented with Version
8.1.31.
This feature was improved/enhanced with the following updates.
I tested Version 8.1.35 and I found a higher cpu-usage with my system.
So I analysed the situation an made a suggestion to Ed on February, 26,
2005, asking him if he can implement an option to deactivate this on
slower cpus.
With Version 8.1.36 published February, 27, 2005, this is implemented.
The only fault in this case was, that the changelog doesn't mention
this new feature. But that's all.

Don, I know your are well-known in the "scanning scene" and have some
kind of reputation. Please tell us, how many enhancement requests do
you put on NikonScan or Silverfast and please let us know how
succesfull this has been.

Winfried
 
The distinction between user error and program error is apparently
alien to some biased individuals.

Blaming users for something that the programmer has included, and has
not given any thought to (evinced by his failing to inform people it
could be turned off) is *not* user error.

I spent five years supporting computer users and I know exactly who
I'd blame in this situation. It's exactly the kind of arrogance you
get from companies like Oracle and Quark.
And it's even built-in functionality (introduced in V 8.1.31)!
It could even help some people to get a life ...
Thing is Bart, if that new "functionality" screws up your scanning
then I wouldn't call it an advance, more like an "MS Paperclip". And,
to give no warning to people so they knew how to turn the feature off
is typical of the way users of Vuescan are treated. Further,
"increased functionality" which messes with a lot of users machines is
usually what Microsoft called a "feature" and everyone else calls a
"bug".
 
And other (really) biased individuals close their eyes to a UI bug,
preferring to blame the user and ignore the facts.
Don, I don't follow your logic as to why you would call adding a feature
a "UI bug"? In the "whats new" section it mentions "Added live display
of raw scan data during scan", so I would have thought that most users
would pick this - it is only sensible to read the "whats new" before
bothering to upgrade.
 
Hecate said:
Blaming users for something that the programmer has included,
and has not given any thought to (evinced by his failing to inform
people it could be turned off) is *not* user error.

I didn't know "Don" was a user of VueScan, or do you mean to classify
someone else as a biased individual? I guess "whom the shoe fit, ..."
applies here.

I also have difficulty in understanding that when all of a sudden a
user sees the preview build up during the scanning pass (something the
program didn't do before the upgrade), and he experiences a(n
intermittend) slow down in the preview, he doesn't take the 'trouble'
to read the help on that new feature. I guess not everybody takes the
same amount of initiative, well such is life.

From the author, Hint 1: What's new in version 8.1.31 - Added live
display of raw scan data during scan. Hint 2: From the user manual -
Prefs Tab, *Display raw scan* Use this option to display the raw scan
data during a scan. You might want to turn this option off if you have
a slow processor or don't want to see the scan in progress.

How that can be called "has not given any thought to", evades me.

I also don't understand why someone, not a VueScan user, suggests to
"get those backups out" without understanding what is going on.
Perhaps he gets a kick out of ending up with his foot in his mouth, I
don't care but it seems a strange fetish to me.
I spent five years supporting computer users and I know
exactly who I'd blame in this situation. It's exactly the kind
of arrogance you get from companies like Oracle and Quark.

I don't really see how you could compare a one man operation like Ed
Hamrick's, with multinationals like Oracle and Quark. To me, there's a
distinct difference in available resources.

Ed Hamrick would probably have responded to the user's question in
this forum, had he not been driven away by a few VueScan bashers. He
probably thought his time was spent better by further development of
VueScan than by having to correct al the nonsense from one or two
bashers.
Thing is Bart, if that new "functionality" screws up your scanning
then I wouldn't call it an advance, more like an "MS Paperclip".

Point is, it doesn't "screw up" scanning, on the contrary. I now don't
have to look at the statusbar for a progress indicator, because I can
see from across the room how the scan is progressing. For those who
experience a measurable slowdown (sofar, things like display updates
have only sped up for me), they can switch the new functionality off.
And, to give no warning to people so they knew how to turn the
feature off is typical of the way users of Vuescan are treated.

See above. Ed Hamrick spends more time on developing free upgrades
than on reminding the users to read the manual. Besides, the issue
apparently was solved by a comment from fellow user (must have been a
clairvoyant, or someone who read the manual).
Further, "increased functionality" which messes with a lot of users
machines is usually what Microsoft called a "feature" and everyone
else calls a "bug".

It doesn't "mess with a lot of users machines", so I don't understand
the analogy.

Well, I'm off to check the mailbox and see if the slide for the
Scanner Bake-off 2005 has arrived.
Have a nice weekend.

Bart
 
Don, I don't follow your logic as to why you would call adding a feature
a "UI bug"? In the "whats new" section it mentions "Added live display
of raw scan data during scan", so I would have thought that most users
would pick this - it is only sensible to read the "whats new" before
bothering to upgrade.

That's not the problem, and Hecate has already addressed it.

In this context, the problem with VueScan (one of many) is the
so-called "user interface" itself. It brakes every rule in the book on
ergonomic design and flies in the face of all usability studies.

Therefore, in order to get around numerous *self-inflicted* problems
caused by such appalling "design" the author is forced to implement
all sorts of "unusual features" and "workarounds".

However, since they all deal with consequences rather than the root of
the problem (i.e. bad design) it just makes matters worse.

In the end, even the author himself has lost track and control. This
was demonstrated repeatedly by users correcting the author on arcane
interaction of various (unrelated) options. That speaks volumes.

So his "cure all" advice to any questions about UI is to "turn
everything off and set the gray point". Of course, "turning everything
off" is near impossible because VueScan always finds a way to meddle.

The bottom line is, you can't blame the user for the program's bugs or
bad design.

Don.
 
How that can be called "has not given any thought to", evades me.

Judging by your irrational (see below) defense of VueScan that's not
the only thing that evades you...

It's the consequences and interactions of adding a feature to VueScan
that are not given *any* thought to.

Or, are you now going to start defending the appalling VueScan's
so-called user interface?
I also don't understand why someone, not a VueScan user, suggests to
"get those backups out"

So let me explain it to you:

Anyone reading this group has witnessed *repeatedly* many desperate
users scrambling to find an old version of "VueBug" where this or that
still (pretended to) work.

Are you going to deny that too, now?

After all, you yourself use Minolta software to scan because VueScan
is too buggy. And yet you continue to defend it!? That's irrational.
Ed Hamrick would probably have responded to the user's question in
this forum, had he not been driven away by a few VueScan bashers.

Even though that's what you would like to think, it's not the reality.

He drove himself away by his own incompetence and temper tantrums.
Unable to address *objective facts* he painted himself in a corner and
then exploded with a torrent of obscenities.

Don.
 
The only fault in this case was, that the changelog doesn't mention
this new feature. But that's all.

Which, considering the VueScan's so-called user interface, is more
than enough to add to the confusion.

But even if the "small print" were in the log it still would not
address the key issue and the root of the problem: Bad VueScan design!

There is simply no way around that fact, no matter how much you and
other VueScan fans try.
Please tell us, how many enhancement requests do
you put on NikonScan or Silverfast and please let us know how
succesfull this has been.

That's known as a "non sequitur" and changing the subject. In other
words: What does that have to do with VueScan bugs?

But I'll take the bait anyway just to clear up the confusion...

First of all, and in spite of its failings, when it comes to bugs
NikonScan is not in the same category as VueScan. I can't speak for
Silverfast, but I can say that I have *never* seen a program as buggy
as VueScan. The whole sorry contraption is a flimsy house of cards
just waiting to fall over.

Therefore, no comparison is possible because VueScan is in a "bug
universe" of its own.

As to making changes to VueScan, you seem to have very short memory.
VueScan's author has always been very , shall we say, "reluctant" to
implement anything he stubbornly (and irrationally, and petulantly...)
doesn't want to, in spite of numerous objective facts to the contrary.

Let me just give you two examples:

One, before my time, but I have it on good authority that the author
"vigorously" refused to add a Preview window to the early versions of
VueScan because - are you ready - "you don't need it". Let's just
ignore for a moment how demonstrably false that statement is, but such
response is just unbelievably arrogant and presumptive. Ironically,
all his subsequent advice was based on the Preview window!

Two, the whole separate RGB Analog Gain (AG) saga. Starting, again,
with the offensive "you don't need it". Even after being presented
with a slide to prove the need for individual AG he refused to
acknowledge it until he was challenged to provide the settings he
claimed would produce a correct scan. Unable to do so, he exploded
with abuse.

Therefore, the last thing you as a VueScan user should do is try to
compare it to reputable software. All you do is just expose the
VueScan's very poor track record and unreliability demonstrated here
daily by numerous messages from frustrated VueScan victims.

Don.
 
I don't wish to join the fray, but I don't understand all the wild
hostility here. What's the big deal? -- If you like it, use it; if you
don't like it, use something else.

Nothing is perfect and while I do find the myriad options sometimes
perplexing, I have made hundreds of excellent scans with this "house of
cards," as someone here refered to it. And I like being able to tweak
all the variables.

Sometimes Nikon Scan does a better job, but for some reason, I usually
find Vuescan more comfortable for my workflow. It's a good option to
have.

Dan
 
I don't wish to join the fray, but I don't understand all the wild
hostility here. What's the big deal? -- If you like it, use it; if you
don't like it, use something else.

Nothing is perfect and while I do find the myriad options sometimes
perplexing, I have made hundreds of excellent scans with this "house of
cards," as someone here refered to it. And I like being able to tweak
all the variables.

Sometimes Nikon Scan does a better job, but for some reason, I usually
find Vuescan more comfortable for my workflow. It's a good option to
have.

Dan

Hear hear.....Couldn't have put it better myself especially the last
sentence.


keith
 
Back
Top