Legend

Question

Acrobat cannot run OCR due to renderable text on page

Forum|Forum|1 year ago
December 13, 2024
2 replies
2493 views

Trying to run the Text recognition tool on a file and I get the above error. Saved it as a TIFF file and brought it back into AA. Was able to run Text recognition, however, really did a horrible job on the rendering of the text. I have also tried changing the DPI to 600. Only after it was on Auto run.

Acrobat 24.1

Win 11

Thanks

Scan documents and OCR

This topic has been closed for replies.

S

shaktikeshri

Adobe Employee

Hi @westdr1dw

Will it be possible to share the test fileon which the issue occurred.

Thanks,

Shakti K

W

westdr1dwAuthor

Legend

Shakti K concern has been resolved using Distiller.

Thanks

gary_sc

Community Expert

Hi, @westdr1dw; please review this blog I wrote for Adobe several years ago. See if any of the scanning issues might be present in your scan.

BTW, Adobe has NEVER been able to scan a page with partial text already rendered. It's a legacy "feature!"

https://community.adobe.com/t5/acrobat-discussions/acrobat-cannot-run-ocr-due-to-renderable-text-on-page/m-p/15038386

W

westdr1dwAuthor

Legend

Hello Gary;

Appreciate the response. However, the link just returns me to the same page.

I have discovered a way to work around this. Having been a AA user since ver 5, we use to use Distiller when we had issues trying to convert scanned image documents. Not sure why Adobe has made this feature difficult to find. Why anyone would save it to an image file, then import it into AA seems a little backward. In any case was able to turn image to Intelligent Text using Distiller. Hope Adobe keeps this little jewel around for many years. Thanks

gary_sc

Community Expert

Morning Gary

A couple of interesting points you make. I have been a a frequent flyer for several years of a few Adobe apps, and have used on a very limited basis most of the others. So yes, I am familiar with posterization. At point in my career I managed 5 print shops for the govt. The overwhelming majority of users are content with cell phone pictures. The sensors have drastically improved over the years. In camera editing has taken it to a new level. However, still cannot match the features of a DSLR. Should not expect it to either.

Been shooting photos back in the dark ages in the darkroom.

However, the past ~25 years I have been shooting in RAW. I thought you were attempting to convince me scanning would give a better result than the original.

As a purist over the years, I was a little turned off when they added movie capability to the DSLR. However, to survive industry and users had to adjust. However, I refuse to buy into the mirrorless tech. At least for the present.

Morning: one last example of how scanning provides better capabilities than photography (outside of speed), and this will focus (no pun intended) on photographs.

When I mentioned that I had photographed slides, it was because I had just under 10,000 slides that I wanted to digitize. I knew from the onset that I'd be dead before I finished scanning all of them, and, as I said, not all were keepers. So I photographed them all, and occasionally go back and scan the actual keepers. All of the images were tethered to Lightroom Classic.

[For my process, you can see this:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/adobe-community-professionals/digitizing-your-slides-by-photography/td-p/4785336]

Here is a shot I did of an old barn. (All images were "as scanned," and have no LRC adjustments.)

Because my camera was a bit "tipped," I went into Transform, and it did this:

It's hard to see, but there is about a 2°–3° CW rotation.

I then scanned the image — noticed the colors and lighting were better.

Then, I again performed a Transform.

I wish I could tell you why the Scanned version can be adjusted via Transform, but the Photographed version cannot. I do not know.

When removing grain in an image, again, the Photographed version can hardly be touched in Photoshop, but (most) scanning software already has grain removal as part of its repertoire. (Although Topaz's noise removal does a decent job at grain.)

One last thing: I LOVE my Canon 7Dm2, but I look at the weight of the mirrorless and scratch my chin — longingly.

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded