It seems there's not much else you can do for your scanner, apart from using it at a particular dpi, according to the link texmex posted above. http://projects.troy.rollo.name/rt-scanners/

Which version of sane have you got? What's the output of:

ls /var/log/packages | grep -i sane

sane-1.0.18-i486-3
xsane-0.991-i486-2

Well, it is late in the business day here so I've been playing with Xsane for the last hour or so. I've changed the various settings, used the default settings, etc., and I'm sorry to report that while Xsane can do the job, it can't do it very well.
SLOW. Talk about slow! I started a straight copy and made a pit stop, then to the lunch room to reheated a snack in the microwave (about 30 seconds), got something to drink and just as I was sitting back at my desk the copy started to print. The quality of the copy, inferior by a large margin to the same process if ran under HP's software in XP, which I then did to check compare the two copies. I made four or five copies and not a one of them was of "good quality."
To be quite honest with you, at this point, if I didn't hate microsoft so much on principle, and if I hadn't spent so much time setting up this system, I would go back to XP. If Kmail was available for XP I would do it. Kmail is the best e-mail client I've seen to date. One could run OpenOffice, Kmail, VLC, The Gimp, and several other programs and still thumb their nose at microsoft in a small way.
There are better things to do with one's time, like make a living, than send endless hours playing around with this stuff trying to make it work.
I'm sorry guys, but Linux still isn't ready for the desktop.

Well, it's kind of a catch 22 ... It may be true that sane does not currently have "good" scanner support for your scanner, but if everyone were to react like this to this fact, then good scanner support from sane will never happen.

Did you try the cvs version of sane ? Who knows, maybe it got better.

H_TeXMeX_H, you and everyone here have been a great help and I do sincerely appreciate it very much.
However it is statements like this that make me want to bang my head against the wall.
What the Linux "hobbyist" don't seem to understand or want to understand, is the rest of us who have to use computers as a tool as part of our daily routine, don't find spending hours trying to make something work to be fun. It is a waste of our time that could be better spent doing something more productive, like doing our jobs and making a living.
Until the time comes that you can install Linux, be it Slackware or whatever distribution, and whatever other software you need to do what has to be done, and do it with as little fuss as possible IN THE LEAST AMOUNT OF TIME as possible, Linux will not be seriously considered a replacement for, ugh, Windoze.
Perhaps, in a large company that can afford an IT department and pay people to install and setup what their employees need, Linux will work, but those of us who own smaller businesses don't have the time or the money to invest in Linux. Oh, sure, Linux is "free," but the time I've spent trying to get all these little things (fax, scanner, printer, DSL connnection, mount/umount, none that are really working the way I want them to) has cost me more, many, many times more, than what I would have spent had I just bought the commercial mickeysoft compatible products, installed them, and gotten it over with.
As much as I personally dislike Microsoft and everything it stands for, Linux has a long to go before you are going to be able to convince people to give up Windoze.

What would be useful would be something like ndiswrapper, but for any device, not just network devices. So you could run any device connected to your computer using the Windoze drivers ... until better drivers are coded. Does anyone know of something like this ? (or can ndiswrapper or maybe wine be adapted to fit this purpose ?)