Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #549491
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Hey Odd! |
| References | (8 earlier) <n8gpi842h9j@news6.newsguy.com> <ag_qy.238688$8V1.13638@fx28.iad> <n8j0j50i49@news6.newsguy.com> <4qgry.166771$Jt4.56746@fx22.iad> <n8k75011mee@news3.newsguy.com> |
| Message-ID | <Tmiry.241640$IX3.57592@fx36.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | TeraNews.com |
| Date | 2016-01-31 02:05 -0500 |
On 01/31/2016 12:47 AM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jan 2016 23:52:15 -0500, benj wrote:
>
>>
>> Gosh, oddly ancient books are on acid-free paper until everyone got so
>> cheap.
>>
>
> Ancient books contain acid-free paper?
>
> I don't know much about the history of paper making. I'll have to find
> more about this.
>
> Whenever I peruse the old collection at the university library near
> my home I find most books have brittle pages.
Actually I'm talking about a university library where I used to look up
old books and was amazed that really ancient books (like from beginning
of 1800s were still fine while newer ones were brown and brittle. At the
time I assumed it was a matter of cheapness like newsprint, but I think
it really had to do with how paper was made back then. I've seen TV
programs where they are looking through old government log books to find
the signature of Shakespeare etc. The pages are white (but faded) and
the pages turn just fine!
>> I do currently have a problem I'm struggling with. It's an adventure
>> game "Zork" game that a bunch of us wrote back in the 70s.
>> Unfortunately all I have now is a line printer printout of the source
>> code (written in JCL) You KNOW what trash line printer paper is! Been
>> trying to scan and recognize the printout but even with modern software
>> and careful tweaking of contrast, gamma, etc, the best I've been able to
>> do so far is get about 50% of it correct.
>>
>
> You may need to threshold the scanned images so the result is bi-tonal
> or black/white.
Been there done all that. Not good enough.
> You may also need to try a trainable OCR, where the software "learns"
> the particular typeface that is used.
My view too. So I put omnipage in "learn" mode. That's when conversion
went from mess up to about 50%. I don't think it's going to get better.
> The open source (free) Tesseract OCR is trainable:
>
> https://github.com/tesseract-ocr
>
>>
>> Oddly the one thing that
>> doesn't convert is .jpg files of pages. You can look at them with an
>> eyeball and read them just fine. But the scanning software gives you
>> nothing but errors. However scanning with .tiff files and it's happy as
>> a clam.
>>
>
> JPEG compression is based on the discrete cosine transform which is
> essentially a fourier transform. Any sharp edges, such as the boundaries
> of text typeface, will experience severe ringing distortion. This is
> why JPEG should NEVER be used to compress text or similar patterns.
Yup. Unfortunately there was this book (on a Kook topic natch) where all
I was able to obtain was the .jpg scan. It was so frustrating because if
you looked at the print out, it looked perfect and was easily readable,
but the OCR just would NOT recognize it. I had to re-type the whole damn
book in FRENCH no less. Brrrr!
> TIFF, if it is compressed at all, is usually compressed with a different
> kind of algorithm and can be used on any type of image.
Usually not compressed which is why it works so well. Pure data.
>> Something effective is clearly waiting to be invented.
>>
>
> Of course. It's only a matter of time.
>
> The digital revolution is never going to stop. Sooner or later
> printed material, like the old "wet" photographic technology,
> will be supplanted.
>
> Regarding photography, I still recall how it was about ten years
> ago when many people were still defending film cameras and film
> technology. They would decry the new digital cameras and sensors
> as being inferior and desperately cling to the old methods.
Tell me about it! What am I supposed to do with my darkroom and all the
gear? Junk! I've got movie cameras that you can't get film for. And if
you could get film you can't get it developed and if you developed it
yourself you can't buy developer. Nobody even knows what hydroquinone is
anymore. Where would you get any? A guy in a used camera shop told me
that there is this cult in New York somewhere that are still able to
develop movie film. All of it gone (including Kodak) and amazingly fast
too!
But there are always a few diehards. I hear there are cultists in
Kalifornia still making wooden toys!
> But now there is a barely a whimper from that crowd. They have
> lost the battle and have been converted to the new digital ways.
MY whimper is how to get rid of all the old gear. That's only part of
it. I've got an old TV projector the size of dog house and weight of a
compact car that is black and white and now in a standard that is long
gone. Talk about technology passing you by. Now a color movie quality tv
projector is cheap and in a small shoebox.
> The same will happen with the dead-tree book adherents.
Not until the permanent digital storage medium gets invented. You know
all the digital books the Pharaohs had are all gone. Only the ones
written on stone are still around! The idea of digital cuneiform storage
for REAL archival durations has been discussed. We decided data density
was too low and also problem was mechanical readers. But clay tablets
obviously have some lasting power!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 17:31 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 16:35 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 17:47 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 17:12 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 17:16 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 16:14 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 20:05 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-01-29 12:34 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 13:36 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 19:55 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 07:45 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:29 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 17:47 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:19 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 18:43 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-29 19:17 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 21:59 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 16:37 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-29 22:40 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 23:38 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:19 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:27 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 22:11 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 16:44 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 02:33 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 22:53 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-29 12:25 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 18:38 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:23 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 22:20 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 16:52 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 23:54 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 12:29 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-30 20:43 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 00:07 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-31 05:17 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 01:39 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:25 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 12:29 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-30 20:51 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 00:16 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-31 05:58 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:29 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-30 21:08 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:33 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-31 20:20 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 14:48 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-31 21:37 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 16:00 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 16:02 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-01 00:03 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-01 00:36 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-01 14:18 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-01 16:16 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 10:41 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:22 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 22:26 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 16:59 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 23:45 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:19 -0600
Re: Hey Odd! Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 14:55 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 10:55 -0800
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 13:47 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-29 22:36 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 03:12 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-30 18:49 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 23:52 -0500
Re: Hey Odd! Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-01-31 05:47 +0000
Re: Hey Odd! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 02:05 -0500
csiph-web