After watching Tom Johnson of Finale scan in clinics with relative ease I have gone back to scanning. He tells us that certain scanners are better than others for scanning and that a dpi of 500 or better will achieve optimal results. 300 dpi is pretty awful in scanning music even though we were all told that long ago it was acceptable. I watched Tom scan in a random band score at the Midwest clinic in Dec. and it produced every note that was on the page correctly as seen using the free version of smartscore lite. Yes there were no text on the scanned page but he also added that instead of taking the scanned page and turning it into your finished doc you should copy the info from it and paste into a new doc set up how you want the final score to look like.
______________________________ J. Scott Jones Band/Orchestra Director/Freelance Trumpet Player-Teacher/Music Engraver Sent from my i5 > On Jan 22, 2014, at 10:30, "David H. Bailey" > <dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote: > >> On 1/22/2014 10:22 AM, Craig Parmerlee wrote: >> I know this is an old topic that has been batted around many times. I >> have owned several of the scanning products (Smartscore, Photoscore, and >> SharpEye). The last time I used any of them was about 7 years ago. Of >> the 3, I could sometimes get marginal results with SharpEye, but usually >> there were so many errors that it was not worth the time to even try. >> >> I need to transpose a big band chart for my singer. As this is very >> clean music, very well engraved, I thought this might be a good time to >> see how that software has progressed. I was encouraged when I saw that >> both Smartscore and Photoscore are proudly claiming that they now work >> even with hand-written scores. Perfect. Then it should have no trouble >> at all with my engraved music that uses the jazz font. >> >> Well, I think you know how this story turned out. I tried the latest >> versions of all three programs, using a wide variety of scan settings. >> They all failed miserably. The best one was Smartscore, which at least >> recognized the key signatures and most of the notes, but it still had at >> least one error on every single measure -- and this is not complicated >> music. It missed slurs, ties, multi-measure rests, endings, repeats, >> etc and interpreted dynamics and text as notes. > > Photoscore works best when I scan at 300dpi and grayscale. What > settings did you scan at? > > I've never tried it on any handwritten font nor on my manuscript. > > It often has problems with multi-measure rests but most of the mistakes > are easy to fix in PhotoScore before importing into Sibelius. > > I haven't worked with SmartScore so I can't offer any insights into that > but perhaps re-scanning at 300dpi/grayscale if you haven't used those > settings might help. > > Good luck -- keep us posted as to what sort of results the SmartScore > people provide for you. > > > -- > David H. Bailey > dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com > http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
