Comparison of OCR Version 1.0 and 2.0

Introduction:

OCR (Optical Character Recognition) technology has evolved significantly, with Version 1.0 and Version 2.0 offering distinct features and capabilities. This comparison outlines the key differences between the two versions.

OCR version 1.0 / 1.x

Single Monitor Support:

• Version 1.0 supports only one monitor. If multiple monitors are used, the OCR screen capture fails with the error "Screen capture failed".

Multi-Monitor Configuration Workaround for Windows:

• Steps:

  • Right-click on the desktop and select "Display Settings."

  • Under the multiple displays section, choose "Show only on 1" (or the primary monitor's number).

  • Click "Apply" and then "Keep Changes" to save the configuration.

Features:

• Pre-processing: Includes image adjustment in its pre-processing stage, allowing for basic image enhancement before text recognition.

• Post-processing: Applies regular expressions for refining OCR results.

• Copy to Clipboard: Automatically copies recognized text to the clipboard.

• OCR Engine: Tesseract OCR.

OCR version 2.0 / 2.x

Multi-Monitor Support:

• Version 2.0 overcomes the major limitation of its predecessor by supporting multi-monitor setups effectively

Features:

• Pre-processing: In addition to image adjustment, it includes an image upscaler and image filters, offering more advanced image enhancement capabilities.

• Post-processing: Applies regular expressions for refining OCR results.

• Copy to Clipboard: Automatically copies recognized text to the clipboard.

• Draw Bounding Box: Adds the feature to display bounding boxes around recognized text, enhancing user interaction and understanding of OCR results.

• OCR Engine: Tesseract OCR, Windows OCR, Google Cloud Vision, and Azure Cloud Vision for enhanced accuracy.

Comparison Summary:

• Monitor Support: The most significant improvement in version 2.0 is the support for multi-monitor setups, overcoming a key limitation of version 1.0.

• Pre-processing Capabilities: Version 2.0 offers more advanced pre-processing features, such as image upscaling and filtering, which can lead to better OCR accuracy.

• Post-processing and Usability: Both versions use regexp for post-processing, but version 2.0 adds the visual aid of bounding boxes.

• OCR Engines: Version 2.0's integration of multiple OCR engines suggests improved versatility and potentially higher accuracy in various contexts compared to version 1.0's sole reliance on Tesseract OCR.

In conclusion, OCR version 2.0 offers significant enhancements over version 1.0, particularly in terms of multi-monitor support and advanced image processing features, making it more versatile and user-friendly for diverse OCR needs.