Can you import our FlexiCapture document definitions?

Not today. Field sets, zones and validations are rebuilt here — the same work the Vantage path asks of you. What shortens it is blueprint provisioning and model-assisted template authoring: drop in a sample page, get a draft template with zones and data types, correct it, train it.

Is Tesseract going to lose against the ABBYY engine?

On degraded scans and dense forms, yes, measurably. That is why the hybrid path exists: Tesseract first, low-confidence words or pages re-read by a vision model. Settle it with a bake-off on your own documents — we publish the fields we lose.

We run ICR-heavy forms. Should we switch?

Probably not on that use case alone. Handwriting runs through the model path here, which carries a cost per page and a latency the traditional engines do not. We price it honestly rather than pretending the gap is closed.

Vantage has pre-trained skills. What do we get on day one?

A blueprint — finance, accounts payable, insurance, KYC, anti-money-laundering or supply chain — that provisions the project, workflow, routing, upload endpoint, export goal and a full field set in one action. That is a pre-authored field set, not a pre-trained model: you still author the template, with a model drafting it from a sample page. We would rather state that plainly than lose the pilot.

Can we run entirely offline?

Yes. Tesseract for text and a local GGUF vision model through a managed llama-server cover recognition with no outbound network. Vantage cannot run offline.

How does the cost curve actually compare?

Below roughly 100–150k pages a year, a metered platform is often cheaper than running infrastructure — we say so. Above it the gap widens every year, and for a service provider with twenty clients on one install it is not close.

Can you match its pages per hour?

Not as a blanket claim. Throughput here scales by adding nodes that declare the workflow duty, and the honest answer for any given box is a benchmark on your hardware and your paper. We run it before quoting volume.

Is your PDF/A really PDF/A?

The renditions assert PDF/A-2b with an sRGB output intent and PDF/A identification in XMP, built with PDFBox from stored page images and persisted word geometry. Archive buyers audit that claim, and we encourage validating a sample set with veraPDF as part of acceptance.

We already run TotalAgility for process automation. Why change capture?

You may not need to. The strongest shape is often capture here, feeding your existing orchestration through REST, JDBC, message bus or file drop — you keep the process estate and stop paying capture volume fees.

Does anything replace VRS?

The pre-processing chain covers deskew, despeckle, binarize, crop, line and punch-hole removal and colour dropout, ordered per project. VRS remains the benchmark on hostile paper; on ordinary departmental scanning the difference rarely survives a bake-off.

Do we have to draw a template for every supplier?

No. A template carries alternatives for layouts that differ, label search finds fields that move, and the model paths read documents you have not templated at all. Where a template does earn its keep is auditability: the same input produces the same output, and the field says which method produced it.

Can you learn from corrections the way Rossum does?

Templates train from operator corrections, and the verification hub's word-group mode applies one correction everywhere the same misread text appears. It is a different mechanism from a continuously retrained global model, and it stays inside your tenant.

We are happy with ChronoScan. When should we move?

When a second operator, a second client, an audit requirement or a compliance question arrives. Those are the four triggers we see — not features.

Is this overkill for one mailroom?

Possibly, and we will say so on the call. A single-machine install runs fine here, but if you will never need users, tenants, workflow or audit, the cheaper tool is the right tool.

Why would we leave a platform that works?

Usually one of three reasons: the renewal, a tenancy requirement Transact cannot meet, or a mandate to run models locally. If none of those apply, staying is a defensible answer and we will say so.

Our developers say they can wire this up in a sprint.

The recognition call, yes. The forty-odd capabilities around it — batch assembly, separator handling, template versioning, validation rules, an operator review UI, retries, retention, audit, tenant isolation, export mapping — are the sprint that never ends. Ask what happens when the person who wrote it leaves.

Can we use Textract as an engine here?

Recognition is pluggable and the plugin SDK exists for exactly this. Most teams end up local for volume and remote for the hard pages.

So you will not quote against ReadSoft for AP?

Not on SAP-native accounts payable with live master-data matching. We will quote for the other 70% of the documents in the building, and we will say the same thing on the first call as on the last.

Migration brief

If you have to rebuild anyway, rebuild where the meter stops.

ABBYY is moving FlexiCapture customers to Vantage. The industry consensus on that path is blunt: it is a rebuild, not a transfer. There is no converter that turns a FlexiCapture document definition into a Vantage skill, because the two are architected differently — and ABBYY deployments are commonly quoted at eight to twelve weeks.

What that means for your negotiation

The switching cost your incumbent normally enjoys is temporarily gone. You are being asked for a fresh three-year commitment, a fresh implementation project, and a move from a licence you own to a transaction meter — for the same documents you process today. That is the one moment when a challenger starts level.

The window closes as each account completes its migration. It does not reopen.

What we will not claim

We do not import FlexiCapture document definitions today. Your field sets, zones and validation rules are rebuilt here — the same work the Vantage path asks of you. What differs is what you get for the weeks: a platform with no per-page meter, no station licences, and a rebuild you do once rather than again at the next product transition.

How a migration actually runs

Scanner audit, before the demo

We ask what is on your floor first. eSCL-capable MFPs and modern departmental scanners are driven server-side with nothing installed. A TWAIN-or-ISIS-only production estate is a blocker, and we say so before you spend time on an evaluation.

Inventory and blueprint

We list document types, field sets, validations and export targets. Then a blueprint provisions the project, workflow, routing, upload endpoint, export goal and a full field set in one action, so week one starts on your documents rather than on configuration screens.

Template authoring, model-assisted

Drop in a sample page and a draft template comes back — zones, field names, data types — in vision, text or hOCR mode. An operator corrects it; the template trains from those corrections. Per-supplier layouts become alternatives on the same template rather than new projects.

Parallel run, with field-level agreement

Same input into both systems, then a report of where the two disagree, field by field. Every migration guide ends this way; we would rather start there. It is also the only fair way to settle the accuracy question on your own paper.

Cutover, and the licence conversation you no longer have

Export mappings switch over, the old meter stops. Scaling recognition later is a hardware decision — add a node, declare its duties — not a procurement one.

Bake-off

Send us 200 of your most relevant pages.

Not the clean ones. The faxed ones, the stapled ones, the supplier who changes layout every quarter. We run them through Tesseract, hybrid and model paths and publish field-level accuracy back to you — including the fields we lose on.

A bake-off is paid work, not a free trial. It is scoped and quoted up front at our standard consulting rate, and it runs one to two days — two at most: reading your documents, authoring templates, running the engines and writing up the field-level results. You own the report either way, and if we lose it says so.

Ask for a bake-off quote