Which OCR package for text scanning is the best?
in [Scanners]
|
Prev: Scanning suddenly stopped working after Windows update
Next: Cannon Scangear issue - clip organiser
From: McGrath on 28 Feb 2010 11:43 "Talker" <Talker(a)thegood.com> wrote in message news:s2jho5hr2b2rghsagd9emdht816fdojk0h(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 09:02:11 -0800, curious8(a)pacbell.net wrote: > >> >>>I'm looking for a good OCR scanning package coming with scanner >>>or stand alone. I'd appreciate any recommendations of hint which >>>one should I choose. I'm familiar whit Omipage 14 basic OCR but >>>someone said that Readiris is better. >>>TIA for any info. >> >>I have both OmniPage16 and FineReader10, have used various versions of >>both programs for years. Both work well for clean copy, but I much >>prefer Abbyy's FineReader for print that is faint, has complex >>formatting, or poorly formed letters. With FineReader it is much >>easier to make corrections during proofing. OmniPage can be very very >>frustrating for me. >> >>charlie > > > I have used Omnipage Pro and Abbyy's Finereader, and neither one > of them are worth a damn. Maybe it's because I rarely use either one > of them, and I'm doing something wrong, but every time I have tried to > scan a document, it never scans and recognizes it properly. I have to > correct so many errors in the text, that I might as well have typed it > myself. > If it has charts or pictures with the text, forget it, I end up > with a total mess. I finally just gave up on OCR software, and no > longer use it. > Oh, and it's not the scanner either, since I have used both OCR > programs with three different scanners over the years....my latest > scanner is a Canon 9950F. > > Talker Does Canon 9950F have Windows 7 Drivers ready? And does any OCR come with Canon 9950F ?
From: CSM1 on 28 Feb 2010 14:34 "Edward Kroeze" <edwardkroeze(a)home.nl> wrote in news:eefc6$4b8a9b82$524b48b1$24547(a)cache2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl: > "CSM1" <nomail(a)nomoremail.com> wrote in message > news:Xns9D2C78F9917E5nomoremail(a)74.209.136.91... > [snip] >> >> No OCR is 100% accurate. 90% is doable. >> > > Just curious what exactly you mean by 90% ? > > 1) 90% of the pages are flawless? (and 10% contain one or more > mistakes?) 2) 90% of each line is correct? (and 10% (appr. 5 to 8 > characters) PER LINE are wrong?) > 3) something different? > > The first option might be workable, but the second for sure is not. > > Cheers, > > Edward > I mean that at least 90% of the text will be correct. 10% or less will require spell checking and some words may be completely garbled. That is based on a One page OCR conversion of mixed pictures and text. Works best if you do a manual zoning, to be sure you have the text zoned and the graphics zoned. PDF Image on text works pretty good, you get the image that is the exact copy of your sheet, and the OCR result for searching. You only miss the words that don't OCR well. I have seen a 100% OCR result on really clear original copy of just text. -- CSM1 http://www.carlmcmillan.com
From: isw on 28 Feb 2010 15:16 In article <4mtko5p46psma36s7gikdm5tkq1bibgc3c(a)4ax.com>, spam(a)kenward.eu wrote: > B&W is also there because that it the source material. It adds nothing > to scan a newspaper cutting in greyscale. I don't think that's true. Unless you can somehow manage to get the edges of the character glyphs to align perfectly with the individual elements in the sensing array in the scanner (which is essentially impossible), forcing the scanner to decide what to do with partial overlaps (forcing all split pixels to be either black or white) is throwing away information which the OCR process can use because it alters the shape of the glyphs. If you really think it takes up less room, you can always convert to B&W after the OCR process, although I have a suspicion that the difference in size between a B&W PDF and a gray-scale one is fairly small. Isaac
From: isw on 28 Feb 2010 15:18 In article <1kuin.53095$qJ.29950(a)newsfe10.iad>, Jethro Pull <jpull(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > As to ABBY vs. Omni Page: I have used both and prefer ABBY. Why? ABBY is > simpler to use and is accurate enough for me. When I import into > MS-Word, misspelled words are underlined and I can fix them. Unless the error results in a different word also in the dictionary. Have you ever found spelling errors in the MS dictionary? I have. Isaac
From: Jethro Pull on 1 Mar 2010 06:52
Interesting ... no, I have found no spelling errors in the dictionary. How would you correct them if you knew an obvious error or accidentally added a misspelled word to the dictionary? On 2/28/2010 3:18 PM, isw wrote: > In article<1kuin.53095$qJ.29950(a)newsfe10.iad>, > Jethro Pull<jpull(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> As to ABBY vs. Omni Page: I have used both and prefer ABBY. Why? ABBY is >> simpler to use and is accurate enough for me. When I import into >> MS-Word, misspelled words are underlined and I can fix them. >> > Unless the error results in a different word also in the dictionary. > > Have you ever found spelling errors in the MS dictionary? I have. > > Isaac > |