@daelba @KathyReid I also recommend #OCR4all. While e-Scriptorium runs on the kraken engine, OCR4all, uses Calamari. Once you have training data in e-Scriptorium, you can also potentially use them to train models in OCR4all. Depending on your discipline, the existing models for e-Scriptorium are 'better' than those for OCR4all or vice-versa, but both tools are highly recommended.
Every now & then, I give #ChatGPT a scan of my handwriting to test its skills in working with #handwrittentexts. Initially, it responded that it could not process the scans or gave me entirely fictional output, but today it got almost everything right. These results are better than those I achieved with #HWR models in #Tesseract & #OCR4all without additional training. I also asked ChatGPT what it "thought" about my writing & it called it "consistently shaped & large with stylistic strokes."

Hi #histodons,
I need your expertise. We want to integrate an #opensource #ocr tool into our #useGalaxy Platform so you can better analyse your texts, etc.
I worked with #tesseract some years ago, and I heard about #ocr4all.
Do you have experience with any of these - or other recommendations?
We are also integrating #tranksribus via API but want another ocr-specific option.
Looking forward to your experiences!

@galaxyfreiburg
@NFDI4Memory

Re OCR/ATR, interestingly the #OCR4all paper also offers a very good overview of the different steps and workflows. It has a different purpose, but I think it can still be used in a class context.

Reul, Christian et al. 2019. “OCR4all—An Open-Source Tool Providing a (Semi-)Automatic OCR Workflow for Historical Printings.” Applied Sciences 9 (22): 4853. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9224853.

OCR4all—An Open-Source Tool Providing a (Semi-)Automatic OCR Workflow for Historical Printings

Optical Character Recognition (OCR) on historical printings is a challenging task mainly due to the complexity of the layout and the highly variant typography. Nevertheless, in the last few years, great progress has been made in the area of historical OCR, resulting in several powerful open-source tools for preprocessing, layout analysis and segmentation, character recognition, and post-processing. The drawback of these tools often is their limited applicability by non-technical users like humanist scholars and in particular the combined use of several tools in a workflow. In this paper, we present an open-source OCR software called OCR4all, which combines state-of-the-art OCR components and continuous model training into a comprehensive workflow. While a variety of materials can already be processed fully automatically, books with more complex layouts require manual intervention by the users. This is mostly due to the fact that the required ground truth for training stronger mixed models (for segmentation, as well as text recognition) is not available, yet, neither in the desired quantity nor quality. To deal with this issue in the short run, OCR4all offers a comfortable GUI that allows error corrections not only in the final output, but already in early stages to minimize error propagations. In the long run, this constant manual correction produces large quantities of valuable, high quality training material, which can be used to improve fully automatic approaches. Further on, extensive configuration capabilities are provided to set the degree of automation of the workflow and to make adaptations to the carefully selected default parameters for specific printings, if necessary. During experiments, the fully automated application on 19th Century novels showed that OCR4all can considerably outperform the commercial state-of-the-art tool ABBYY Finereader on moderate layouts if suitably pretrained mixed OCR models are available. Furthermore, on very complex early printed books, even users with minimal or no experience were able to capture the text with manageable effort and great quality, achieving excellent Character Error Rates (CERs) below 0.5%. The architecture of OCR4all allows the easy integration (or substitution) of newly developed tools for its main components by standardized interfaces like PageXML, thus aiming at continual higher automation for historical printings.

MDPI

@[email protected] as far as I understand you want to implement a PDF -> Text -> PDF workflow. Using plaintext as intermediate is problematic, as you (may) lose a lot of layout information.

For high quality fulltext you may need a more sophisticated intermediate format like #PageXML or #AltoXML. But they also require a more sophisticated tool for editing like #OCR4All.

A colleague just asked me about a good, free OCR software for a historical book they are scanning. I was checking out #OCR4all to see if I could recommend it. First thing on the "Getting started" page: A Linux terminal command to start docker … 😵‍💫 I’m not criticizing the project, which I think does important work, but it’s a rather peculiar definition of "all" …

Salut ici :)
Je suis en train de tester #ocr4all pour faire reconnaître de l’écriture manuscrite. ( #ocr #hwr #htr )
Mais j’arrive à rien.
C’est peut-être à cause des modèles ?! Je n’ai que ceux de base qui sont optimisé pour le vieux français … ça aide pas … 😅

Est-ce que quelqu’un a déjà essayé et réussi ??

#question #RT apprécié 😌

@jomla @stabihh Mittlerweile haben wir auf unserem DSRI (Data Science Research Environment) #ocr4all aufgesetzt und der Workflow insgesamt erscheint uns sehr transparent. Allerdings sind wir bei der #Layouterkennung gleich am ersten Dokument gescheitert. Also... "read the docs"!
„Many handwritten sources not digitized. But see Transkribus.“ 🙄 #escriptorium #ocrd #ocr4all #dhd2024
@jomla @stabihh Workshop habe ich leider verpasst. Bin aber interessiert daran, Menschen mit #OCR4all Expertise als Referent*innen nach #Maastricht einzuladen. Hat jemand aus der Community Interesse? Dann gerne PM.