TMPLee@DOCKMASTER.ARPA (12/13/87)
Anyone know what the resolution of the Thunderscan for the Imagewriter is? (The article in A+ doesn't say.) Is it good enough to capture printed text (say, normal magazine/newspaper size fonts) so that one might think of attempting character recognition on it? (Its so new it's probably futile to ask, but does anyone know if anyone has written the software to digitize text, recognize the characters, and convert it to ASCII?) TMPLee@DOCKMASTER.ARPA
nazgul@apollo.uucp (Kee Hinckley) (12/22/87)
In article <871213052935.402124@DOCKMASTER.ARPA> TMPLee@DOCKMASTER.ARPA writes: > Anyone know what the resolution of the Thunderscan for the Imagewriter > is? (The article in A+ doesn't say.) Is it good enough to capture I assume they have the same capabilities as the Mac version. On the Mac the resolution defaults to 72DPI (same as the screen). You can get lower res than that (I think down to 30%) or bump it up to 400%, but it will max out at 72*3DPI and just fake hire resolutions. > printed text (say, normal magazine/newspaper size fonts) so that one > might think of attempting character recognition on it? (Its so new it's Yes, although 72DPI is not really good enough, the higher resolutions are. > probably futile to ask, but does anyone know if anyone has written the > software to digitize text, recognize the characters, and convert it to > ASCII?) This software does exist on the Mac, I've seen it advertised in MacUser, I doubt that anything is available for the GS - yet. -nazgul -- ### {mit-erl,yale,uw-beaver}!apollo!nazgul ### (Apple ][e ProLine BBS) ### ### apollo!nazgul@eddie.mit.edu ### nazgul@pro-angmar.uucp ### ### nazgul@apollo.uucp ### (617) 641-3722 300/1200/2400 ### I'm not sure which upsets me more; that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.