[bksvol-discuss] Re: Puzzlement

HI Rick,
 
You're very welcome.  Hope you find settings that you are happy with!
 
Mayrie
 
 

  _____  

From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ohio1803@xxxxx
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 9:38 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Puzzlement


No, quite helpful, Mayrie - thanks again.
 
I am sure that my grayscale also using "image kept" contributed greatly to
the size and speed of the process.
 
And pretty interesting to know that Grayscale improves quality even when
standard text and background on the pages.
 
Anything that works, and allows us not to have to fuss and fool so much
trying to fix things, I say I want to try and do it!
Thanks for sharing your experiences.
 
Rik
 
From: Mayrie ReNae <mailto:mayrierenae@xxxxxxxxx>  
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 12:21 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Puzzlement
 
HI Rik,
 
It's true that grayscale takes longer to recognize if the machine is not
very robust.  I rarely keep images in my documents, so the size of the
images doesn't make a difference for me.  Here's the thing.  I've chosen to
use gray scale by default because I'm lazy and don't want to fuss around
trying to get good scanning settings when most often when I've done that
gray scale has given me the best results, even with standard text in a
standard font on a white background.  In short, I like gray scale because I
am ultimately lazy.  Over all it takes less time for me.
 
Of course, you may get different results depending upon the light
fluctuations in your room, or lack thereof, or any number of other
contributing factors.  If you're happy with the results you get, by all
means, use them!  This is just my suggestion based on my personal
experience, and we do all experience different things and have different
needs.
 
Happy scanning in any case.
 
Sorry if that ramble was completely unhelpful.
 
Mayrie
 
  
 
  _____  

From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ohio1803@xxxxx
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 10:18 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Puzzlement


Hey you guys are awesome alright.
thanks very much.
Really great to read these specific recommended K-1000 settings.
I will plan on making the changes in my settings next book scan I do.
 
One question...
 
Grayscale, huh?
 
I did use it one time on a big CD Boxed set that had this terrible contrast
problem. Like a shiny silver font on a dark background. And grayscale was
the only thing that I could get to work.   
 
But boy I did find however that the 60 page document was just powerfully
huge. And it caused my machine to slow down.  Though it was a machine that
did not have too much memory.  I had to break it down into smaller chunks,
and just do sections and then put them together later in Rich Text.
 
This was not for Bookshare submission. But it is something I am always
trying to do, to read the text with new commercial music materials which
often are not otherwise available.
 
So, I am a little shy of the grayscale unless I know I have this contrast
problem.
 
Do many of you actually scan in Grayscale, then?
 
Thanks again.
Rik
 
From: Mayrie ReNae <mailto:mayrierenae@xxxxxxxxx>  
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 7:55 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Puzzlement
 
HI Scott,
 
The section containing tips for scanning using Kurzweil 1000 still contains
the improper document.  The document in this section is instructions for
proofreading using Kurzweil 1000.  The scanning tips are different, and in
case anyone went looking for those instructions, I'm pasting them below.
 
Mayrie
 

Scanning a Book Using Kurzweil 1000 Version 11

 

The settings that I use in Kurzweil 1000 version 11.03 for preparing a book
for submission to bookshare are those that I have found to be the most
accurate.  Though there are many options for differing settings, especially
scanning settings, these are the ones that give the best results in my
experience having worked on well over 500 books. 

 

The processes that I describe for preparing the book for submission are
those that are most helpful for a proofreader, again in my experience with
well over 500 books proofread.

 

Scanner settings are as follows:

Scan and recognize, automatic page orientation, gray-scale data, resolution
at 300 DPI.

Recognition settings:

Collumn identification disabled, two pages recognized per scan, speckle
removal disabled, Text quality is normal, partial collumns kept, suspicious
regions kept, blank pages kept, recognition engine is FineReader 8.0,
English will be recognized.

Reading settings:

Line endings will be ignored by the editor and tables will not be
identified.

I do not identify tables in straight fiction because junk sometimes scans as
a table and is more of a pain to remove that way, more time consuming.  I
have to know when I'll need table recognition so I can enable it. If you
have a book containing tables, you're best advised to know that before
beginning to scan.

Conversion settings: 

This set of settings is not available in versions earlier than version 11.
In this dialogue the only deviation from the defaults is to disable "split
long pages" wherever this option is available.  

General settings: Raise the confidence level to 98.5. The default of 95.0
leaves too many errors to correct.

 

Save the file as a kes file under the name of the book. Convert to rtf as
bookshare requires its submissions to be in rtf format only once you have
done all clean-up.

 

Clean up preliminary pages and confirm accurate page count: 

Label: [From The Back Cover] [From The Front Flap] [From The Back Flap][This
Page is blank.] if any blank pages exist. Read through all preliminary pages
and correct all scannos.  

Determine where the publisher thought page one should go and set an
opperator defined page number there as page 1.

Check that the last page in the book is numbered properly, telling you that
you do not have any missing or duplicated pages. If the numbers don't match,
either rescan and insert pages that you missed, or delete duplicated pages.
It is helpful to proofreaders if you insert missing page numbers if they
have not scanned at all or are unclear.

 

Once you have done these things, you're ready to convert your book to an rtf
file and submit it.

 

 
 
  _____  

From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Scott Rains
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 6:22 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Puzzlement


Volunteers,
 
Of course there is always a value judgement in the decision to reject but
let me publicly encourage those who are very experienced proofers and
scanners to exercise that role. 
 
For those who are less experienced,  establish a formal or informal
relationship with more experienced volunteers. Ask them to advise you on
making the call to reject or to fix. As you see from this thread much time
is consumed by not legitimately rejecting a book - including the time of the
scanner who may continue to repeat the same mistakes until given feedback.
 
This list is a rich source of advice on the subtleties of scanning software,
hardware, and AT. On this point, if anyone feels there is something missing
in the scanning section of the Online Manual let me know or open it for
discussion here on the list under a new Subject line. Here is a relevant
section of the manual:
 
https://wiki.benetech.org/display/BSO/3.+Scan+a+book#3.Scanabook-3usingassis
tivetechnologysoftwaretoscan
 
scott
 
From: Martha Rafter <mlhr@xxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 06:09:10 -0800
To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Puzzlement

 
Hi Lori,
   Sometimes when I check out a book that gives me problems right off the
bat, I simply just release it, thinking that someone else may be smarter
than I am and knows how to fix the book.  It's probably not fair for the
next person, but that is why I sometimes release a book instead of rejecting
it.  I think that you did the right thing; good for you!
Marty 
 
From: Lori Castner <mailto:loralee.castner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 8:46 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Puzzlement
 
Today I checked out a book that had been on the checkout list for a number
of months.  Three or so people had checked out this book and released it.
When I looked at the book I saw it had a number of styles.  Per an email
from Misha (excuse spelling) that I had kept I removed styles.  Then I
changed section breaks to page breaks.
Then I found that the book had very few page numbers and that those numbers
did not line up at all with the number of pages between the numbered pages.
There was no way to determine where page breaks really should occur and
where to make the appropriate number of page numbers to align the material
on the appropriate pages.
Finally, I rejected the book.
Now, I really would prefer not to reject a book, but sometimes it is really
necessary to do so and part of our volunteer responsibility to do so.
I can't really understand why I am the first person who checked out the book
who was willing to reject it.  I'm not hard-hearted, but there was no way to
get the book in the necessary shape to add it to the collection.
 
Feeling like an ogre,
Lori C.
 

Other related posts: