How could you use your digital camera to digitize and scan text?

Including doing OCR on them?

I am a student trying to save money on copies you need from a
libraries. (Aren't digicams expensive enough already?)

Sometimes papers are not that good anyway and you only need sections
of them.

I know there are ways to tell an OCR software to read a file from the
file system, but I haven't found an end-to-end, comprehensive
explanation about how to do this, and AFAIK there is no web site that
consistantly lists features in comparison charts

Most hits I found after googling for it were about using cameras
primarily to take pictures, which might be not the case for the large
amount of students that would basically use them as scanners.

I tech monkey I know was telling me about high res imaging cameras,
which come with a PCI card to plug into a PC so that 'you get what you
see' functionality which is useful for running the OCR right and keep
working at the same time.

Could you explain to me at least your experience with such things?

What are the involved issues?

I guess all cameras are not created equal. Which ones are best for
text scanning? Those best for B&W Mode or gray scale?

I think this is pretty much doable with current commercial gadgets,
but I just don't know how.

 

You just need a digital camera with 3mp or better and macro mode at more
then one distance if you want to crop, some lights and OCR software like
OmniPage Pro X (or the Windows equivalent).

 

In

Since the free copy of ABBYY "Fine Reader Sprint 4.0" which came with my
old scanner can do it, I'm assuming that any OCR software can be pointed
at digital photos of pages of text and convert them.

I just grabbed my Canon A60 (a 2MP camera), photographed a piece of paper
on my desk, downloaded the resulting JPEG and OCRd it. The parts of the
page that were in reasonable focus and not too distorted perspective-wise
came out pretty clean.

If you had a suitable rig with a camera mount and some lights, you should
get decent results.

 

Save yourself the headache and buy a cheap and inexpensive flatbed. I bought a
Canon LiDE 20 for only US$20.

 

In

He's apparently talking about making copies in a library.

Dragging in a scanner and associated PC might be a bit more trouble than a
camera and a small table-top tripod.

 

OR he could be a spy??

 

In "jean"

A digital Minox C would be perfect for his needs

 

I would have to agree. Some things can be done (and this CAN be done),
but aren't really worth the bother.

 

The suitable rig would be a copy stand. Once that's in place then it would
be a piece of cake.

 

Laptop, cheap scanner, cable & power strip.
And orange witches' hats to keep people from tripping over your stuff.

 

I've done it in the past - I found you need to convert the picture to a 2-color
TIF file at 300 DPI to get success... You will want maybe 50-pixel high
letters...

 

Cross posting removed, & reply to this group only!!!

OCR from an image works well as long as you have a good image in the
first place. Use 'photo editing' software to increase the contrast as
high as commensurate without loosing textural info.

I have Nikon 5700 & photographed many documents & use Abby Fine Reader
OCR software to convert to *.rtf/.doc. The OCR software will treat the
image as if it is a scan.

It depends on what you want to do with the 'copy'. You state that you
want to save money on (library charge?) cost of photo copying - this
infers that you do not want to 'edit' the text. If it is just a copy
for reference & NO editing, other than cropping the image, then you
need not OCR it, just print the image (I use a b&w laser for the quick
reference prints)

If, on the other hand, you want to plagiarise or otherwise edit the
text, then you will need to OCR the image.

Photographing a document is far quicker than 'scanning' or using a
Xerox. The largest single 'photograph copying' I did was a 72 page A4
hand written book. - I did use a tripod for that - It was as quick as
I could turn the page.

If you do have a lot to do and need to use a tripod, then use one that
allows you to put the camera (on a tilt/panhead) UNDERNEATH the column
rather than on top as normal. That way the tripod straddles the
document without the legs getting in the way

For the occasional copy, I cant be fluffed with using a tripod. I just
hand hold & use the built in flash, framing the doc as big as possible
in the viewfinder.

BTW: Copying a document, especially in a library raises a couple of
issues that you have to consider:

1) Check with the librarian on their policy re copying and ask
permission to use a camera. (Or take the book home and do the biz
there!)

2) This is the sticky and contentious one - the Copyright issue. I
believe that copyright laws in most countries is similar to the UK. A
document/text/image/artwork et al is automatically the copyright of
the author and is not 'registered' anywhere as such. It therefore
follows that any copying of a document, even for private 'one off'
use, IS a breach copyright of the author's work. That said, hands up
anyone who hasn't breached this for private use...
--
Donald Gray
Putting ODCOMBE on the Global Village Map!
www.odcombe.demon.co.uk
You do not have to email me, but if you wish to...
Please remove the SafetyPin from my email address first
Thanks

 

I am not trying to plagiarize anything, but since you posted your
mesage on the net, I assume you are talking in general. So, people
plagiarize all the time, free exchange of info is of paramount
importance for the well being of a society.

'Fare use' is also part of the copyright laws.

You have a good point, but is civilization going to depend on
'copyright laws'? when are we going to understand that we should go
from 'paper' to e-docs as people some time ago went from carving on
wood to writing on paper?

 

Indeed so. Perhaps I used the 'p' word in the wrong context. It was
not intended as a personal comment. No offence meant. Sorry for any
hurt taken.

[]

I strongly believe that is not so. Copyright is copyright. Period. To
copy anything that is copyright is a breach unless you have permission
from the copyright owner. All you have to do is read the copyright
notice in most book to see the strict terms of the copyright restated.
That is not the author's or publisher's terms - it is the law.

Again that said, fair use does, to a certain extent, come in to it
based on the _spirit_ of the law rather than the _letter_ of the
law.

However, the main point I was wanting to put across was that unless
you wanted to edit the text, (for whatever the reason), selecting
certain sections/paragraphs from a photographed document, you do not
need to OCR the photo.

Do you mean to say I can stop using clay tablets as well?
--
Donald Gray
Putting ODCOMBE on the Global Village Map!
www.odcombe.demon.co.uk
You do not have to email me, but if you wish to...
Please remove the SafetyPin from my email address first
Thanks

 

Well, this is exactly the problem, things can not be put like this.
EVERYBODY plagiarize, including you, people use 'language, laws,
etc.' to dress it, but as part of communication you do use it, and so
take owbership of it to a certain extent, this is just -part of
communication-.

I wanted if not exactly to edit the text, have it a searchable form

I think you should, unless you are a lawyer and have a different
understanding of reality

 

True, but dealing with digital camera output just to photocopy of few
pages of a book or magazine seems like a big headache to me when the
library's photocopier can do it much faster and probably at much less
expense than any other way, when time is factored into the equation.

 

My Sony S70 has a 'text' mode which saves as a high contrast positive. The
files are quite small but it takes around 10 seconds for the camera to save.
I sometimes use this for text or monochrome graphics. I have an old 35mm
enlarger stand and a piece of bar with standard tripod screw sized holes -
the nut came from an old 35mm camera case.