+1 On Friday, December 13, 2013 11:25:42 AM UTC-5, Nick White wrote: > > A lot of people seem to assume that if they get poor quality results > from Tesseract the appropriate response is to retrain tesseract. For > most cases that will just be a waste of time, and preprocessing > would be a much more sensible route. > > While this is not news for those of us who have been around for very > long here, I think it could be better communicated to new users. > There is a good brief entry in the FAQ about it[0], but the FAQ is > long, and I think a more focused separate page which is referenced > from the homepage would be a better idea. > > I've drafted such a page, and I'd be keen to get feedback on it. Is > it clear? Is it a good idea? I haven't filled out all of the "Image > processing" sections yet, but (presuming people don't hate the idea > in general) I will do soon, including image examples. > > The page is attached, as is an image that will be displayed in the > "binarisation" section (shamelessly stolen from Zdenko's page at [1]). > > Nick > > 0. > http://code.google.com/p/tesseract-ocr/wiki/FAQ#Output_without_result_or_bad_output > > 1. http://www.sk-spell.sk.cx/through-tesseract-ocr-eye >
-- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tesseract-ocr" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tesseract-ocr?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tesseract-ocr" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
