[bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux

  • From: "Sarah Van Oosterwijck" <curiousentity@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:34:20 -0600

Yup, I sure do.  It's disgusting correcting all the messed up characters
from other languages, so that is something I would consider reject and
rescan material. :-)  Besides I don't usually know how to correct what is
messed up, so scanning with the correct settings is much safer.

Aaaaa I am being grabbed and viciously cleaned by a cat, and can hardly
type!

Sarah Van Oosterwijck
http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity/
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Guido Corona" <guidoc@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 12:05 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux


> As I suspected,  your machine is faster than mine.  If you have multiple
> languages in the book you may want to consider activating reco for all the
> languages you need in recognition settings.
>
> Guido
>
>
> Guido Dante Corona
> IBM Accessibility Center,  Austin Tx.
> Research Division,
> Phone:  512. 838. 9735.
> Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Web:  http://www.ibm.com/able
>
>
>
>
> "Sarah Van Oosterwijck" <curiousentity@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 12/29/2004 11:52 AM
> Please respond to
> bksvol-discuss
>
>
> To
> <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
>
> Subject
> [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mine isn't either.  It's a 1Ghz with 512 MB of slow RAM.  I can see the
> difference scanning in grey scale causes.  I have about 320 characters
> being
> recognized per second with static threshholding and 300 DPI.  I can't scan
> at 400 DPI, but sometime I will scan in grey scale to see the difference.
> I
> wouldn't count the book I did scan in grey scale as something normal to
> use
> for comparison because it had to use multiple languages and the text was
> pretty awful.
>
> My scanner is slower, so I prefer to edit a little over rescanning pages
> that aren't too bad, or even scanning using slower settings.  I'm sure
> there
> are others that feel the same about that.  Besides, reading and fixing is
> a
> good deal more stimulating to the brain than holding down a book while it
> scans. ;-)
>
>
> Sarah Van Oosterwijck
> http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity/
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Guido Corona" <guidoc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 9:45 AM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
>
>
> > Sara,  in the last book reco speed was approx 170 chars per second. That
> > would have meant approx  20 seconds of reco time per double page.
> Scanning
> > takes about 7 seconds per double page, plus return time.
> > My machine has a mobile Pentium M running at 1.6Ghz with 1.5 GB of RAM.
> > This is roughly equivalent to a 1.1Ghz Pentium 4 on a desktop.
> > Not the fastest kid on the block.
> >
> > Guido Dante Corona
> > IBM Accessibility Center,  Austin Tx.
> > Research Division,
> > Phone:  512. 838. 9735.
> > Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > Web:  http://www.ibm.com/able
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Sarah Van Oosterwijck" <curiousentity@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > 12/28/2004 11:26 PM
> > Please respond to
> > bksvol-discuss
> >
> >
> > To
> > <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > cc
> >
> > Subject
> > [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Just for my curiosity, how fast is your computer, and how many seconds
> > does
> > each scan take?  Have you ever reset your recognition statistics when
> you
> > started a new book and did the math to figure out exactly how fast the
> > average character, or paperback page takes to recognize.  You seem to be
> > interested enough in statistics to have tried it.
> >
> > Online you can find all kinds of benchmarks for processors, but the only
> > kind I would really be interested in would be an OCR benchmark. hehehe
> >
> > BTW, I haven't done the math on the recognition statistics for my
> > computer,
> > because I don't like math enough to do it just for the fun of it, and i
> > had
> > no other computer to compare with.
> >
> >
> > Sarah Van Oosterwijck
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity/
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Guido Corona" <guidoc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:12 PM
> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
> >
> >
> > > Kelly,  if the scanner is the cause of the quality problem,  a minimal
> > $45
> > > investment will get them a perfectly good EPSON 1650 at the EPSON
> refurb
> > > store.  If someone can't afford that,  I can't even see how they can't
> > > possibly afford a monthly Internet connection charge.
> > > A barely higher $124 will get them a modern refurb EPSON 3170 in the
> > same
> > > place.  If Kurzweil or Openbook were too costly and rehab funding were
> > not
> > > available,  the ABBY Fine Reader Professional 7.0 is a perfectly high
> > > quality solution, as the spottless submission from Donna Smith
> testify.
> > > As you said,  obsolete equipment is not a good excuse.  A little
> > up-front
> > > work prior to submission typically ensures that a good part of the
> > errors
> > > have been fixed.  A spotcheck can also detect bunch of missing words
> > etc.
> > > . .
> > >
> > > Now,  think about time usage:  is it better to work 20 hours to
> salvage
> > a
> > > single book,  or spend the same total amount of time and end with 3 to
> 4
> > > submissions at the end?  Let's not even think about the fact that our
> > > paying subscribers will find the collection grown by 4 instead of 1 at
> > the
> > > end of your effort.  Let us think about our work benefitting other
> > > volunteers?  Your 20 hours can be spent giving credit to 1 sloppy
> > > submitter,  or give credit to 4 other good ones.  Now,  tell me where
> > you
> > > will work,  if the greater good of the volunteer community is
> paramount
> > to
> > > you.
> > > And if instead you think about your own credits, as a reviewer,  your
> 20
> > > hours can get you 1 credit, or can get you 4,  depending on what you
> > work
> > > on.
> > >
> > > So,  as you can see,  whether you think about our customers, the
> > volunteer
> > > community at large,  or your own interest,  the outcome seems to be
> the
> > > same.
> > >
> > > Unless we think of these files as orphan, hungry, sick children,  in
> > need
> > > of comfort, and nurture. Which I am afraid they are not.
> > >
> > > Guido
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Guido Dante Corona
> > > IBM Accessibility Center,  Austin Tx.
> > > Research Division,
> > > Phone:  512. 838. 9735.
> > > Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Web:  http://www.ibm.com/able
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Kellie Hartmann" <kellhart@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > 12/28/2004 08:19 PM
> > > Please respond to
> > > bksvol-discuss
> > >
> > >
> > > To
> > > <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > cc
> > >
> > > Subject
> > > [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Oh Guido, great Lord High Rejecter of all, <grin>
> > > That's fantastic if you have access to a copy of the book. Oftentimes
> > the
> > > volunteer may not, and a certain amount of error-correcting really
> isn't
> > > that onerous, especially if you're going to read the book anyway.
> > > I do think, though, that it's nice when people who, because of older
> > > equipment, can't get scans that live up to our modern high standards
> go
> > > through and do some work on their submissions before submitting. After
> > > all,
> > > there's a lot more credit for submitting than there is for validating.
> > > Kellie
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>


Other related posts: