Capture Plug-in vs. Capture HELP!

Capture Plug-in vs. Capture HELP!

Post by Bradley D Olive » Wed, 12 Aug 1998 04:00:00



I am considering purchasing Acrobat for a project, but I am not sure exactly
what software I need...

I need convert a hardcopy document into .pdf format.  How do I do this...
with Acrobat and it's "Capture plug-in", or do I have to spent $900 for the
full "Adobe Capture"?  What is the difference between the two.

The document is full of charts, graphs, and pictures, if it matters.

Thank You

 
 
 

Capture Plug-in vs. Capture HELP!

Post by Bradley D Olive » Thu, 13 Aug 1998 04:00:00


C. Scott Miller, first I would like to thank you for your very throughout
response, but I still have some questions/concerns.

The document I need to convert is approximately 800 pages.  It will be split
up into sections, lets just assume 8 sections of 100 pages a piece.  It will
then be distributed on CD-ROM, and on the Web (file size permitting).

I have received several quotes from professional service bureaus as you have
mentioned, and they are all in the range of $3500-$4500.

I have access to a sheet fed scanner, which I am sure will cut down the
workload somewhat.  Access to the scanner and the price of the estimates is
why we are thinking of the "do-it-ourselves" approach.

I do not understand the difference between "PDF Normal" and "PDF image+
text" as you have put it.

Does Acrobat perform OCR on every document/page you scan?  Or are the pages
saved as an image of the page?(sort of like a digital photocopy)

What do you mean by "Clean-up"?  What "conversion" needs to be performed?

The document is not clean...it is a collection of letters, technical
specifications, memos, legal docs, etc... the list goes on and on...the
bottom line is that it comes from many different sources of varying degrees
of quality.  We distributed info such as this before on CD, but it was done
by scanning every page and saving each page individually as a .TIFF file.
It was very cumbersome to create, manage,and use.  Acrobat seemed like a
possible alternative.

Thanks Again.
-Bradley D. Oliver

 
 
 

Capture Plug-in vs. Capture HELP!

Post by Bradley D Olive » Fri, 14 Aug 1998 04:00:00


C. Scott Miller

After writing the last posting, I had a chance to visit your website:

http://www.performancegraphics.com

I found it very interesting and informative..thank you.  Your site has
answered many of my questions, and here is the conclusions I have drawn
(please correct me if I am wrong).

Yes, I can scan in any page as a .TIF and paste it to a PDF file/page,
without perfroming any OCR/Conversion on it.  I will basically be dropping a
bittmapped-image of the original document onto a PDF page.  I can then save
this page as a PDF image doc/file.

Do I have it so far?

I read somewhere where I loose the ability to index the document if I save
it a a PDF "image" file, but if I convert it to "PDF Normal" then I can
index and search it.

My last question is, if I save it as a PDF image file, can I bookmark it?  I
think so, but I am not entirely sure.

Sorry for sooo many question.  Thanks

Bradley D. Oliver

 
 
 

Capture Plug-in vs. Capture HELP!

Post by Tom Salinsk » Fri, 14 Aug 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

> I read somewhere where I loose the ability to index the document if I
> save
> it a a PDF "image" file, but if I convert it to "PDF Normal" then I can
> index and search it.

My last question is, if I save it as a PDF image file, can I bookmark

Quote:> it?  I
> think so, but I am not entirely sure.

You can't search an image for the presence of text, as a text search will
ignore all graphics, whether they happen to contain visual
representations of words or not. So, you don't lose anything by making a
PDF image file, but you don't gain anything either, except portability,
and the ability to create bookmarks.

If you want a searchable document, you have to use Capture (plug in free
with Acrobat 3.0) to recognise the text in the image files and replace
the bitmaps with real text. If all you want is searchability, you should
use the "hidden text" option, which leaves the bitmaps alone, but
includes invisible real text along with the file. This way any OCR errors
are invisible.

If you want to use Capture to rebuild the pages as Acrobat files, which
will bring the file size down, you'll have to spend some time tidying up
the pages to account for mis-recognised text, incorrect fonts, dirt on
the scans, etc. How much work is up to you (Capture will leave a bitmap
in place when it is doubtful about a word).

Hope this helps

Tom

 
 
 

1. Difference between Acrobat 3.0 capture plug-in and Capture?

Hello,

I am trying to figure out what would be best for a little projet we have
involving digitizing about 50 3-page all text documents a month, then
indexing and poutting them available on the WWW.

Thos are exams made available to students AFTER they have done it, so the
next semester they can do them to study on past questions.

My question: Would the Acrobat 3.0 capture plug-in be sufficient? What
does it do? Adobe does not seem very good at establioshing differences
between products - Remember Adobe Acrobat Exchange, Exchange Pro,
distiller, etc. I would like to have an answer from someone owning Acrobat
3.0 vs. someone using capture 1.0

Greetongs,

Fabian Rodriguez

2. Fast Graphics

3. Adobe Capture plug-in for Acrobat 3.0 vs. TextBridge and OmniPage

4. anyone experience with TAPI / TSP programming ?

5. capture card vs usb capture

6. Uptime

7. Mac Capture Plug-In Out Yet?

8. Two references to public GA software

9. Capture plug-in for Mac

10. Scanner for Capture Plug-in

11. Win95: Capture Plug-in (UK?)

12. Capture Plug-In with Mixed Fonts

13. Yes, the Capture plug-in IS available for 5.0