barcodes

[TecnologiaMV]

Dear,

I would like to know which barcode corresponds to pure Code 128.

I have been trying to use the ones provided by the report—Code 128A, Code 128B, Code 128C, and Code 128 Auto—but despite my efforts, my equipment is still unable to read them correctly.

I would like to know which barcode in Stimulsoft corresponds to pure Code 128.

image (12).png (41.63 KiB) Viewed 22062 times

Attached is an example of the labels. On the left side, you can see a label printed from an application that contains the pure Code 128 barcode. On the right, there are labels generated using the Stimulsoft library with the Code 128A, Code 128B, Code 128C, and Code 128 Auto barcodes, but there are always reading errors.

WhatsApp Image 2025-01-24 at 17.08.18.jpeg (166.36 KiB) Viewed 22062 times

[Lech Kulikowski]

Hello,

First of all, all barcodes are “pure”, they differ only in the way they encode information:
https://www.stimulsoft.com/en/documenta ... ode128.htm

Secondly, on the screenshots with labels we see only Code-128c barcodes, and on the designer screenshot too. We don't see any difference, they are all read by scanner.
So please clarify about “there are always reading errors”.

Thank you.

[TecnologiaMV]

As we are evaluating with our client, we found that none of the standards available in the library meet the format required by the equipment used to read barcodes. These devices are used in laboratories to analyze urine samples and are highly complex.

Given this, our next approach will be to generate the barcode using a specific font, similar to what is done in other products, such as Excel and Word. We would like to know if the library supports this approach and, if so, how we can implement it.

We await your return with more information.


Equipment:
Sysmex 5000
Cobas 6000

[TecnologiaMV]

This is the standard used on the labels that the equipment is using.

In Oracle Forms 10g, barcode generation in Code 128 format was typically done using specific barcode fonts installed on the client operating system or application server. Some sources used include:

IDAutomationC128 → Code 128 compatible IDAutomation commercial source.
Code128.ttf → Generic font for printing Code 128 codes.
Free 3 of 9 Extended → Although more common for Code 39, it could be used in some cases.
BC C128 → Another variation used for Code 128 C (subset that uses only numbers).

[Lech Kulikowski]

Hello,

We have analyzed the last screenshot you sent us. The barcodes on the left and right read the same on all our scanners, giving the same number “3054189”. They differ only in the internal encoding of the number: the left uses the “Code_A” command and the right uses the “Code_B” command. But both are in compliance with the specification and should read everywhere.

The following screenshot will show two barcodes we made in our product, with different “Code_A” and “Code_B” commands. They should read equally well everywhere. (we only included the “Code_A” variant in the code for testing purposes).

1.jpg (54.02 KiB) Viewed 20033 times

In the following screenshot below is our preview barcode and above is your printed one. In red we have underlined the place where the lines are printed with incorrect thickness, which may cause them to be misread by scanners. This is a known problem when printing to label printers from common applications (not specialized ones) and especially from browsers. Label printers have low print resolution (dpi), so thin lines are often distorted, especially in barcodes. To improve the quality you should increase the barcode size, for example, by increasing the Module property of the barcode.

The attachment 2.jpg is no longer available

Thank you.

[TecnologiaMV]

We understand the answers, but we still identify discrepancies in these devices. Even using the same format, such as Code 39, for example, when we generate the label with Stimulsoft, the format presented differs from that used in the client's old system. The same occurs with Code 128.

### Current scenario:
- Code 128 and Code 39 are read correctly by the old system.
- Code 128 (A, B, C, AUTO)** and Code 39 generated with Stimulsoft are not recognized by specialized equipment.
- Both formats are read correctly on external readers**.

Given that Code 39 is present in both implementations, we are focusing on using this standard. However, we still cannot get these specialized equipment to read correctly.

Any suggestions or tweaks we can test to ensure compatibility?

[Lech Kulikowski]

Hello,

We need some additional time to investigate the issue, we will let you know about the result as soon as possible.

Thank you.

[Lech Kulikowski]

Hello,

> - Code 128 (A, B, C, AUTO) and Code 39 generated with Stimulsoft are not recognized by specialized equipment.

You didn't say anything about Code39 before.
It has a CheckSum option, we have it by default true. In your specification there are two options - with and without CheckSum. Which option are you checking?

From Code128 on all your screenshots there is only Code128_C. Are you sure you checked the other variants?
Also a question: in the previous post we gave a picture with two barcodes (Var.A and Var.B). Do you read both of these barcodes? Because Var.A looks exactly like your barcode.

> - Both formats are read correctly on external readers.

I don't quite understand this sentence. What exactly does the external readers read correctly? Your barcodes, our barcodes or any barcodes?
Also a question: do you check with the readers exactly what you printed on the label printers? If printed on a laser printer - will it read better? Does it read normally from the screen?

There is also such a problem: many specialized programs for label printing have direct low-level access to printers and adjust the print quality to the printer.
And it is impossible to do this with Java/JS and when printing from a browser. Therefore, the only way to increase the reading quality in this case is to increase the barcode size.

Thank you.