Guess I'm full of questions today.  Is OCR to the point where it is very
reliable....or, is it still as I used to hear more of a problem than a
help?  Apparently it works well for some of you because you keep
mentioning it.  

Gus Harris
Univ. of West FL
Pensacola, FL
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of John Annunziello
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 8:42 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] electronic imaging question

Hi Bill.

Bill said:  "We are revising our standard to a standard 200 dpi with
even 
lower dpi
permitted on high quality text documents."

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said high quality text 
documents.  Without a doubt you could probably get away with OCR'ing the

document at this resolution.  However, in many cases when you are not 
working with originals, the quality may not be there.  I believe this is

where you should use 300 dpi because it increases the performance of the

OCR capability.  When we went through our testing, we found that on many

documents the additional 100 dpi increased the quality of the OCR'ing by

up to 5% better resolution.  This was especially true when the original 
was a faxed copy.

Bandwidth and storage space should always be taken into account, but the

ability for the client to effectively search and find the document
should 
override this process. 
 
John Annunziello
Manager, Records and Information 
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
[log in to unmask]

"Information is a corporate, strategic asset that needs to be managed"

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance