Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (
More info?)
Geeez. Math not a strong suit? 3.2 Megapixel is what?...about 2K by 1.5K
pixels.
Shoot the damn business card...all of 3.5" wide with 2K+ pixels of
resolution. If OCR doesn't work at 600 pixels/inch it whould never have
worked at 300 dpi years ago.
"CSM1" <nomoremail@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:BMcBd.9809$wi2.3131@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> A 3.2 MP camera will work, if you only view the image on your computer
> screen. Not good enough for OCR.
> If all you want to do is have them readable on the computer screen, then
> shoot away with a 3.2 MP digital camera. You will want a tripod and lights
> to get a good steady well lit image.
>
>
http://www.carlmcmillan.com/how_to_copy_with_digital_camera.htm
> and
>
http://www.carlmcmillan.com/lightingforcopying.htm
>
> There are programs to catalog images. Programs that search by keyword,
user
> fields and annotations.
>
>
> --
> CSM1
>
http://www.carlmcmillan.com
> --
> "alvin.g" <alvin.G@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:41d507ac$1_2@news.tm.net.my...
> > Sorry for the late reply, been out of town.
> > So it means that getting a 3.2 mega.digital camera will not
> > help me to capture the image of doc / business cards?
> > For downloading to pc?
> >
> > Thank-you in advance
> > Alvin.G
> > ***********
> > "CSM1" <nomoremail@nomail.com> wrote in message
> > news:m%Xzd.3399$F67.2830@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
> > >
> > > "alvin.g" <alvin.G@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:41d03568_1@news.tm.net.my...
> > >> Hi! I am considering getting a digital camera and my main
> > >> consideration is to use to snap at close range A4 documents
> > >> then saving them to pc running on win.XP.
> > >>
> > >> The image must be clear enough and comparable to using a
> > >> flatbed scanner. ( I have tried using a flatbed scanner but I find
> > >> that it is very slow in scanning an A4 documents -upto 3minutes
> > >> or more for a plain text.- using Mustek 2400.
> > >
> > > If scanning at 2400 dpi you are wasting time and it is unnecessary to
> scan
> > > at that much resolution.
> > > For most OCR you scan at 300-400 dpi.
> > >
> > > The Mustek is slow. There are faster scanners now.
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Will the image capture on a digital camera be sharp and speedy?
> > >> Is a 3.2 mega pizel good enough?
> > >> I am looking at Kodak, Fuji.
> > >> Please advise.
> > >>
> > > A 300 dpi document on computer screen is huge. Computer screens are
> pixels
> > > only.
> > > That means that to read a whole document on screen needs (depends on
> your
> > > screen resolution) 1024 x 768 pixels. For that purpose, a 3.2
Megapixel
> > > camera is good.
> > >
> > > 8.5 x 11 inch (A4) document to get 300 dpi for OCR needs 2550 x 3300
> > > pixels = 8.415 Megapixels. A4 is 210 x 297 mm or 8.25 x 11 3/4 inches=
> > > 2475 x 3525 pixels=8.725 Megapixels.
> > > There is not a cheap digital camera that can do that.
> > > A 4 Megapixel camera is less than half of the resolution image that is
> > > needed for good OCR.
> > >
> > > A 3.2 Megapixal camera is not good enough for OCR.
> > >
> > > It can be done with a 35 mm camera and scan the film on a film
scanner.
> > >
> > > A good low cost flatbed scanner is much cheaper and faster. And is
> > > designed to scan flat sheets of paper.
> > > All flatbed scanners are not created equal. Some of the newer one are
> much
> > > faster per page.
> > >
> > > Epson 2480 is from the spec:
> > > 2400 dpi high-speed mode: Monochrome 11 msec/line; Full color 11
> msec/line
> > >
> > > Which translates to 3300 lines per 11 inch page at 300 dpi.
> > > 3300 lines x 11 msec per line=36.3 seconds.
> > >
> > > A epson 2480 costs about $100 and should scan one page every 37
seconds
> or
> > > as fast as you can put the paper on the glass.
> > >
> > > --
> > > CSM1
> > >
http://www.carlmcmillan.com
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram