<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PDF OCR Batch-processing with ScanSnap</title>
	<atom:link href="http://drjunker.org/2009/12/27/pdf-ocr-batch-processing-with-scansnap/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://drjunker.org/2009/12/27/pdf-ocr-batch-processing-with-scansnap/</link>
	<description>On a quest to find optimality in an imperfect world.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 14:38:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tobi</title>
		<link>http://drjunker.org/2009/12/27/pdf-ocr-batch-processing-with-scansnap/comment-page-1/#comment-2702</link>
		<dc:creator>Tobi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:22:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drjunker.org/?p=244#comment-2702</guid>
		<description>Update:
The same approach does not work well for color scans. When I scan color at 300 dpi and then do the OCR with the high quality color option (for documents), the file size grows approximately 2-3 fold. For color OCR, there are two options: (1) documents, and (2) photo. Interestingly, picking the high quality photo option for OCR creates high quality OCR even of text at only a fraction of the file size. Medium and low quality text setting results in small files sizes and very poor quality. The medium quality text setting is really quite useless. Medium quality photo setting is similar to medium quality text. &lt;i&gt;==&gt; My choice is the &quot;high quality photo&quot; setting for Color Text OCR.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Update:<br />
The same approach does not work well for color scans. When I scan color at 300 dpi and then do the OCR with the high quality color option (for documents), the file size grows approximately 2-3 fold. For color OCR, there are two options: (1) documents, and (2) photo. Interestingly, picking the high quality photo option for OCR creates high quality OCR even of text at only a fraction of the file size. Medium and low quality text setting results in small files sizes and very poor quality. The medium quality text setting is really quite useless. Medium quality photo setting is similar to medium quality text. <i>==> My choice is the &#8220;high quality photo&#8221; setting for Color Text OCR.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brooks @ DocumentSnap</title>
		<link>http://drjunker.org/2009/12/27/pdf-ocr-batch-processing-with-scansnap/comment-page-1/#comment-2690</link>
		<dc:creator>Brooks @ DocumentSnap</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:02:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drjunker.org/?p=244#comment-2690</guid>
		<description>Hey thanks for this post.  I&#039;ve done batch ScanSnap posts using Acrobat but hadn&#039;t seen one using FineReader so this is great. Blogged about it!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey thanks for this post.  I&#8217;ve done batch ScanSnap posts using Acrobat but hadn&#8217;t seen one using FineReader so this is great. Blogged about it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
