I need a control to implement scanning functionality into my VB.NET application. Does anyone have any good experience with a TWAIN toolset that will control the scanner, do some image correction, etc ect? My old trusted VFP one doesn't offer a .NET flavor.



Also, in VFP I never stored images in the database, I just stored pointers to the file locations. It always worked very well, can anyone make the argument that I should be storing the images themselves in SQL Server? They will be about 25kb per.



Thanks for any input.

Keith Chisarik

We use AtalaSoft for TWAIN support within PracticeStudio because they are fully .NET (no COM junk) and they are runtime royalty-free.  Their TWAIN support works well.

As for storing images in SQL Server, we allow our users to store them both in SQL Server and on disk (because some users would go over the 4GB limit on SQL Server Express database size).  The performance of reading the images in from SQL Server is far superior to that of storing them on disk.  Pulling an image from a TDS stream is just faster than opening it from a file handle on a network share. 

Hope this helps

I was very curious about this question that Keith made. I used to have the images stored in the General field in my Fox applications, but then I started having the table limit reached, and swapped to poiting to addresses.

Now, in SQL, I was wondering which way to choose, and it's nice to know that stuffing them into the database will be faster. I guess that giving the option to choose would be the best way, as it is probably not a major problem to extract them from the tables if necessary to save them in a folder, with this serialization thing.

Thanks Keith and Ben.

We allow our medical system to go both ways.  This is for those users who want to run SQL Server Express and will quickly hit the 4 GB limit.  We also have an in-place conversion so that they can swap back and forth and it will automatically move the images from a folder based environment to a SQL Server stored entry and vice-versa.  Being stored in the database is faster, but if you are expecting a potential mass amount of data, you will need to provide the folder based (or file based) option as well otherwise you will start having data loss when you hit the SQL Express limit.  If you are running a full version of SQL Server then this is not a concern.

Thanks, great info.

Keith Chisarik

Hmm I have had nothing but problems with Atalasoft so far. Mostly from the sample code being just plain wrong, it looks as if they used a converter to go from C# to VB.NET so I am having to fight two learning curves trying to evaluate it. Also some functions are just plain old documented poorly, for instance the use of an ADF.



You guys didnt have these issues?




Keith Chisarik

Yes, we had them.  And many other frustrations at first as well.  I had all of the same thoughts and experiences that you have just expressed.  Maybe even a little more exaggerated .  However, the alternatives require run-time licenses for every machine that will run a license of your product.  Atalasoft has run-time royalty free licenses.  This prompted be to stick with them. 

Their samples are actually very poor which initially made me think less of the product because I was afraid the product was written like the samples.  But I think that the internal code is better than their samples....though I cannot say this with an certainty since they do not give you the source code...another problem I had with them. 

I will say that they have been willing to work with me to work through the issues and we still have some work to do to get to the finish line, but all being said, this was fully managed .NET code and has royalty-free run-time.  I spent less time working around the problems I ran into versus writing this myself.  Also, I think that they will have the memory leaks resolved in the latest build (now available for download).  After all of this, I still think they are the best option for the money to purchase.  Using ImageXPress, Pegasus, or Accusoft will ultimately be a very expensive (and not totally comaptible) solution.

Ok, good it inst just me.



I have used ImageXpress in the past with great results, but they will be at least double the cost for the same functionality. I will keep banging my head with Atala. Thanks Trent.

Keith Chisarik

Me too.  But the run-time licenses this time scared us off.  It would have been a nightmare trying to keep up with these license not to mention the additional cost to our users.  The cost for just the development license was fair, the run-time was not.

Yeah i looked and it was like 80 bucks a user, no thanks!

Keith Chisarik