From: Al and Masha Sten-Clanton 
Subject: Re: Braille Quality from a University
On Sat, 14 Feb 1998, M. THOMPSON wrote:
> 
> If we are going to provide Braille to our students how do you feel about
> the following?
> 
> Is Braille produced via scanning and printing on a Braille printer "good
> enough"?
I doubt that any document can be brailled immediately after scanning.
Some human intervention is needed every time, as far as I know:  I have
seen near-perfect scanning, but never perfect scanning, and there's no
value in translating any scanning errors into Braille.
> 
> Should we insist on the use of Certified Braille transcriptionsts when
> producing class materials.
I'd say no.  I'm sure no expert, but I suspect that, given a clean
document, a good Braille translator and some intelligent human
intervention ordinarily should be able to produce reasonable Braille.  I
also suspect that the human intervention would be especially important
when graphs or tables are being brailled.
> > How would you rank the
following? > > Cost > Quality
> Speed
I think the priority of these things might be different, depending on
whats being brailled.  I use Braille whenever I can, and would have been
happy to have a lot more of it in college and law school.  There probably 
were times when top quality would have been essential.  With class
handouts, I would have been willing to sacrifice a modicum of quality if
this were necessary for me to get it fast enough for it to be useful in
my studies.  Im having trouble commenting sensibly about cost.  How much
it matters depends on what I can afford, to state the obvious.  I do
think, though, that if cheap Braille was as difficult to read as some of
the stuff Ive heard about, I'd forego the Braille and use readers, tapes, 
or whatever else I could get.  
> > Thanks > > -Mike Thompson
And thank YOU for the questions.  I have spoken only for myself, but I
hope my comments have been a little useful.
Al Sten-Clanton
---
 # Origin: NFBnet  Internet Email Gateway (1:282/1045)
---------------