Return-Path: <owner-tiff@olympiakos.com>
Received: from nataly.at1895.spb.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by at1895.spb.edu (8.12.4/8.12.4/Debian-4) with ESMTP id g7GFKEdF018750
	for <dron@at1895.spb.edu>; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 19:20:14 +0400
Received: from olympiakos.com (uucp@localhost)
	by nataly.at1895.spb.edu (8.12.4/8.12.4/Debian-4) with UUCP id g7GFKEsg018747
	for dron@at1895.spb.edu; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 19:20:14 +0400
Received: from knot.pu.ru (knot.pu.ru [193.124.85.214] (may be forged))
	by wg.pu.ru (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA15998
	for <dron@at1895.spb.edu>; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:49:10 GMT
Received: from gate7.olympiakos.com (sdsl-64-32-199-150.dsl.iad.megapath.net [64.32.199.150])
	by knot.pu.ru (8.9.3/8.9.0) with ESMTP id SAA00594
	for <dron@at1895.spb.edu>; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 18:49:08 +0400 (MSD)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA23408;
	Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:44:21 -0400
Received: by gate7.olympiakos.com (bulk_mailer v1.9); Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:34:36 -0400
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA23302
	for tiff-outgoing; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:34:35 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: gate7.olympiakos.com: majordom set sender to owner-tiff@olympiakos.com using -f
Received: from ariel.eastgw.xerox.com (ariel.xerox.com [208.140.33.25])
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA23299
	for <tiff@olympiakos.com>; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:34:34 -0400
Received: from "Firewall" (mswitch3.cinops.xerox.com [13.250.20.173])
	by ariel.eastgw.xerox.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA06985;
	Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:34:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.mgate.usa.xerox.com by mgate.usa.xerox.com
 (PMDF V6.1 #39865) id <0H0X00M01XKV88@mgate.usa.xerox.com>; Fri,
 16 Aug 2002 10:29:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from usaxeroxbh1.USA.XEROX.COM
 (usaxeroxbh1.usa.xerox.com [13.250.20.25])
 by mgate.usa.xerox.com (PMDF V6.1 #39865)
 with ESMTP id <0H0X00M4VXKU47@mgate.usa.xerox.com>; Fri,
 16 Aug 2002 10:29:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by usaxeroxbh1.usa.xerox.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
	id <QZ7M2LYV>; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:34:31 -0400
Content-return: allowed
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:34:29 -0400
From: "Poysa, Kari" <Kari.Poysa@usa.xerox.com>
Subject: RE: Orientation field
To: "'pnielsen@tuug.fi'" <pnielsen@tuug.fi>, Andreas_Kleinert@t-online.de
Cc: tiff@olympiakos.com
Message-id: <1DD88DDBBB83D6119C8C00096BB0408F01EFB2@USAMCMS5>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Sender: owner-tiff@olympiakos.com
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
Content-Length: 2046
Lines: 40


Good points and great discussion. From my limited experience with scanner
development, I want to add a few more comments:

Scanners like any other devices are intended for a target market (read:
price) that sets some financial limitations to the amount of memory and CPU
that can be offered. Because the slowest component is typically the physical
paper movement, it is natural to feed the originals such that the original's
longest edge that is shorter than the scanner bar is fed to the scanner. On
a typical paper document - a letter or A4 size portrait - this requires a 90
degree rotation to view the scanned image properly. And I agree, this should
really be done at the source, and it typically will be done as long as the
resources to do it are available.

Now the dilemma: you can offer the user as an added bonus the scanning of
originals that are larger in size and/or utilize a higher resolution than
the intended everyday use (which set the original design boundaries - the
target market). Problem is you cannot rotate them properly. Do you not offer
these paper sizes and resolutions or do you hope that the viewer will do the
rest of the work?

I agree that an experienced user will figure out how to feed the originals
so that the resulting image is properly oriented and needs no rotating.
However, the Joe Average user will still have to learn this the hard way
when he opens his scan in a viewer.


I don't like the term laziness (I use words like "budget" and "schedule"
with my boss ;), but how is it that just about all TIFF viewers offer a
rotate option on the user's toolbar, but they do not rotate automatically if
the TIFF tag requests it? This does not help spreading TIFF as a raster
image interchange format.

So I want to repeat my plea for the viewer developers to rethink
implementing the orientation tag. It will set you apart from the rest!

	--- Kari ---

To subscribe or unsubscribe email tiff-request@olympiakos.com with subscribe
or unsubscribe in the email body.  Libtiff home page: http://www.libtiff.org

