I'm told the problem is the hardware not so much the software, so Steve, 
you're right on most likely.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Dresser" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: scanning operation


> Harvey,
>
> Your bank's ATM may be using a camera instead of a flatbed scanner, which
> may partially account for the higher accuracy.  It will be interesting to
> see whether the software can read handwriting reliably as well as 
> perfectly.
> In the case of your bank's ATM, , the software only has to deal with
> numbers.  In the case of our reading software, the software has to analyze 
> a
> much broader range of text, which requires more resources, and may be much
> more prone to errors.  For your sake, I hope your bank's ATM can get the
> numbers right every time.
>
> Steve
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Harvey Heagy" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 10:37
> Subject: scanning operation
>
>
>> In this message I am speaking of scanning for reading purposes not public
>> service band scanning.
>>
>> My bank now offers ATM deposits without the use of envelopes or deposit
>> slips.  You simply insert all checks at one time into the receptacle for
>> checks, or all cash at once into a separate receptacle for cash.  Since 
>> it
>> also offers talking ATM's, I decided to try it to see if it could be done
>> by
>> a blind person.  I found out happily that it could.  You can deposit
>> checks,
>> cash or a combination thereof.  What further amazed me is that you don't
>> have to enter the deposit amount.  The ATM reads the cash, checks or
>> whatever and totals the deposit amount itself.  The check I deposited was
>> handwritten, and the machine read it perfectly.  My question is, if we 
>> can
>> have a bank ATM that can read handwritten checks perfectly, why can't we
>> have scanning software such as Kursweil or OpenBook that can also read
>> handwriting perfectly?
>> Harvey
>>