iseahound wrote:Training is possible, but I haven't included the necessary command line utilities. You're right in that training may help, but unless you have some wacky, specific font, training is unlikely to beat the pre-trained model that is tesseract_best. Since your 0 just has a line through it which is pretty common for a zero, it's probably the upscaling step that's ruining it. I suspect it's 0 or 8 about half the time? The image is upscaled 3.5x before processing, maybe changing it to 2 or 2.5 may help. I think you can control F for 3.5. Finally there's a lot of improvements that can be made. I intend to improve it sometime in the future.
Thank you for the reply! Would changing static scaleFactor := 3.5 (line 2169) be all that is needed to reduce the magnification? I will give this a try, and also I am also going to mess with the application's scaling/font size to see if it helps.
EDIT: On first run it read 100% accurate at 2.5, I'm going to have it do a ton of random reads and check the logs for variance. Thank you again!
EDIT2: Getting still some bad reads, but a lot better, playing with the numbers and UI settings.
EDIT3: Works well enough to just sample a bunch of times and use majority consensus. Thank you!