--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hugin-ptx+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/a3d21dc0-e1c9-4b75-ad61-9cdf1f0e1fbe%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/CAMcFxV1QEwOsn%3DTZsG2RLGjL02qkAk4Y0s2tVT4iVDe8jRzJxw%40mail.gmail.com.
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hugin-ptx+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/78106ace-ff87-45cf-aa30-17f95bc6ccd4%40googlegroups.com.
... anyway: I'd really prefer if I got some guidance about the existing tools, instead of attempts at talking me out of the approach I'm currently experimenting with.
Correct, I scan each page multiple times.
The idea is to align the scans, combine them in a way that makes use of the added redundancy to reduce noise and speckles.
The background is that I'm scanning my books, for going paperless. Well, paper-frugal, some books will stay :-)
The scanning will be destructive. I want/need to shed the weight and volume of all that paper.
I cannot go crazy with storage, the NAS size is somewhat limited. 300 dpi TIFF, compressed with the right PNG settings, will fit.
Am Montag, 19. Februar 2018 21:38:26 UTC+1 schrieb Toolforger:Correct, I scan each page multiple times.But do you it without moving the page? - then the pages should be aligned. Or do you move the page between consecutive scans? Then you probably need align_image_stack.
The idea is to align the scans, combine them in a way that makes use of the added redundancy to reduce noise and speckles.When the images are aligned, you can use hugin_stacker to get the average image.
The background is that I'm scanning my books, for going paperless. Well, paper-frugal, some books will stay :-)
The scanning will be destructive. I want/need to shed the weight and volume of all that paper.
Now you wander from the subject. Keep on the track.
I cannot go crazy with storage, the NAS size is somewhat limited. 300 dpi TIFF, compressed with the right PNG settings, will fit.A TIFF file with PNG compression? How should this work?
I need *something* to align the images, yes. The scanner isn't replicating the exact position.
I tried align_image_stack, but it would refuse to work with images of slightly different sizes. Which I don't really understand, because it's identifying and moving control points, which includes moving some pixels beyond the image boundary. So I'm wondering what it's doing - clipping them?
It's not a big deal because the page margins are white space anyway, but I'd like to understand what it's actually doing. Is it considering the image border to be all control points?
A TIFF file with PNG compression? How should this work?
Ah, the joys of too much editing.
I tested with PNG and found that 300 dpi with the right settings are small enough. TIFF with one of its compression modes may work, too,
That where the missing information.I tried align_image_stack, but it would refuse to work with images of slightly different sizes. Which I don't really understand, because it's identifying and moving control points, which includes moving some pixels beyond the image boundary. So I'm wondering what it's doing - clipping them?Sorry, but control points are not moved. Run align_image_stack with -p parameter and open pto file in Hugin to see the control points.
It's not a big deal because the page margins are white space anyway, but I'd like to understand what it's actually doing. Is it considering the image border to be all control points?A point is a point and not a border
A TIFF file with PNG compression? How should this work?
Ah, the joys of too much editing.
I tested with PNG and found that 300 dpi with the right settings are small enough. TIFF with one of its compression modes may work, too,Sorry, but PNG and 300 dpi resolution have nothing in common. A JPEG and a TIFF or a BMP can also have 300 dpi resolution.
It seems you mix a lot up.
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hugin-ptx+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/20180221144554.GP17324%40BitWizard.nl.
Of course it depends on what kinds of texts you're looking at, but my experience with text-only academic articles/books and 240-300 dpi scans is that with a little clean-up, OCR is very good already. I'd recommend playing with your scanner settings up front to minimize background noise and make sure your text is mostly black or nearly black pixels. Save to tiff or png, if you can. You're right that jpeg will hurt.(I even have some scripts that use ImageMagick to clean the scans, and I'm not the only one. :-) : https://github.com/Jmuccigr/scripts )