Red Steel and competent scanners.

Red Steel It’s highly unlikely the Xerox 7655 software recreated all the anomalies that the latest OBot claims. And if so, it is the most inefficient and convoluted Xerox software ever to be found. The Obama FogNuts are a brazen lot and they can be since there are no real consequences for their incessant lying.

That presumes that you can first show that we have been lying… You appear to presume that we are lying and therefore you have no burden to show this. It should be relatively straightforward to do so. Scan a document on a Xerox WorkCentre in the workflow outlined and show that we are wrong.

Red Steel Competent scanners make a flat copy, then saving it in the document PDF preservation software that should also be flat.

While Red Steel may be familiar with the consumer scanners, it is pertinently untrue that competent scanners make a flat copy. The use of Mixed Raster Compression is well known in scanning and the Xerox WorkCentre has implemented it as part of the standard e-mail scanning workflow.
What we see here is how Red Steel’s unfamiliarity with these concepts leads him to false conclusions.
The facts are simple: Xerox scanners manage to compress scans significantly. It’s not very convoluted but rather well thought out and implemented. But it does come with some side effects and the replacement of digits is a rather funny example.

11 thoughts on “Red Steel and competent scanners.

  1. I am sure the CCP is well aware of MRC and it’s application to Xerox scanners. It’s absurd to think the CPP didn’t test extentivly Xerox printers, big and small. This would be like testing TVs and not testing Magnavox or Panasonic models.

  2. John, you are assuming that the CCP “tested” anything. Since they don’t believe in the scientific method how would they ever do any experiments?

  3. I am sure the CCP is well aware of MRC and it’s application to Xerox scanners. It’s absurd to think the CPP didn’t test extentivly Xerox printers, big and small. This would be like testing TVs and not testing Magnavox or Panasonic models.

    Then it was just sloppy work… Your trust in the CCP’s diligence may also be misplaced?

  4. Sure they must have tested the Xerox models. Like I said, it would be like forgetting to test magavox or panasonic models of TVs. Makes absolutely no sense that the CCP neglected the Xerox models. Maybe they tested models didn’t do what NBC claimed they do.

  5. Investigators attempted to recreate the anomalies found in the computer generated image by tedious implementation of the some 1200 computerized tests, and were unable to recreate the anomalies contained in the White House .pdf file. Investigators clearly demonstrated that neither could account for the myriad discrepancies found in the White House image.

    They clearly missed some obvious candidates. Looking in the wrong direction and applying the many parameter variations is not very helpful. How many different scanners were tested for example? Or did they only test software packages?

  6. Sure they must have tested the Xerox models.

    So what did they really test? Was the CCP as diligent as John wishes them to be?

  7. NBC what Xerox models lack the scanner technology that Work CEnters have.

    I have no idea… You may be able to research this by searching for MRC in their product documentation.

    So far the 7655 and the 7535 support the MRC technology and recreate the same artifacts. There are model numbers that share the same technology.

    I find it hard to believe that the CCP tested a WorkCentre and missed the obvious workflow.

  8. It’s possible they used the original hard copy tangible Hawaii birth certificate and simply couldn’t replicate the anomolies. That was the base protoype testing which lead testing the White House Birth Certificate and concluding the same thing.

  9. It’s possible they used the original hard copy tangible Hawaii birth certificate and simply couldn’t replicate the anomolies. That was the base protoype testing which lead testing the White House Birth Certificate and concluding the same thing.

    That’s very unlikely as the MRC is unavoidable in the workflow.

    So either user error or they just missed what you consider to be an obvious candidate. Would that surprise you?

  10. NBC what Xerox models lack the scanner technology that Work CEnters have.

    The recent brouhaha over Xerox scanners changing numbers (ie, an issue that arose independent of the BC issue) generated a list of models affected. This list should correspond to the list of models that have the scanner technology in question, which would indicate that models not on the list likely do not (though it is possible the list was not exhaustive).

Comments are closed.