+- HP Forums (https://www.hpmuseum.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Not HP Calculators (/forum-7.html)
+--- Forum: Not remotely HP Calculators (/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: Scanning / OCR'ing manuals (/thread-11948.html)
Scanning / OCR'ing manuals - EugeneNine - 12-13-2018 05:23 PM
I'll start a new thread
(12-13-2018 04:27 PM)Raymond Del Tondo Wrote:(12-13-2018 12:51 PM)EugeneNine Wrote: hmm, a quick check says they are not too expensive, tempting https://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-9100C-C1313A-Digital-Sender-W-JetDirect-600N-no-hard-disk/323567401339?epid=66779571&hash=item4b561eb97b:g:ACQAAOSw~Q9bJxa3:rk:2Slightly OT, but: Back then I used an HP ScanJet 4500C with ADF, but that thing was too slow and sometimes didn't pull the sheets correctly, and duplex scanning was an unreliable pain. A wheel replacement kit would have been more expensive than the unit itself.f:0
I'm still trying to find decent OCR software to run the 48sx manuals through though
So I looked for a newer scanner, but even the used semi-professional units which could scan more than two pages per minute were more than 100 Euro back then, and had several thousands of work hours beind them. So in addition to the unit, you could pay for a wheel replacement kit, if available at all.
So I went for a new HP ScanJet 2500 pro f1, which offered what I wanted: Landscape format, duplex scan in one go (two scan lines. No paper wrapping acrobatics), new and unused, and therefore reliable transport mechanics, and speeeed!
The ADF feed is for less than 50 sheets, but the software allows for feeding the sheets in several chunks for the same result PDF.
I've had a few HP's myself since then, both laser and spitter, and none of them have had as good as ADF as the 9100.
A quick search shows that pro 2500 as about $250. Merging pdf's is eary enough with pdftoolkit, in fact a lot of OCR tools I've found split pdf's with pdftoolkit then put them back together afterward.
RE: Scanning / OCR'ing manuals - tgray - 12-14-2018 02:09 AM
I have a Fujitsu ScanSnap ix500. I highly recommend it if anyone wants a good reliable scanner that has ADF and duplex capabilities. I've scanned over 20k sheets with mine. It does about 25 sheets per minute (so ~50/min counting both sides of duplex). It comes with decent OCR software as well.
One would need to disassemble a manual into sheets to scan it properly though.
I also use Vuescan. Great software for old scanners, but the Fujitsu software is much better for the ScanSnap scanner.
RE: Scanning / OCR'ing manuals - rprosperi - 12-14-2018 03:24 AM
(12-14-2018 02:09 AM)tgray Wrote: I have a Fujitsu ScanSnap ix500. I highly recommend it if anyone wants a good reliable scanner that has ADF and duplex capabilities. I've scanned over 20k sheets with mine. It does about 25 sheets per minute (so ~50/min counting both sides of duplex). It comes with decent OCR software as well.
One would need to disassemble a manual into sheets to scan it properly though.
I also use Vuescan. Great software for old scanners, but the Fujitsu software is much better for the ScanSnap scanner.
Great scanner, I completely agree with you that it's great; I've installed many of them for clients with no complaints ever. Though not cheap, this is easily the most reliable and consistent scanner I've ever experienced; they just work, and work and work, without errors or issues. I wish more devices were as well made and reliable. Its only drawback, for use scanning various manuals, is its complete lack of flatbed scanning, which one will need sooner or later.
RE: Scanning / OCR'ing manuals - tcab - 12-14-2018 09:25 AM
(12-14-2018 02:09 AM)tgray Wrote: I have a Fujitsu ScanSnap ix500.
I also have one of these. I’ve literally converted boxes of notes, old uni papers, old software project printouts and notes, photocopied material, receipts etc. into digital nothingness - it physically makes room in my shed! The hopper and duplex is the killer feature. All you have to do is remove staples, bindings etc and "feed it".
RE: Scanning / OCR'ing manuals - David Hayden - 12-18-2018 03:12 AM
I have a canon DR-C125. It's same idea as the scansnap. Works well, but I wouldn't say flawlessly.