wackywoo105
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 14:48
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2014
- Messages
- 203
[Solved] Microsoft Windows Image Acquisition Library very large scan file size
I am using the Microsoft Windows Image Acquisition Library to scan directly from a button in an access form.
I am using this to scan A4 files at resolution 200dpi in greyscale to jpeg. The scans captured by my access code are 3785KB in size. If I run the same scan using devices and printer the file size is 685KB.
I have the following set up:
Does anyone know why the access scans are so large?
Comparing the 2 images captured by different methods shows no real difference in quality.
I am using the Microsoft Windows Image Acquisition Library to scan directly from a button in an access form.
I am using this to scan A4 files at resolution 200dpi in greyscale to jpeg. The scans captured by my access code are 3785KB in size. If I run the same scan using devices and printer the file size is 685KB.
I have the following set up:
Code:
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana]With wiaScanner.Items(1)[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana] .Properties("6146").Value = 2 '4 is Black-white,gray is 2, color 1 (Color Intent)[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana] .Properties("6147").Value = 200 'dots per inch/horizontal[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana] .Properties("6148").Value = 200 'dots per inch/vertical[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana] .Properties("6149").Value = 0 'x point where to start scan[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana] .Properties("6150").Value = 0 'y-point where to start scan[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana] .Properties("6151").Value = 1660 'horizontal exent DPI x inches wide[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana] .Properties("6152").Value = 2334 'vertical extent DPI x inches tall[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana] Set wiaImg = .Transfer(wiaFormatJPEG) 'Change file type in save to match format[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana]End With[/FONT][/COLOR]
Comparing the 2 images captured by different methods shows no real difference in quality.
Last edited: