6
Replies
Hi, @Inélsòre, I have some sad news for you: this is not going to happen.
Let me explain: as amazing as OCR is, there are limitations, and your text is hitting each and every limitation there is. The original documents are not clean (there are speckles and irregularities everywhere), they are not consistent in shading (one area may be lighter or darker than other areas), the scans are of insufficient resolution, and the printing has poor kerning between some letter groups.
Before I show you what I'm referring to above, let me explain some of the limitations of OCR. Simple letter pairs can confuse it such as "in" can be seen as "m" or "ri" as "n." Processing this in OCR can be improved by a higher-resolution scan. Normally, if the copy is good, 300 ppi is sufficient. But, when the text is small or the text is close together (small kerning), 600 ppi can help, but at a certain point, it won't make a difference.
Here is a screenshot of a sample of one page I worked with (for the record, this is page 15 of the total manuscript):
When I saw the quality of the document, I knew there would be issues, but I wanted to try and see what could be done with it. I extracted the single page and opened it in Photoshop. I then converted it to a grayscale image. Next, I opened up the Adobe Camera Raw filter to use an ACR Linier Mask to darken the bottom right of the page, as it was lighter than the rest. Then, I opened a "Levels" adjustment to make the non-text regions white and the text regions black. This brought me to have this as a result:
Looking at this, it's easy to see that many letters encroach upon the adjacent letters. Also, you can see where the quality of the print itself is, well, poor. If I select an arbitrary word, such as Jungfrauen (3rd line down), and copy and paste what the OCR pulled out, you get "Jungf 11auen." So, if you were searching for Jungfrauen, you'd never find it.
BTW, if I OCRed the page as it was without any Photoshop enhancement, I got "Jungf1·nue1."
To put this into perspective, in my mom's later years, she decided she'd write the family history for my sister and me. She had an electric typewriter, but the platen was old and didn't grab the paper as well as one would hope, so occasionally, the lines were not parallel and were tipped at an angle a bit. The ribbon was old, so the letters were not as dark as they could have been. Suffice it to say that while the OCR did OK on more of this document than I thought it would, there were whole paragraphs that were easier to retype than to try and fix the results of the OCR.
Sadly, as this document stands, there is no hope for Acrobat or any OCR product to do what you want. If you had access to the original documents to do a proper scan*, you'd succeed better. But the best you can do here is read it with your eyes. This whole thing shows how marvelous our eyes and brain can interpret what we see so much better than a computer. And no, I know of no AI work being done on OCR (and oh, how much I wish it were).
* Some of the "softness" seen in the letters in my Photoshopped version is caused by the processes I did to whiten the page. If you did those same things in the scanning software, the letters would have been cleaner and sharper, providing better success in the OCR. How much so, it's impossible to tell.
AdChoices