Just saying that we were using it in the military before it was cool. Back then, we would only accept messages that had been typed on a selectric typewriter with a OCR type ball.
That way we could minimize the errors. I'm sure the technology has improved substantially since 1982, but it still depends on the font, whether it is serif, san-serif, stuff like that -----Original Message----- From: ProFox [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken Dibble Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 8:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [NF] Neat scanner system info and questions > >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 [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ 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.
