>btw I have had *very* mixed results with OCR - particularly of scanned
>documents.
The font's make a very big difference.
We were using OCR in the navy around 82.
Only way we could get the best results was the OCR font.
Something along the line of courier
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying OCR works better if you
standardize the fonts in the documents to be scanned?
If I could do that I probably would already have the documents in
electronic format and wouldn't need to OCR them.
The reason to use OCR, at least these days, is to scan printed documents in
all kinds of fonts and formats, and get machine-readable text out of them.
With Open Book, my blind wife can print out a crummy image-only PDF that
she can't read, scan and OCR it, and get back about 95% text that she can
read. (Many people don't understand that PDF documents are not accessible
to people who use screen-reader software unless the text has been OCR'ed on
its way into the PDF.)
Ken Dibble
www.stic-cil.org
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
