Our approach
OCR.now combines a working browser-based OCR utility with a field guide for deciding when recognition is useful, how to prepare a source, and what must still be checked by a person.
For the recognition process, see OCR methodology; for publishing controls, read the editorial policy.
What the site is for
The tool is designed for document photos, scanned images, and image-only PDFs that need a reviewable text draft. The learning library covers capture, reading order, language selection, output formats, archival quality control, privacy, and validation. It does not present recognition as proof that a document is accurate, authentic, complete, or safe to act on.
What the site is for checks
- Use the live tool when text cannot be selected from the source.
- Use the guides to choose capture and review methods before processing a collection.
- Keep the source document available while checking the result.
- Use approved offline or organizational tools when an online upload is inappropriate.
How the product and library fit together
All public tool routes use the same recognition core. A route earns a separate page only when the source format, capture risk, layout, review method, or intended output changes the work. Specialized pages state their current output boundary beside the tool. Workflows that depend on exports the site does not yet generate are kept out of the search index.
How the product and library fit together checks
- No account is required for the current OCR form.
- Available recognition languages reflect installed server data.
- Multi-page PDF output keeps explicit page boundaries.
- TXT and JSON downloads contain recognition output and diagnostics, not certified structured records.
Publishing standards
OCR.now uses an organizational editorial byline because no named expert credential or independent reviewer has been established. Pages disclose limits, link to primary technical sources where they support a claim, and avoid invented tests, testimonials, accuracy percentages, or professional endorsements.
Publishing standards checks
- Titles and H1 headings must describe the same intent.
- Important claims must be supportable from code, a primary source, or a clearly labeled method.
- Weak or duplicative pages are improved, consolidated, redirected, or excluded from indexing.
- Corrections should reflect a real change rather than an artificial freshness date.