HP 3c sig better than HP 3p for OCR, Pagekeeper, copying?

Thread View: comp.os.ms-windows.apps.misc

2 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

2 total messages Started by David R. Hanson Mon, 11 Sep 1995 17:06

Author: David R. Hanson
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 17:06

20 lines
1461 bytes

I'm considering purchase of either an HP3p or 3c scanner.  I can afford the
3c, but only want to pay the extra $ if the difference for my uses are
significant.  Occasionally, I'll scan in pictures and art, but the bulk of my
scanning work should be in OCR, document storage, (Pagekeeper 2.0), "copying"
with the photocopy utility, etc.  I'm using win 3.1, OS/2 Warp's win-os2, and
either Win95 or NT, moving increasingly to one of the latter as 32-bit win
apps get released.

Thus the question:  do those of you using the 600 dpi, speedier 3c notice a
significant improvement in these areas over the 3c?  What are your other
thoughts on this decision, and what applications have you had good luck with?

TIA for any advice,

Dave


Dave Hanson                U. of Chicago Philosphy PhD Student
drh4@midway.uchicago.edu  
Running OS/2 3.0, Dos/WFW 3.11, and NT 3.51

Re: HP 3c sig better than HP 3p for OCR, Pagekeeper, copying?

Author: weisslaw
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 1995 04:48

37 lines
2298 bytes

drh4@midway.uchicago.edu (David R. Hanson) wrote:

>I'm considering purchase of either an HP3p or 3c scanner.  I can afford the
>3c, but only want to pay the extra $ if the difference for my uses are
>significant.  Occasionally, I'll scan in pictures and art, but the bulk of my
>scanning work should be in OCR, document storage, (Pagekeeper 2.0), "copying"
>with the photocopy utility, etc.  I'm using win 3.1, OS/2 Warp's win-os2, and
>either Win95 or NT, moving increasingly to one of the latter as 32-bit win
>apps get released.
>
>Thus the question:  do those of you using the 600 dpi, speedier 3c notice a
>significant improvement in these areas over the 3c?  What are your other
>thoughts on this decision, and what applications have you had good luck with?
>
>TIA for any advice,
>
>Dave
>
>
>Dave Hanson                U. of Chicago Philosphy PhD Student
>drh4@midway.uchicago.edu  
>Running OS/2 3.0, Dos/WFW 3.11, and NT 3.51 
>
If your primary use is OCR, the B&W model is not only faster, but actually
more accurate.  Since both support Accuscan, this takes care of colored
backgrounds and other distractions.  All good high-end OCR runs best at 300
dpi, anything higher just inflates the size of the files and slows
processing.  I've used HP Scanjet Plus and now an HP IIp, the 3p is even
nicer (and a LOT cheaper...).  BTW, the reviews in the OCT. Computer
Shopper from ZD Labs reinforces something I've know for years, the BEST OCR
software is Typereader by Expervision, you have to look for it and it's
never bundled, but it's simply faster and more accurate, especially on
small type, most other programs can't even get 6 pt. decently, Typereader
reads it perfectly and is useable on 5 pt. and some 4 pt.
---------------
Jeff Weiss          Voice: (603) 352-8004
weisslaw@sover.net

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads