Hi all,
Running 'tesseract -l eng+chi_tra' on a scanned page of English text mixed with Chinese characters does not detect any Chinese characters at all:
> The five chapters on fiction, memoirs, and other kinds of prose that
> follow offer as many approaches to our understanding of the transition
> between 1644 and 1700. Focusing on the lives of Mao Xiang § X (161-
> 93) and Yu Huai A1% (1616-96), Oki Yasushi develops portraits of these
> two "romantic Jiangnan loyalists," who clung to patterns of late Ming
> feeling and aestheticism long after the Ming had fallen. The image of
> loyalism as romantic is in striking contrast to starker images of loyalist
> experience. Both Mao and Yu are best known for their memoirs, which
> focus prominently on women, one of the new ways of figuring nos-
> talgia and resistance in male writings of the early Qing. Robert Hegel's
> "Dreaming the Past" is similarly concerned with the individual, fo-
> cusing on Chu Renhuo #ARE (ca. 1630-1705+), as well as his novel,
> Sui Tang yany: G B® #&, (ca. 1675), but it extends well beyond Chu and
> his work in contemplating how "the past" (the Tang past in particular)
> shaped imaginative literature in an era when the present offered little
> solace.
The characters are (mostly) correctly recognized when only 'chi_tra' is set as the OCR language, but at the cost of seriously degraded accuracy in English OCR:
> The fve chapters on fiction,menoirs, and other kinds of prose thar
> follow offer as nany approaches to our understanding ofthe transition
> between :644 and I7oo. Focusing on the |ives of Mao 文 iang 冒 裱 (I6II-
> 93andYuTiuai 余 懷 ((616-96), OkiYasushidevelops portraits ofthese
> two "ronantic Jiangnan loyalists"who clung to patterns of ]ate N{ing
> feeling and aestheticismn long after the Ming had fallen. The of
> loyalisn as ronantic is in striking contrast to starker 1nages of |oyalisr
> experience. Both Mao and Yu are best known fortheir memolrs, wˇhich
> focus Proninently on womnen, one of the new ways of figuring nox-
> talgia and resistance in male writings of the early Cuing. Roberr Tiegel's
> "1reaning the Past" is simnilarly concerned with the individual, fo-
> cusing on ChuRenhuo 褚 人 穫 (ca. I63o-I7oy+)}, as well a$ his novel,
> 5#77mzg5227 隋 唐 演 義 (Ca.I67y, butit extends well beyondChu and
> his work in contemplating how "the past" (the Tang Past in Particulan
> shaped imaginative ]iterature in an era when Lhe present offered |ittle
> $olace.
Is this a known issue? Am I doing something wrong here?
--Brendan