Kevin,
You could try GIMPshop which is available at www.gimp.org. It is free and
powerful. There is only a beta version for Windows XP, but it runs on Mac
OS X. I am not clear if it runs on Linux although the parent of GIMPshop is
GIMP which I am sure runs on Linux. I can only assume that GIMP and
GIMPshop have ways of automating the processing of "images" so you can
increase contrast, apply an unsharp mask, and reduce resolution in batch
mode.
I think you documents will be much more readable if you use 8 bits per
pixel.
Jim Gray
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Toppenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Imaging Disk requirements?
James,
Thanks for the info. I had intended 1 bit per pixel. But your advise
is appeciated.
I have yet to get the tools in place to let me do all this image
manipulations.
Thanks
Kevin
On 10/10/05, James Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Since no one has apparently discussed these issues on this topic I will
point some things out.
Kevin, By BW do you mean gray scale (8 bits per pixel) or bitmapped (1 bit
per pixel)?
I assume you mean gray scale. You can very good documents this way.
First
scan a document at 300 dpi or higher, then increase the contrast of the
image, then apply a good unsharp mask to the document. Then you can
reduce
the resolution down to 150 dpi. If you take these steps you will end up
with documents that are *MORE* readable than documents scanned at 300 dpi
and left that way. The steps could be automated so that it works well.
Also jpeg compression can give you documents that are 10% of the size of
the
uncompressed image with little loss in such "images".
Jim Gray
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nancy Anthracite" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Imaging Disk requirements?
> The OCR programs I have used require 300 dpi, and I suspect that might
> be
> something that should be considered for the future as it may be that not
> only
> typed but hand written notes could be loaded right into the database in
> a
> compact fashion and the scanned images archived for backup purposes
> only.
>
> On Wednesday 28 September 2005 08:49 am, Mike Schrom wrote:
> I think fax scans are lower about 150 dpi, but still, usually, readable.
> That's a factor of four smaller file size, but even at 300, your figures
> yield about 25,000 charts per terabyte. That's four 250 gig hard drives
> at about $50 each (on sale).
>
> Mike
>
> Kevin Toppenberg wrote:
>> As I get close to completing a document imaging system that uses
>> standard VistA Imaging code, I have wondered what use of the system
>> will do to my disk space.
>>
>> Does anyone know what typical scanning resolution is (300 dpi?), and
>> how much disk space this would take in BW, compressed as JPG file? I
>> am guessing about 150k per image (image size 8.5x11 inches). If I did
>> my math right, that would be about 6,600 images per gigabyte. Many of
>> my charts have about 200 pages in them, so this would be about 25
>> complete charts per gigabyte.
>>
>> I am asking this because I am not planning on implementing the
>> background processor that archives images off of the magnetic disks
>> into an optical jutebox. It seems that disk drives are growing in
>> size fast these days.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
>> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads,
>> discussions,
>> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hardhats-members mailing list
>> Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads,
> discussions,
> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> Hardhats-members mailing list
> Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
>
> --
> Nancy Anthracite
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads,
> discussions,
> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> Hardhats-members mailing list
> Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
