Anyone using FuzzyOCR?

[Julian Field]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I have spoken to other people who have tried FuzzyOCR and have found 
Imageinfo much more useful. FuzzyOCR is reckoned to be very high on 
resources and very slow, of the order of several seconds per message. 
The opinion from other people I have spoken to seems to be that it is 
not worth it.

But that's my opinion, Gary.... (along with Steve Freegard of MailWatch 
fame and Anthony of milter.org fame).

Pentland G. wrote:
> All,
>
> I'm trialling FuzzyOCR and having mixed results.
>
> Are any of you using this and what have you found?  Good and bad, I'm
> interested.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gary
>
>
>   

Jules

- -- 
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store

MailScanner customisation, or any advanced system administration help?
Contact me at Jules at Jules.FM

PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
For all your IT requirements visit www.transtec.co.uk


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.0 (Build 1112)
Comment: Fetch my public key foot-print from www.mailscanner.info
Charset: ISO-8859-1

wj8DBQFFMUqTEfZZRxQVtlQRAvOiAJ4njTG4uuYfQG39AOGbYumw56Gv4gCbBEba
Il9G8auXN+L5S6Y1X5bvCNQ=
=Ab3s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
For all your IT requirements visit www.transtec.co.uk