RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
You wouldn’t believe the system I have for digital photographs. I use a numbering system because I have several thousand images and use a spreadsheet to list them all. Names just didn’t work for me and numbers keep the file name short. Without the spreadsheet, nobody would know what it is, where it is, or who’s in it. Not all of them are people pictures, but at least if there’s a date or name to go with it I have it in there. I wish my ancestors had been that meticulous with just a pen or pencil on the back of some of them. I’m a fanatic about accuracy and organization. I think it comes from growing up with insane and/or disorganized family members. From: Kathy Meyer [mailto:kmeyer2...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 4:27 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures How interesting all of these opinions are! I am spending today going through my digital files on my computer, in my dropbox and on my most recent external backup hard drive. I don't have an automatic backup that automatically saves any changes or additions that I make to my hard drive so this is something I have to do every once in awhile to make sure I have everything saved in the 'right place'. I know how to organize, backup, copy files and all of that but being as human as I am, I sometimes mess up (imagine that!) For instance, if I am saving something I've scanned, my scanning software automatically saves it to the last place that I used unless I change the settings. If I'm not paying attention, I could go crazy in a couple of months trying to find it and 'knowing that I scanned that!'. Mostly though, it's because I want all of my family history information backed up in multiple places and I want it to be consistent in all of those places. Since I do not have software to automatically backup only the changes, I go through them manually. I don't mind much because I find this will bring things to my attention and I'll write notes to myself to take care of this and that. I'm doing this now with the intent of getting all of my images and documents added to my Legacy file but I know they all need to be in a good, understandable order so that I can always file them that way and so Legacy will always be able to find those images. If my computer crashes, my dropbox and external hard drive backup would be in the exact same order, which would help Legacy to find those new files in those new places. So this is bringing my mind to all of the things that can go wrong (that I can do wrong) with my filing system. It also makes me think about how someone else would be able to follow my research should I not be able to do it any longer (or as I pass it down to future generations) It makes me uncomfortable to store all of the research only in a digital way, although my plan is to scan everything that is in my paper files and source them, etc; the stuff that I didn't do way back in the beginning :-) I'm not ready to recycle all of that 'paper research' and I still print out plenty of stuff because I make notes on it, like transcriptions or explanations and source information. I type all of that into Legacy from the paper copy. Why throw it away once it's digitized? At least if I have a question, I can go back to the printed copy. I will love it when I eventually go all digital and can feel comfortable with that. For now, I still like to look at a paper copy for certain things. I know when technology changes, we should all take our old stuff and move it to the new format but not everybody will do that or has the means. Paper copies, like printed photographs, can be viewed and enjoyed by anyone whether they have the newest technology or not, or even if they have no computer at all. I'm not arguing or criticizing, just thought I'd try to explain why I can't give up my paper yet :-) I'm envious of all of you who have gone completely digital and love it. Kathy On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 2:08 PM, William Boswell wrote: There has to be someone in the family that will continue to preserve the information we have compiled through the years. I have data from the 1980's that started out on 5 1/4" diskettes up to current times and if I hadn't preserved them by upgrading their formats it would be gone for good. Some originally came from paper that I had to retype because PC's didn't exist them (1970's). In that sense paper was the best media for that time. What about old 8mm and 16mm films? Try to get them converted these days. I have a bunch of them deteriorating. Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old m
Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
How interesting all of these opinions are! I am spending today going through my digital files on my computer, in my dropbox and on my most recent external backup hard drive. I don't have an automatic backup that automatically saves any changes or additions that I make to my hard drive so this is something I have to do every once in awhile to make sure I have everything saved in the 'right place'. I know how to organize, backup, copy files and all of that but being as human as I am, I sometimes mess up (imagine that!) For instance, if I am saving something I've scanned, my scanning software automatically saves it to the last place that I used unless I change the settings. If I'm not paying attention, I could go crazy in a couple of months trying to find it and 'knowing that I scanned that!'. Mostly though, it's because I want all of my family history information backed up in multiple places and I want it to be consistent in all of those places. Since I do not have software to automatically backup only the changes, I go through them manually. I don't mind much because I find this will bring things to my attention and I'll write notes to myself to take care of this and that. I'm doing this now with the intent of getting all of my images and documents added to my Legacy file but I know they all need to be in a good, understandable order so that I can always file them that way and so Legacy will always be able to find those images. If my computer crashes, my dropbox and external hard drive backup would be in the exact same order, which would help Legacy to find those new files in those new places. So this is bringing my mind to all of the things that can go wrong (that I can do wrong) with my filing system. It also makes me think about how someone else would be able to follow my research should I not be able to do it any longer (or as I pass it down to future generations) It makes me uncomfortable to store all of the research only in a digital way, although my plan is to scan everything that is in my paper files and source them, etc; the stuff that I didn't do way back in the beginning :-) I'm not ready to recycle all of that 'paper research' and I still print out plenty of stuff because I make notes on it, like transcriptions or explanations and source information. I type all of that into Legacy from the paper copy. Why throw it away once it's digitized? At least if I have a question, I can go back to the printed copy. I will love it when I eventually go all digital and can feel comfortable with that. For now, I still like to look at a paper copy for certain things. I know when technology changes, we should all take our old stuff and move it to the new format but not everybody will do that or has the means. Paper copies, like printed photographs, can be viewed and enjoyed by anyone whether they have the newest technology or not, or even if they have no computer at all. I'm not arguing or criticizing, just thought I'd try to explain why I can't give up my paper yet :-) I'm envious of all of you who have gone completely digital and love it. Kathy On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 2:08 PM, William Boswell wrote: > There has to be someone in the family that will continue to preserve the > information we have compiled through the years. I have data from the 1980's > that started out on 5 1/4" diskettes up to current times and if I hadn't > preserved them by upgrading their formats it would be gone for good. Some > originally came from paper that I had to retype because PC's didn't exist > them (1970's). In that sense paper was the best media for that time. > > What about old 8mm and 16mm films? Try to get them converted these days. > I have a bunch of them deteriorating. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Gray [mailto:grayp...@telus.net] > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 3:16 PM > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures > > John, > > While I agree that digital technologies do become obsolete, I don't see > paper as a particularly good alternative either. Paper deteriorates, inks > fade. And, fire and flood is all too common. > > I attended a Dick Eastman presentation, and his advice was 'multiple > copies, multiple media types, multiple locations. That is the only way to > protect yourself from the failure of any one backup. > > Digital media do become obsolete, absolutely. One needs to periodically > copy data from old media to new media, one to keep up with technology and > simply to ensure that the original media is still readable. And, even new > hard drives, DVD's, USB sticks, and whatever is coming in the future will > fail. Hence, multiple copies. > > I keep data on my hard drive, backup to USB an
Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
It's interesting Bill you mentioning about family members probably throwing stuff in the garbage. I had some distant family members that literally threw an entire collection of photo's on a bonfire because they weren't remembered in a will!! Horrifying! Charlotte On 28 May 2011 21:08, William Boswell wrote: > There has to be someone in the family that will continue to preserve the > information we have compiled through the years. I have data from the 1980's > that started out on 5 1/4" diskettes up to current times and if I hadn't > preserved them by upgrading their formats it would be gone for good. Some > originally came from paper that I had to retype because PC's didn't exist > them (1970's). In that sense paper was the best media for that time. > > What about old 8mm and 16mm films? Try to get them converted these days. > I have a bunch of them deteriorating. > > -Original Message- > From: Paul Gray [mailto:grayp...@telus.net] > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 3:16 PM > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures > > John, > > While I agree that digital technologies do become obsolete, I don't see > paper as a particularly good alternative either. Paper deteriorates, inks > fade. And, fire and flood is all too common. > > I attended a Dick Eastman presentation, and his advice was 'multiple > copies, multiple media types, multiple locations. That is the only way to > protect yourself from the failure of any one backup. > > Digital media do become obsolete, absolutely. One needs to periodically > copy data from old media to new media, one to keep up with technology and > simply to ensure that the original media is still readable. And, even new > hard drives, DVD's, USB sticks, and whatever is coming in the future will > fail. Hence, multiple copies. > > I keep data on my hard drive, backup to USB and DVD held at my home > frequently, use Dropbox for on-line backup, and periodically take DVD > backups to friends and family that live far away. > > Certainly, paper can be one of those multiple backups, but I'm not sure > it's the most secure. > > Paul > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and > on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
There has to be someone in the family that will continue to preserve the information we have compiled through the years. I have data from the 1980's that started out on 5 1/4" diskettes up to current times and if I hadn't preserved them by upgrading their formats it would be gone for good. Some originally came from paper that I had to retype because PC's didn't exist them (1970's). In that sense paper was the best media for that time. What about old 8mm and 16mm films? Try to get them converted these days. I have a bunch of them deteriorating. -Original Message- From: Paul Gray [mailto:grayp...@telus.net] Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 3:16 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures John, While I agree that digital technologies do become obsolete, I don't see paper as a particularly good alternative either. Paper deteriorates, inks fade. And, fire and flood is all too common. I attended a Dick Eastman presentation, and his advice was 'multiple copies, multiple media types, multiple locations. That is the only way to protect yourself from the failure of any one backup. Digital media do become obsolete, absolutely. One needs to periodically copy data from old media to new media, one to keep up with technology and simply to ensure that the original media is still readable. And, even new hard drives, DVD's, USB sticks, and whatever is coming in the future will fail. Hence, multiple copies. I keep data on my hard drive, backup to USB and DVD held at my home frequently, use Dropbox for on-line backup, and periodically take DVD backups to friends and family that live far away. Certainly, paper can be one of those multiple backups, but I'm not sure it's the most secure. Paul Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
I remember those 8" floppies as well as tape-based formats. Paper also has issues as well. It tends to fade over the years and is easier to destroy. If I had a choice between the two I'd take digital. I used to received fax transmissions from a cemetery for burial information, but unfortunately I only had a thermal paper fax machine. I copied these to Xerox paper and was glad I did because the original thermal paper copies faded so badly within the first year I couldn't read them anymore. Regular copy paper will last much longer, but it also burns or can be destroyed much easier than electronic copies. I move too much so having to move many boxes of paper just wasn't economical anymore. I scanned my genealogy reference books too (marriage records) and threw out the books. I digitize everything only because it takes up a lot less space than all that paper. I wish I could keep all the paper copies, but nobody in my direct family is interested in genealogy and it would just end up in the garbage anyway. My distant lines have most of my digital copies so hopefully it will live on. Bill Boswell -Original Message- From: John Carter [mailto:a...@wizardanswers.com] Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 2:29 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures Unless you and your descendants continuously stay current with changes in digital storage technology, your digital data will eventually become inaccessible. Once upon a time, the 8" floppy disk was the commercial standard for digital storage and backup. Do you know anyone who has the equipment to read an 8" floppy disk? Or even a 5 1/4" floppy disk? Eco-friendly is fine (my recycle bin contains more than my garbage bin), but some of the family history I've collected is too valuable to entrust solely to a medium that is guaranteed to become obsolete - it's just not possible to re-interview someone who died 10 years ago. For that reason, I keep all paper originals. Every couple of years, I print appropriate multi-generation documents to have a human-readable copy of the data. (two family lines, 11 generations back in some places) John Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
John, While I agree that digital technologies do become obsolete, I don't see paper as a particularly good alternative either. Paper deteriorates, inks fade. And, fire and flood is all too common. I attended a Dick Eastman presentation, and his advice was 'multiple copies, multiple media types, multiple locations. That is the only way to protect yourself from the failure of any one backup. Digital media do become obsolete, absolutely. One needs to periodically copy data from old media to new media, one to keep up with technology and simply to ensure that the original media is still readable. And, even new hard drives, DVD's, USB sticks, and whatever is coming in the future will fail. Hence, multiple copies. I keep data on my hard drive, backup to USB and DVD held at my home frequently, use Dropbox for on-line backup, and periodically take DVD backups to friends and family that live far away. Certainly, paper can be one of those multiple backups, but I'm not sure it's the most secure. Paul -Original Message- From: John Carter [mailto:a...@wizardanswers.com] Sent: May-28-11 12:29 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures Unless you and your descendants continuously stay current with changes in digital storage technology, your digital data will eventually become inaccessible. Once upon a time, the 8" floppy disk was the commercial standard for digital storage and backup. Do you know anyone who has the equipment to read an 8" floppy disk? Or even a 5 1/4" floppy disk? Eco-friendly is fine (my recycle bin contains more than my garbage bin), but some of the family history I've collected is too valuable to entrust solely to a medium that is guaranteed to become obsolete - it's just not possible to re-interview someone who died 10 years ago. For that reason, I keep all paper originals. Every couple of years, I print appropriate multi-generation documents to have a human-readable copy of the data. (two family lines, 11 generations back in some places) John > I agree with you James. There doesn't seem any real justification for > keeping paper documents when it's not eco-friendly to use all that paper > and > most things now can be stored digitally, unless of course they're > originals > but even these can be scanned. Just in case anyone wasn't aware, as I > recall > in one of the recent webinar's it was recommended they be saved as .tif's > at > 600dpi, 100% scale to preserve the integrity of images they need to be > stored. I thought that was a really good tip. > > > On 28 May 2011 17:48, James Cook wrote: > >> I've been working on this hobby seriously for about 1 1/2 years now. >> At the time, I read about organization, and most of the articles I >> found were how to keep binders. This is the computer age, and I'm a >> computer guy, so took some ideas from the binder based articles, but >> scan and organize all my stuff electronically on my computer. >> >> I find the thing I like best about it is that if somebody asks me for >> something, I can just email them the document. >> However, I user dropbox too, and as others have said, having >> everything electronically scanned in allows me to access it no matter >> where I'm at via another computer or even my phone. >> >> I do keep any paper copies I collect, and have been wondering about >> the value of adding a paper based system as well. I've not convinced >> myself there is enough value in doing that so I've not done it. >> >> >> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 8:44 AM, William Boswell >> wrote: >> > Michele: >> > >> > I understand the daunting feeling. That's why I scanned all my >> documents >> and photos years ago. I keep very few documents unless they are >> originals >> or have some historic value. All copies get scanned then tossed out. >> Even >> old negatives and photographs are scanned at the highest resolution and >> tossed. Negatives, especially color, do not hold up very long. Black >> and >> white negatives seem to last forever even ones that are about 100 years >> old. >> > >> > I still have several hundred negatives that need scanning so I know >> that >> daunting feeling because I keep putting it off. Scanning negatives is >> very >> boring and time consuming because you can't do much else while you're >> doing >> it. >> > >> > Also, if you have any old audio recordings I suggest converting all of >> them to digital. I did that for a collection of about 50 hours of audio >> interviews done back in the 1970's and
Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
And when documents are that valuable, it is important they are handled as little as possible. You may have only one original, but once they are digitised they can be viewed time and time again. Hence why most repositories are trying to digitise as much as possible. It's almost impossible for the storage of data & images digitally to become obsolete because there will always be the means of storing them and it can only improve. It's all in bits and bytes so it's easy to transfer into storage, what medium it's stored on is irrelevant because it can be changed easily and moved from one to the other. This is why large businesses spend vast sums of money storing digital copies often in different locations, if they had a fire it could potentially mean the loss of the business. On 28 May 2011 19:28, John Carter wrote: > Unless you and your descendants continuously stay current with changes in > digital storage technology, your digital data will eventually become > inaccessible. > > Once upon a time, the 8" floppy disk was the commercial standard for > digital storage and backup. Do you know anyone who has the equipment to > read an 8" floppy disk? Or even a 5 1/4" floppy disk? > > Eco-friendly is fine (my recycle bin contains more than my garbage bin), > but some of the family history I've collected is too valuable to entrust > solely to a medium that is guaranteed to become obsolete - it's just not > possible to re-interview someone who died 10 years ago. > > For that reason, I keep all paper originals. Every couple of years, I > print appropriate multi-generation documents to have a human-readable copy > of the data. (two family lines, 11 generations back in some places) > > John > > > > I agree with you James. There doesn't seem any real justification for > > keeping paper documents when it's not eco-friendly to use all that paper > > and > > most things now can be stored digitally, unless of course they're > > originals > > but even these can be scanned. Just in case anyone wasn't aware, as I > > recall > > in one of the recent webinar's it was recommended they be saved as .tif's > > at > > 600dpi, 100% scale to preserve the integrity of images they need to be > > stored. I thought that was a really good tip. > > > > > > On 28 May 2011 17:48, James Cook wrote: > > > >> I've been working on this hobby seriously for about 1 1/2 years now. > >> At the time, I read about organization, and most of the articles I > >> found were how to keep binders. This is the computer age, and I'm a > >> computer guy, so took some ideas from the binder based articles, but > >> scan and organize all my stuff electronically on my computer. > >> > >> I find the thing I like best about it is that if somebody asks me for > >> something, I can just email them the document. > >> However, I user dropbox too, and as others have said, having > >> everything electronically scanned in allows me to access it no matter > >> where I'm at via another computer or even my phone. > >> > >> I do keep any paper copies I collect, and have been wondering about > >> the value of adding a paper based system as well. I've not convinced > >> myself there is enough value in doing that so I've not done it. > >> > >> > >> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 8:44 AM, William Boswell > >> wrote: > >> > Michele: > >> > > >> > I understand the daunting feeling. That's why I scanned all my > >> documents > >> and photos years ago. I keep very few documents unless they are > >> originals > >> or have some historic value. All copies get scanned then tossed out. > >> Even > >> old negatives and photographs are scanned at the highest resolution and > >> tossed. Negatives, especially color, do not hold up very long. Black > >> and > >> white negatives seem to last forever even ones that are about 100 years > >> old. > >> > > >> > I still have several hundred negatives that need scanning so I know > >> that > >> daunting feeling because I keep putting it off. Scanning negatives is > >> very > >> boring and time consuming because you can't do much else while you're > >> doing > >> it. > >> > > >> > Also, if you have any old audio recordings I suggest converting all of > >> them to digital. I did that for a collection of about 50 hours of audio > >> interviews done back in the 1970's and noticed that the tapes were > >> starting > >> to degrade. They lasted nearly 30 years so I guess I can't complain. > >> > > >> > Bill Boswell > >> > > >> > -Original Message- > >> > From: cranberryf...@cobridge.tv [mailto:cranberryf...@cobridge.tv] > >> > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 7:52 AM > >> > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > >> > Subject: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures > >> > > >> > Speaking of pictures... > >> > > >> > In the Marriage Record Webinar, Geoff pretty much said that he > >> attaches a > >> > photo (scan of a document) to every source he does. I have been > >> thinking > >> > about this. Right now I don't have any scans in my file and I have > >>
Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
Unless you and your descendants continuously stay current with changes in digital storage technology, your digital data will eventually become inaccessible. Once upon a time, the 8" floppy disk was the commercial standard for digital storage and backup. Do you know anyone who has the equipment to read an 8" floppy disk? Or even a 5 1/4" floppy disk? Eco-friendly is fine (my recycle bin contains more than my garbage bin), but some of the family history I've collected is too valuable to entrust solely to a medium that is guaranteed to become obsolete - it's just not possible to re-interview someone who died 10 years ago. For that reason, I keep all paper originals. Every couple of years, I print appropriate multi-generation documents to have a human-readable copy of the data. (two family lines, 11 generations back in some places) John > I agree with you James. There doesn't seem any real justification for > keeping paper documents when it's not eco-friendly to use all that paper > and > most things now can be stored digitally, unless of course they're > originals > but even these can be scanned. Just in case anyone wasn't aware, as I > recall > in one of the recent webinar's it was recommended they be saved as .tif's > at > 600dpi, 100% scale to preserve the integrity of images they need to be > stored. I thought that was a really good tip. > > > On 28 May 2011 17:48, James Cook wrote: > >> I've been working on this hobby seriously for about 1 1/2 years now. >> At the time, I read about organization, and most of the articles I >> found were how to keep binders. This is the computer age, and I'm a >> computer guy, so took some ideas from the binder based articles, but >> scan and organize all my stuff electronically on my computer. >> >> I find the thing I like best about it is that if somebody asks me for >> something, I can just email them the document. >> However, I user dropbox too, and as others have said, having >> everything electronically scanned in allows me to access it no matter >> where I'm at via another computer or even my phone. >> >> I do keep any paper copies I collect, and have been wondering about >> the value of adding a paper based system as well. I've not convinced >> myself there is enough value in doing that so I've not done it. >> >> >> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 8:44 AM, William Boswell >> wrote: >> > Michele: >> > >> > I understand the daunting feeling. That's why I scanned all my >> documents >> and photos years ago. I keep very few documents unless they are >> originals >> or have some historic value. All copies get scanned then tossed out. >> Even >> old negatives and photographs are scanned at the highest resolution and >> tossed. Negatives, especially color, do not hold up very long. Black >> and >> white negatives seem to last forever even ones that are about 100 years >> old. >> > >> > I still have several hundred negatives that need scanning so I know >> that >> daunting feeling because I keep putting it off. Scanning negatives is >> very >> boring and time consuming because you can't do much else while you're >> doing >> it. >> > >> > Also, if you have any old audio recordings I suggest converting all of >> them to digital. I did that for a collection of about 50 hours of audio >> interviews done back in the 1970's and noticed that the tapes were >> starting >> to degrade. They lasted nearly 30 years so I guess I can't complain. >> > >> > Bill Boswell >> > >> > -Original Message- >> > From: cranberryf...@cobridge.tv [mailto:cranberryf...@cobridge.tv] >> > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 7:52 AM >> > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com >> > Subject: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures >> > >> > Speaking of pictures... >> > >> > In the Marriage Record Webinar, Geoff pretty much said that he >> attaches a >> > photo (scan of a document) to every source he does. I have been >> thinking >> > about this. Right now I don't have any scans in my file and I have >> been >> > working in Legacy for 6 years (FTM before that). Since census records >> are >> > readily available, I just cite them. I do copy marriage, death, >> military, >> > land records etc. and I keep those in binders (I have a binder for >> each >> type >> > of source and then I file them alphabetically). I am trying to figure >> out >> > the wisdom of scanning everything into Legacy. I would love to hear >> your >> > opinions. I must say thinking about going back and scanning >> everything >> is >> > rather daunting. >> > >> > michele >> > >> > >> > >> > Legacy User Group guidelines: >> > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp >> > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: >> > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ >> > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: >> > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ >> > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp >> > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.fac
Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
I agree with you James. There doesn't seem any real justification for keeping paper documents when it's not eco-friendly to use all that paper and most things now can be stored digitally, unless of course they're originals but even these can be scanned. Just in case anyone wasn't aware, as I recall in one of the recent webinar's it was recommended they be saved as .tif's at 600dpi, 100% scale to preserve the integrity of images they need to be stored. I thought that was a really good tip. On 28 May 2011 17:48, James Cook wrote: > I've been working on this hobby seriously for about 1 1/2 years now. > At the time, I read about organization, and most of the articles I > found were how to keep binders. This is the computer age, and I'm a > computer guy, so took some ideas from the binder based articles, but > scan and organize all my stuff electronically on my computer. > > I find the thing I like best about it is that if somebody asks me for > something, I can just email them the document. > However, I user dropbox too, and as others have said, having > everything electronically scanned in allows me to access it no matter > where I'm at via another computer or even my phone. > > I do keep any paper copies I collect, and have been wondering about > the value of adding a paper based system as well. I've not convinced > myself there is enough value in doing that so I've not done it. > > > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 8:44 AM, William Boswell > wrote: > > Michele: > > > > I understand the daunting feeling. That's why I scanned all my documents > and photos years ago. I keep very few documents unless they are originals > or have some historic value. All copies get scanned then tossed out. Even > old negatives and photographs are scanned at the highest resolution and > tossed. Negatives, especially color, do not hold up very long. Black and > white negatives seem to last forever even ones that are about 100 years old. > > > > I still have several hundred negatives that need scanning so I know that > daunting feeling because I keep putting it off. Scanning negatives is very > boring and time consuming because you can't do much else while you're doing > it. > > > > Also, if you have any old audio recordings I suggest converting all of > them to digital. I did that for a collection of about 50 hours of audio > interviews done back in the 1970's and noticed that the tapes were starting > to degrade. They lasted nearly 30 years so I guess I can't complain. > > > > Bill Boswell > > > > -Original Message- > > From: cranberryf...@cobridge.tv [mailto:cranberryf...@cobridge.tv] > > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 7:52 AM > > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > > Subject: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures > > > > Speaking of pictures... > > > > In the Marriage Record Webinar, Geoff pretty much said that he attaches a > > photo (scan of a document) to every source he does. I have been thinking > > about this. Right now I don't have any scans in my file and I have been > > working in Legacy for 6 years (FTM before that). Since census records > are > > readily available, I just cite them. I do copy marriage, death, > military, > > land records etc. and I keep those in binders (I have a binder for each > type > > of source and then I file them alphabetically). I am trying to figure > out > > the wisdom of scanning everything into Legacy. I would love to hear your > > opinions. I must say thinking about going back and scanning everything > is > > rather daunting. > > > > michele > > > > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ > > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ > > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and > on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > > > > > > > > -- > James Cook > GED Utils, Ancestry Utils > http://loosestacks.blogspot.com/ > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and > on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyu
Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
I've been working on this hobby seriously for about 1 1/2 years now. At the time, I read about organization, and most of the articles I found were how to keep binders. This is the computer age, and I'm a computer guy, so took some ideas from the binder based articles, but scan and organize all my stuff electronically on my computer. I find the thing I like best about it is that if somebody asks me for something, I can just email them the document. However, I user dropbox too, and as others have said, having everything electronically scanned in allows me to access it no matter where I'm at via another computer or even my phone. I do keep any paper copies I collect, and have been wondering about the value of adding a paper based system as well. I've not convinced myself there is enough value in doing that so I've not done it. On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 8:44 AM, William Boswell wrote: > Michele: > > I understand the daunting feeling. That's why I scanned all my documents and > photos years ago. I keep very few documents unless they are originals or > have some historic value. All copies get scanned then tossed out. Even old > negatives and photographs are scanned at the highest resolution and tossed. > Negatives, especially color, do not hold up very long. Black and white > negatives seem to last forever even ones that are about 100 years old. > > I still have several hundred negatives that need scanning so I know that > daunting feeling because I keep putting it off. Scanning negatives is very > boring and time consuming because you can't do much else while you're doing > it. > > Also, if you have any old audio recordings I suggest converting all of them > to digital. I did that for a collection of about 50 hours of audio > interviews done back in the 1970's and noticed that the tapes were starting > to degrade. They lasted nearly 30 years so I guess I can't complain. > > Bill Boswell > > -Original Message- > From: cranberryf...@cobridge.tv [mailto:cranberryf...@cobridge.tv] > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 7:52 AM > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > Subject: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures > > Speaking of pictures... > > In the Marriage Record Webinar, Geoff pretty much said that he attaches a > photo (scan of a document) to every source he does. I have been thinking > about this. Right now I don't have any scans in my file and I have been > working in Legacy for 6 years (FTM before that). Since census records are > readily available, I just cite them. I do copy marriage, death, military, > land records etc. and I keep those in binders (I have a binder for each type > of source and then I file them alphabetically). I am trying to figure out > the wisdom of scanning everything into Legacy. I would love to hear your > opinions. I must say thinking about going back and scanning everything is > rather daunting. > > michele > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on > our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > -- James Cook GED Utils, Ancestry Utils http://loosestacks.blogspot.com/ Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
Michele: I understand the daunting feeling. That's why I scanned all my documents and photos years ago. I keep very few documents unless they are originals or have some historic value. All copies get scanned then tossed out. Even old negatives and photographs are scanned at the highest resolution and tossed. Negatives, especially color, do not hold up very long. Black and white negatives seem to last forever even ones that are about 100 years old. I still have several hundred negatives that need scanning so I know that daunting feeling because I keep putting it off. Scanning negatives is very boring and time consuming because you can't do much else while you're doing it. Also, if you have any old audio recordings I suggest converting all of them to digital. I did that for a collection of about 50 hours of audio interviews done back in the 1970's and noticed that the tapes were starting to degrade. They lasted nearly 30 years so I guess I can't complain. Bill Boswell -Original Message- From: cranberryf...@cobridge.tv [mailto:cranberryf...@cobridge.tv] Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 7:52 AM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures Speaking of pictures... In the Marriage Record Webinar, Geoff pretty much said that he attaches a photo (scan of a document) to every source he does. I have been thinking about this. Right now I don't have any scans in my file and I have been working in Legacy for 6 years (FTM before that). Since census records are readily available, I just cite them. I do copy marriage, death, military, land records etc. and I keep those in binders (I have a binder for each type of source and then I file them alphabetically). I am trying to figure out the wisdom of scanning everything into Legacy. I would love to hear your opinions. I must say thinking about going back and scanning everything is rather daunting. michele Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
RE: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
I, like Ron, attach a copy of the source document to each source. This way when I am at a library or otherwise on the road I have access to the document even when my files are at home or I don't have access to the internet. Sometimes a web site may be taken down and you will be unable to locate the source. There are probably other reasons why it is a good idea to attach these documents and have them available with a few clicks of the mouse. bgj -Original Message- From: Ron Ferguson [mailto:ronfergy@tiscali.co.uk] Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 8:54 AM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures Michele, Just because one can do something in Legacy, and/or somebody uses a certain facility, does not mean that we all should adopt that method. As it happens I do link images to all my sources, but I do not also keep hard copies. I use this method so that I can rapidly check a census without having to find a piece of paper when I wish to check a source, and I do not have shelves of paper files. Others prefer to do both, or like yourself, just have the paper copy. At the end of the day it is your choice. Ron Ferguson http://www.fergys.co.uk/ -Original Message- From: cranberryf...@cobridge.tv Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 12:51 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures Speaking of pictures... In the Marriage Record Webinar, Geoff pretty much said that he attaches a photo (scan of a document) to every source he does. I have been thinking about this. Right now I don't have any scans in my file and I have been working in Legacy for 6 years (FTM before that). Since census records are readily available, I just cite them. I do copy marriage, death, military, land records etc. and I keep those in binders (I have a binder for each type of source and then I file them alphabetically). I am trying to figure out the wisdom of scanning everything into Legacy. I would love to hear your opinions. I must say thinking about going back and scanning everything is rather daunting. michele Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
Thanks, Ron. I appreciate your thoughts. If I were to ever do a book I wouldn't print EVERY document anyway, only selected ones, so I wouldn't need all of the documents in Legacy for that. I will continue using Legacy just as my facts database :) michele -Original Message- From: Ron Ferguson Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 8:53 AM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures Michele, Just because one can do something in Legacy, and/or somebody uses a certain facility, does not mean that we all should adopt that method. As it happens I do link images to all my sources, but I do not also keep hard copies. I use this method so that I can rapidly check a census without having to find a piece of paper when I wish to check a source, and I do not have shelves of paper files. Others prefer to do both, or like yourself, just have the paper copy. At the end of the day it is your choice. Ron Ferguson http://www.fergys.co.uk/ Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
Re: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures
Michele, Just because one can do something in Legacy, and/or somebody uses a certain facility, does not mean that we all should adopt that method. As it happens I do link images to all my sources, but I do not also keep hard copies. I use this method so that I can rapidly check a census without having to find a piece of paper when I wish to check a source, and I do not have shelves of paper files. Others prefer to do both, or like yourself, just have the paper copy. At the end of the day it is your choice. Ron Ferguson http://www.fergys.co.uk/ -Original Message- From: cranberryf...@cobridge.tv Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 12:51 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: [LegacyUG] Speaking of pictures Speaking of pictures... In the Marriage Record Webinar, Geoff pretty much said that he attaches a photo (scan of a document) to every source he does. I have been thinking about this. Right now I don't have any scans in my file and I have been working in Legacy for 6 years (FTM before that). Since census records are readily available, I just cite them. I do copy marriage, death, military, land records etc. and I keep those in binders (I have a binder for each type of source and then I file them alphabetically). I am trying to figure out the wisdom of scanning everything into Legacy. I would love to hear your opinions. I must say thinking about going back and scanning everything is rather daunting. michele Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
