|
|
|
Scanners & other hardware discussion forum
Discuss Check & Document Scanner Issues and more here. No Vendor solicitations / announcements here please.
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
awargo
-
4/28/2007 2:22:02 AM
Scanner Hit Rate
What would be an acceptable % success rate (scanned and no corrections need to be made) of preprinted corporate type checks run through an RDC scanner. We have been running test batches and have had up 37.5% and 45% failure to read check dollar amounts. We are using our bank's internet RDC solution, since our audit department vetoed the software version. We had a much better rate with the software solution, utilizing the same scanner, Digital TS220E. In our most recent test, we had an 85% success rate.
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
rdc1
-
4/28/2007 2:43:13 AM
Re: Scanner Hit Rate
An 85% success rate is very good. Based upon personal experience, and discussions with dozens of solution providers and end-users, a general range of success for the types of checks you outline is generally around 75-80%. We've even heard of instances of 90%+.
The success rate depends primarily upon the quality of 1) the source document, 2) the CAR / LAR / OCR / ICR software being used, 3) the actual scanner, and 4) the degree to which the equipment is (or is not) maintained and cleaned.
Are you using the same scanner with the browser-based version?
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
awargo
-
4/30/2007 10:27:22 PM
Re: Scanner Hit Rate
We are using the same scanner, the Digital TS 220E. It is new, having only been used to run a few test batches, possibly 200 checks in total. The biggest problem checks seemed to be the ones with the multiple 'Void' (covering the whole face of the checks) watermarks/security features.
If 85% is good for printed corporate checks, what can we expect from hand written consumer checks?
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
rdc1
-
5/1/2007 6:33:51 PM
Re: Scanner Hit Rate
If you're using the same scanner, but are having vastly different results on CAR / LAR reco rates on a thin client vs. thick client operational model, the most likely cause is the Reco software being used in the thin environment is not as complicated / sophisticated as the version you had locally installed. This makes logical sense as the more horsepower the reco software has / needs equates to the need for more horsepower centrally, more data from the scanner, and more time to transmit and process the data.
In conversations we've had with hosted solutions providers, there is a delicate balance between processing time and robustness of the CAR/LAR and IQA/IQU software. Most solution providers have a goal of performing the reco process in the background without any impact to the end user. Based upon the experiences you've outlined above, maybe this isn't the right goal?
Similar to all the various versions of Microsoft Office and other competing software packages, Reco Software comes in many degrees of competency, from basic to editions lebelled as "platinum", and results are further complicated by source documents, the scanner being used, the condition of the scanner and more.
Most of the reco rates I am familiar with are part of a thick-client installation where the reco software may very well be better than the capabilities currently available in a thin-client environment. In a thick-client environment, we have heard from the industry to expect 80% success on printed checks and 60% success would be good on hand-written checks, on average. Please keep in mind, though, any success rate results in new processing efficiencies for the end user.
Hopefully, a couple of solution providers might be able to post some additional insights on this issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: Patent Reform
I have been doing some research on the various blogs and "informational" sites on the Patent Reform Act of 2007. It is considered by many that this will not pass the votes needed to make into law. In fact, people are saying that this is going to loose alot of steam. Sure, it made it out of committee, but that does not necessary make it into law. People are trying to get this voted on before the August break if it has any chance of maintaining the needed steam.
My opinion, for what it is worth, is that this bill will not make it into law. What do other people think? Remember, this has to be a joint bill which both the Senate and House pass in the same form. Also, remember that Sen. Sessions amendment dealing with check imaging is only on one of the bills. So, it could be axed as part of the process.
CopaKid
|
|
|
|
We're thrilled to be able to announce a simply amazing session at the RDC Summit 2010, and one where you will be able to control (to some degree) the questions that are asked in the session: The Technology Leadership Roundtable: A Discussion with Industry TitansSession Description: Driven by...
Posted on 8/27/2010 9:31:48 AM
Hi All,
I am wondering if the Financial Institutions out there have started to create a separate RDC Policy? I know some FIs have included the RDC information in other policies, like a department specific policy. Are you willing to share with me what you are doing?
Thanks very much!
Hi All,
I...
Posted on 8/25/2010 8:03:19 PM
The past 5+ years in the RDC Industry can be typified with one word: Change. RDC has evolved from a check depositing service for banks and large corporations to now be defined as a payments and data platform for all. In the early days of the industry, thick-client, in-house solutions were the dom...
Posted on 8/10/2010 3:39:46 PM
It sounds like a very interesting issue to help solve. The majority of software vendors and payments processors can offer you a solution for your customers using Check 21 with agreements by their, the customer's, bank to accept the file. The systems offer flexibility and control on depo...
Posted on 8/8/2010 10:26:17 AM
Hi Joe, we can provide this solution. We currently have hosted and in house solutions to help. Please contact me and see if our solution is a fit.
David Meany
President
AQ2 Technologies, LLC
Posted on 8/6/2010 5:51:17 PM
Here's a wiki page that lists banks currently offering remote deposit to individuals:
http://paperless.wikia.com/wiki/Remote_Check_Deposit
Posted on 7/30/2010 1:35:56 PM
The speed of the scanner is one thing as is the size of the hopper. It is a good practice for high volume applications to jog the checks first. This improves the ability of the scanner to grab the checks. In my experience you cannot jam to many checks into the scanner it is faster to keep adding ...
Posted on 7/26/2010 10:00:48 AM
The issue with money orders has been a problem with RDC from the very beginning. The quality of the ink (how fresh is the cartridge) and the color of the ink are designed to make it difficult to copy (or scan). This has been an issue that has been raised to the money order manufacturers. There ar...
Posted on 7/26/2010 9:53:05 AM
We are having the same issues with Money Orders; the ink is unreadable and the thickness of some of the Money Orders will not go through the scanner. We have offered to pick up those items as a courtesy to our customer. Any one have a better solution.
Nancy,
What type of scanner are...
Posted on 7/23/2010 5:05:16 PM
Mobile is a good idea. In my opinion it is just another way to get or make a deposit. It gives the consumer or business another choice; they don't need to go to the branch or buy a scanner, they can just use their phone!
Posted on 7/22/2010 7:13:02 PM
|
|
|