Hi,

The quality of the result depends of paramaters.

I use Abby FineReader, and I use the high quality possible, which gives good quality DjVu, but of high volume. It is always a trade-off between quality and volume.

Regards,

Yann

2017-01-24 12:03 GMT+01:00 Andrea Zanni <zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com>om>:

> I added this issue to IA-upload tool on github:

> https://github.com/Tpt/ia-upload/issues/14

> Unfortunately, the new PDF > DJVU conversion is useless, as it loses > too much quality. > Can we find a solution?

> The IA-Upload tool is a great asset for the whole international > community, > and it's very simple to teach librarians to upload stuff on IA and > then use it to port it on Commons and Wikisource. > But when they upload new stuff on IA, we don't have the IA djvu > anymore. > So the tool converts the original PDF to a new DJVU, and this is the > part of the process that is failing. > I can think of 2 solutions:

> * integrate this script from Alex brollo into the tool: > https://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Progetto:Bot/Programmi_in_Python_per_i_bot/j… > the script creates a good quality djvu

> _______________________________________________

> Wikisource-l mailing list

> Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org

> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

_________________________________________________

Wikisource-l mailing list

Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Sam Wilson <sam(a)samwilson.id.au> wrote: > __

AFAIU, Yann is using ABBYY finereader to generate a djvu and then uploads it directly to Commons. So outside of our ia-upload tool.

Yes.

If the Djvu quality is much lower than the PDF there's no reason to use the djvu over the pdf :-(

Please ;-)

Aubrey

_________________________________________________

Wikisource-l mailing list

Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, at 03:27 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote: On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Sam Wilson <sam(a)samwilson.id.au> wrote: Yann, do you mean you're getting good quality DjVu generated from the PDF? Or from the original scan Jpegs? AFAIU, Yann is using ABBYY finereader to generate a djvu and then uploads it directly to Commons. So outside of our ia-upload tool. Ah, okay. So if it could be done in the tool, that'd be nicer. Yes, it is a question of settings.

Aubrey: when you say directly use the PDF, you mean for the tool to copy that across to Commons and not create a DjVu? Yes. If the Djvu quality is much lower than the PDF there's no reason to use the djvu over the pdf :-( DjVu has to advantages over PDF: better compression, so small files for

Are we saying that we *never* want to use the IA PDF? That if there's a DjVu we use it, and if there isn't we generate our own DjVu from the JP2 and djvu.xml files? Or should the tool user make this call and we give them a drop-down list of "PDF only", "Generate DjVu from PDF", and "Generate DjVu from original scans" with a note about the last of these being higher quality but slower? I think I'm in favour of just generating a high-quality DjVu and making it simpler for the end user. But we want to be flexible too. jayantanth mentioned <https://github.com/Tpt/ia-upload/issues/15> that he'd like to be able to just upload the PDF for example. I can have a look at adding that feature perhaps? (Anyone else working on this?) Please ;-) I can try! :-) Aubrey *_______________________________________________* Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l _______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

By now IA pdf too are very compressed, sometimes too much - the result being impredictable; the problem is, that viewer doesn't uses djvu nor pdf IMHO, so the quality of pdf (and of resulting djvu by pdf2djvu) doesn't mirror at all the quality of viewer images. The IA pdf needs a good review before upload it into Commons. There are subltle advantages using djvu instead of pdf, i.e. fixing errors into source file (adding/deleting/moving pages, manipulating text layer); djvu is a great "wiki" format since it is *open*. Alex 2017-01-25 11:35 GMT+01:00 Yann Forget &lt;yannfo(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: _______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

On Thu, 26 Jan 2017, at 06:35 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote: The problem for me is that librarians and other people who are genuinely interested in Wikisource and IA don't understand why * they upload a good scan on IA * see a good book on IA, via the viewer * get an horrible djvu on Wikisource. This is the issue we should try to solve, otherwise we will lose a potential important ally, content and new userbase. Aubrey Definitely! On a related note: most (all?) IA-scanned books have e.g. *_jp2.zip files containing all the original scan images, but is there any standard for user-uploaded books? Like your librarians above, I assume they're uploading individual jpg/png files? Do these get combined into a single zip? I'm thinking that they don't, and that ia-upload needs to provide the option of using any of the following sources: - .djvu - _jp2.zip (there's also _jpg.zip and _raw_jp2.zip, but I guess we don't need to use them?) - *.jpg + *.jp2 + *.png (i.e. use all images in the item, apart from _cover_image.jpg) - .pdf Sound complete? Or are there other ways? _______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

Good to know, thanks! So, we just stick with jp2.zip And I love the IA magic :) On Fri, 27 Jan 2017, at 07:40 AM, Andrea Zanni wrote: AFAIK, IA always produce the jp2 files by himself. I suggest GLAMs to upload zipped folders of jpegs, so IA can do his magic and produce a book viewer and a PDF as well as the jp2. On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:10 AM, Sam Wilson &lt;sam(a)samwilson.id.au&gt; wrote: On Thu, 26 Jan 2017, at 06:35 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote: The problem for me is that librarians and other people who are genuinely interested in Wikisource and IA don't understand why * they upload a good scan on IA * see a good book on IA, via the viewer * get an horrible djvu on Wikisource. This is the issue we should try to solve, otherwise we will lose a potential important ally, content and new userbase. Aubrey Definitely! On a related note: most (all?) IA-scanned books have e.g. *_jp2.zip files containing all the original scan images, but is there any standard for user-uploaded books? Like your librarians above, I assume they're uploading individual jpg/png files? Do these get combined into a single zip? I'm thinking that they don't, and that ia-upload needs to provide the option of using any of the following sources: - .djvu - _jp2.zip (there's also _jpg.zip and _raw_jp2.zip, but I guess we don't need to use them?) - *.jpg + *.jp2 + *.png (i.e. use all images in the item, apart from _cover_image.jpg) - .pdf Sound complete? Or are there other ways? _______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l *_______________________________________________* Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l _______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

On a related note: most (all?) IA-scanned books have e.g. *_jp2.zip files containing all the original scan images, but is there any standard for user-uploaded books? Like your librarians above, I assume they're uploading individual jpg/png files? Do these get combined into a single zip?