Discussion in 'Research Hints' started by Dee Dee, Jul 9, 2013.
Very true, Sue.
And pray that the Vicar/Verger was no where near the communion wine or hard of hearing.
Likewise as a transcriber, if people saw what we have to work with at times,faded documents and awful hadwriting. Also, even if the transcript is "as is" there maybe mistakes made on the original.
Ah, well that's another topic. I could probably produce a whole book of examples where the person who produced the original record - or the surviving copy of the original record - was apparently drunk, deaf, daft, delinquent, disobedient or determined to hide something. In fact I think I am producing that book, it's my family history, if only they ever let me discover enough about the family to get it written!
Whilst on the subject of Ancestry Old & New Search, is anyone using the New Interactive Viewer instead of the Old (which is set to disappear some time soon)? I tried to save an image yesterday and again today which I have done many times in the past and saved them as jpegs (which seemed to be the default). The images I have tried to save now default to png format and there is no option to save as anything else. They do not save in the png format -- the size at 6kb is not large enough to hold an image.
I use a workaround by printing to CutePDF which enables me to save the image as a pdf file.
All the best,
I have sent the a note about jpg and png so will let you know their reply.
I have been reverting to basic view in order to save.......and on the new interactive it doesnt give you the view all which let you see others who have used image I find that useful for finding trees which often dont come up on searches or "hints"......emailed them but no reply.
I wonder if it is because I am in old search that I dont have this problem? I looked at the options and it said revert to basic viewer so I must have been in the new one. Or is it because I am using Windows XP?
Hadn't thought of that. I'm now in Windows 8 and this is the first time I have tried to save an image on my new computer. My previous computer was Windows XP.
All the best,
I e-mailed Ancestry-in fairness to them they always reply-they say jpg copies are available to download. I did not mention Windows 8 though but might be worth your while dropping them a mail. Worth pointing it out
I was using the new viewer yesterday and wanted to download an image of a multiple page record. As it wasn't the first page I got a message saying I couldn't download that image as it wasn't indexed. Reverting to the old viewer solved this --- but what happens when the old viewer is lost?
I do think it worthwhile pointing this out to them-before the old viewer disappears-they may take notice and incorporate the good stuff. Up to you of course
'tis done! Must say that they have never replied to any other issue I've raised with them (I recently reported incorrectly indexed pages ... the Epsom 1871 census if I remember correctly ... and they still haven't replied); though I do note that you get responses ... hmmm, extra-special member, obviously
Some may say pest!!
Yes I too have transcribed records. I However like to think I try to get them as accurate as possible. Some transcriptions I look at and wonder where on earth they got them from. You can often look at the original and it is nothing at all like what has been transcribed. Which site sends its records to India for transcribing?
I nearly had a heart attack (only a slight exaggeration) recently when I looked at some parish registers that had been added to Ancestry, and looked up the marriage of my 3x great grand parents to find the bride's father transcribed as Joseph instead of Hugh.
There was I thinking 'all that work on the Andrews family, I'll have to delete it all and start over'. But then I looked at the image ... and I suppose if you look at the image at the size it first appears on screen what you see is a distorted scrunched up kind of 'Joseph', however the simple process of enlarging the image to it's actual size remedies this optical illusion very nicely.
I did submit a correction, and I do wonder how many of these transcription errors are caused by people looking at the image at a size that suits the size of their computer screen, instead of at a magnification that truly reflects the real article.
I submitted a correction to Ancestry once, many years ago. They had my several times great grandmother as Sarah CROFS instead of Sarah CROSS.
I tried to explain that, back in those days, a double 's' was written to look like 'fs' but they were not having any. They very snootily told me that I was wrong and this could not be Sarah CROSS because the surname was definitely CROFS.
I never contacted them again.
I've submitted several corrections over the years and usually get an email a month or two later saying they have added the correction as an alternative.
just tried again to save with the new interactive viewer...........ziltch
had to revert to basic..........what is going to happen when they switch it off
I dont know......they dont seem to acknowledge the problem
I'm also lucky in that I've always had a reply & 'thankyou' when submitting corrections. I'm using the new viewer on Windlows 7 & just tried the 'save' -worked fine. I find the viewer a bit slow to adjust to clear the fuzzyness tho'. lot's of helpful little bits to it which I had hither-to ignored. Hitting the 'S' key for a quick sight of the source is handy, rather than going back & forth.
Separate names with a comma.