Re: [hylafax-users] HylaFAX performance vs regular fax machine.

["Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@baylink.com>]

On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:32:35AM -0400, Joe Matuscak wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Lee Howard wrote:
> > At 07:51 PM 9/4/01 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > >This makes it sound like it's the modem's fault to *me*...
> >
> > It would be my guess, too.  I'd venture to guess that the modem doesn't
> > support 2-D, at least in Class 2.  I don't think that there is a firmware
> > restriction to data format in Class 1 (I'm vague on this, though) because
> > it is handled by HylaFAX.
> 
> Howdy.
> 
> Ive tried the things that we've talked about.  I have deleted the files in
> info and reconfigured the modem to use Class 1.  The transmission times
> have improved, but are still not as good as the manual fax machine. The
> HylaFAX times went from 4'34" to 4'12" (fax machine is 2'53"). In looking
> at the files, it still looks like HylaFAX is using 1-D, even after the
> first transmission.   All of the logs are for the third job I sent.

It occurs to me that even if everything's 2D capable, you're *still*
only going to send 1D if that's all GhostScript images; is it possible
for GS to know how to image 1D but not 2D, Lee?

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra@baylink.com
Member of the Technical Staff     Baylink                             RFC 2100
The Suncoast Freenet         The Things I Think
Tampa Bay, Florida        http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 804 5015

   "Usenet (and fanfic): it's enough to make you loose your mind."
     -- me


____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________
 To unsub: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-users-request@hylafax.org < /dev/null