brent said:
Currently in america there is a decline in scanner use.
giving the popularity of all-in-one printer/scanner/copier/fax machines, i don't see how this statement can be justified. and i _most_certainly_ do not see an increase in the numbers of "type-in" projects, not at all! but if _you_ personally wanna type in some books, be my guest! it's a wonderful way to become thoroughly immersed in a text... *** geoff said:
The last, oh, five or six books I've submitted to PGDP have been photographed (on a 4 MP camera), not scanned. It's a lot less rough on books, and the results were as good as scanning once I figured out what I was doing.
i'm skeptical of that claim. i think if we tested the quality of the o.c.r. recognition results, using the best-in-class o.c.r. app, we would find a significant difference between images from a 4-m.p. camera and the best-in-class scanners, such as the opticbook3600. and dollar-for-dollar scanners give better images than cameras, though i'm not disputing your assertion that cameras might be "less rough" on the books. just because most of the proofers over at d.p. are not aware that the images they are getting are less-than-the-best doesn't mean it isn't so.. but as long as they don't mind correcting errors that wouldn't even exist if the images were better, or if a better o.c.r. program would have been used, i guess it doesn't matter all that much... -bowerbird