NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #18/NN_1992_18.iso/spool/comp/sys/mac/apps/13362

Internet Message Format | 1992-08-16 | 7.5 KB

From: [e-mail] (Steve Knight)
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 12:52:50 GMT
Subject: Re: "Typist Plus Graphics" OCR -- How good?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.
Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!hpscdc!hplextra!otter.hpl.hp.com!otter!sfk
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps
References: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 147

> I'm always on the lookout for a good, not-too-expensive OCR program,
> and I noticed this one today. It comes with a hand-held scanner and
> the catalog claims it "recognizes text in any non-stylized font..."
> etc. The only requirement is 4 megs of RAM, which I have (exactly).

Some general remarks about Typist+ and then some about using it with
a Classic, which is as near to a Plus as I've got.

I recently bought Typist+ myself and I was pleasantly surprised by how
effective it is.  My expectations were not very high -- it is an inexpensive
hand-scanner -- so it was no surprise to find that the hardware is
inelegant.  Here's an attempted description of the hardware.

The Typist+ comes as TWO main devices and a PSU.  There is the hand-scanner
itself and a separate "SCSI box".  The SCSI box sits on the chain and comes
without a terminator (it works fine without the terminator).  The scanner
unit itself is actually nicely engineered and I'll describe it in more
detail later.  The SCSI box also needs a suitable power supply, and the
enclosed PSU is most ugly -- having a separate icky connecting cable
before it goes into a wall socket.  (Presumably so that you can use other
power sources.)  Still, there's plenty of cable length, which is actually
important with a hand-scanner.  Maybe this picture will help.

               wall socket
                   |
                   |
                   x icky plug
                   |
                  PSU
                   |
    my             |                    my
    mac  -------> "scsi box"  ------->  external disc
                   |
                   |
             hand-held scanner unit


The scanner unit itself is a neat black plastic unit -- fairly big.  The
scanning width is 14cm and the head is about 16cm wide.  It feels bulky
in the hand but is light and doesn't seem to tire my hand when using it.
(Someone with small hands might not feel the same way.)  It's got a small
bar just behind the head, a bit like a big mouse button.  When this "scanning
bar" is pressed, Typist+ wakes up and gets ready to read.  Using it is
a cinch.

It's a 300dpi scanning unit.  It's really geared up for character
recognition, though.  The image processing software that comes with it
is minimal.  I guess it's just about fine for getting images in.
Anything more is *painful*.  I also find it counter-intuitive but I
need to RTFM again before I pass final comment.


> My questions are: will it run on a Mac Plus (system 6.*); how fast and
> how reliable is it? Personal experiences welcome. Email me and I'll
> summarize if I get enough testimonials. Thanks in advance.

I bought it when I was still using a 4MB Classic (I've just upgraded to
an SE30).  I don't know how a Classic compares with the MacPlus but I can
guess you aren't going to enjoy the thrill of an open road ....
The blurb in the manual says "a Mac SE or better".  I'd check with
Caere -- I've enclosed their address below.

On my Classic, Typist+ works sort of OK with two big provisos.  Firstly,
when Typist runs a OCR, it *requires* you to already be in a text processing
application, because when its analysed the text its going to send a
pile of keyboard events to the foreground application.
This means you need at least enough RAM for the System,
your text processor, and the Typist application to run at the same time.
I ran with System 7.0 and my usual word processor was Word 5.0.  Typist+
just won't fit in 4MB.  Secondly, you need to book your holiday before
you do any scanning.

As far as memory goes, you might find that running System 6.0.x is a
cure-all.  (Frankly, I'd rather trash my Mac and buy a PC.)  My
solution was to use BBEdit, which is modest enough and powerful enough
for this job.  If you're that sort of person, you can use TeachText.
That works fine, too.

(When you use the scanner as an image scanning device, it works
standalone, so there aren't these memory hassles.)

Performance is an issue.  I can copy-type faster than Typist+ does
OCR on a Classic.  And I can't touch type.  Furthermore, performance
depends crucially on two factors.  The quality of the copy you are working
from is very important.  Good quality copy (e.g. newspaper, magazine)
goes in without trouble.  Poor quality copy (e.g. mouldering photocopies
of monographs used as a privvy by 100000s of homeless arthropods) takes
a great deal more time.  The other factor is the setting you choose for
"brightness".

Typist+ expects you to tell it how light or dark the text (or image) you
are scanning is.  This takes practice and it isn't too difficult.  But
guessing wrongly not only degrades the accuracy to an unacceptable level
but boosts computation time to infinity.  I don't know why Typist+ can't
work this out for itself.  (It's obvious why it has to do this with
image scanning.)

Furthermore, interrupting Typist+ whilst it's in the middle of a deep
think works -- but expect a 30 second delay on a Classic.

(Scanning images is acceptably fast, though.  However, any subsequent
image processing is mind-bogglingly slow.  Use something (anything) else.)

Having said all this nasty stuff, I ought to balance it up with the
reasons I'm pleased with the thing.  Although I *can* copy-type about as
fast as Typist+ can read it in, I find it a strain on my concentration.
Typist+ changes the job from tedious copying to straightforward copying.
I got it to scan in a load of articles I wrote in my distant youth.  It's
been a pleasure rather than a mind-destroying chore.

Its accuracy on good quality text is quite amazing.  I received a wedding
invitation through the post the day I got Typist+ home.  Naturally that
went straight under the scanner (hey, that looks *fancy* I bet it screws
up).  100% recognition.  In fact, provided
you can stand the waiting -- I just go and make some tea and watch the TV --
it's a really simple and good solution for entering text.  On the
typewritten stuff that I'm entering there's about one mistake per paragraph.
Furthermore, that mistake is usually correctly flagged by Typist+.  The
stuff I'm entering is typewritten text from about 12 years ago -- so this
is fine by my standards.

Whether or not it is a "good buy" if you've got a machine as low-powered
as a Classic or a Plus is going to be a difficult decision.  If you've got
a lot of copy-typing of *good* quality text, I'd say it's a maybe.  I
didn't regret it but I'd guess I would be in a minority.  If you are
considering upgrading your Mac in the none too distant future, then
it's a yes.  Obviously, you should consider more expensive solutions, too.
But I'm pretty satisfied with my purchase.  And now I've got an 8MB SE30
I've no complaints (yet).

And, in case it isn't obvious, Caere don't recommend using Typist+
with anything as weedy as a Classic or a Plus.  It's probably a warning
you should take seriously.  And I don't work for Caere and I don't know
anyone who does.  I'm just a customer.

I hope this helps.

Steve Knight

The manufacturers of Typist+ are Caere.  Here's the address from the manual.
    CAERE CORPORATION
    100 Cooper Court
    Los Gatos
    California 95030
    Tel [phone]
    FAX: [phone]