Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - I forget

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 9
1
Phew! Thanks Guy, that's given me a lot to think about. I think you've probably also made my husband happy as I won't be printing out as many in future.  Though I guess I'm going to need the money to sort out the scanning side. 

Have to say it's strange for me to hear that hard copy isn't the extra peace of mind back up I thought it was (having read so much about how computer files are not to be trusted, become obsolete and can be lost so easily).

*goes off to read more about optical resolution and file types and rethink my whole strategy*
 :o

This is getting more complicated than I thought. eeek!

I forget

 

2
 Thanks Gadget,
I'll stick to Tiff and I know my scanner has it as an option.
 :)

Oh ok, that is interesting, learn something new every day.

3
Thank you Gadget,

I will be looking into buying more storage asap. I have stuff copied on flash drives and on photobox (plus in process of copying onto another computer), but definitely need to do more. (want to leave a copy with a relative 'off site' as well). I am getting a bit hung up on durability of SSD vs. cheaper HDD.   But still, my husband has bought a cheap one, which will do for now.


Thank you Guy,

That is a very comprehensive answer.  :)

I think I'm pretty sussed on what I need to do about the prints (ie: photos from negatives etc, pre dating digital): let me know if I have missed something...

Scan at highest resolution possible.
I've not heard of DNG before, but I've got TIFF as an option on my (old) scanner) I'll need to check what the scanner is capable of and if I might need to invest in a new one that does negatives as well.
Keep all originals in archive conditions as much as I can.
Print 'new' copies of a small selection of the best for family enjoyment.
Keep several copies of the scanned files.


However, can I please clarify your opinion on digital camera pictures:

Copy the original files in the original formats and keep as many copies as possible, check regularly

Is that it? So is printing out digital camera pictures to keep them as a 'hardcopy' of these files a waste of time?
I always thought 'hard copies' was a good back up? (hence boxes of all the prints cluttering my shelves, I also print out downloaded census sheets etc). 

The alternative is to only print out a small selection of the 'best' and hope that the multiple copies of files will be sufficient. (which would make my husband happier!!! Maybe I just need a museum standard shed  ;D ;D )

If I have misunderstood anything, please let me know.  :-)

Cheers.

4
Thank you Gadget and Imfamilyresearch,

That is really helpful.
 
I don't really want to re-scan,  I did most at 300 with the first black and white albums in TIFF,  (as this was said to be the best compromise between size and quality at the time).  A lot of them are tiny, so higher scans for them will be better.

I will need some serious storage though, as I don't think my desktop can take all the photos in higher res TIFF.
But these are precious photos and I don't want to keep re-scanning as it will damage them.  So if I'm doing it twice, this must be it.  I still have over 6 albums worth of family photos to do (in colour) and more of my own, which haven't been scanned as yet.

Think I'll need to re-read that link and see what storage I'm going to need.  (yikes!)

5
Thank you,

Just as a side issue, what do you recommend for scanning old/non digital prints these days?
ie: dpi  is '300' ok? (with 100 for documents) which was the 'standard' when I scanned most of the black and white photos we have. Or should it be 600? 
I don't want to be re-scanning every few years (plus I haven't even started on the colour photos yet. I need to get my external hard drives sorted out ready.)

Best file type?  Tiff or Jpeg?  (I've heard that Giff is being superceded by PNG or some such.)
I've been trying to find out if there is an 'archiving standard' I could adhere to for scanning.
 

6
Hello  :),

I'm stopping my FH research in order to try (desperately) to return to archiving my collection of old and newer photos.  I feel like I've at least made some progress on the 'old prints', (storing in archive quality boxes, scanning  etc) but have realised, with some panic, that my 'new' photos taken with digital cameras, have not had the same thought or storage.

I have been musing on hard drive types etc, and multiple copies of my files, but have also been trying to print 'hard copies' of many of these digital prints as another (safer?) way of storage. (I may try and do another post on file storage at some point)

My practice has been to get the photos printed by big well tested commercial printing companies, such as Photobox, Snapfish/Boots, etc. I have extensively read reviews and tried them out. Ending up with Photobox as my 'go to' printing company. (there are smaller 'better' professional printers but they are too expensive for the sheer volume i have printed over the years).

The idea being that they can afford better printing machinery and dyes than i can. The fading of several 'printed at home' on our inkjet printers (admittedly ones that are on the wall) has put me off home printing (that and the cost).

On browsing some photography forums (all too technical for me) I find warnings that 'pretty much all commercially printed photos fade badly in recent accelerated ageing tests' and that 'home printing is better'. With certain printers being mentioned as 'better'.

This surprised me greatly. 

But then I haven't 'updated' any of my practices in printing and storing modern prints in over 10 years.

So my question is:

From a purely archiving point of view, what is best?
Printing your digital photos from a commercial printer   ???
or printing at home?   ???

Also, are 'photo books' and 'canvas's', which are so heavily promoted these days, better/worse/ the same for keeping those precious prints long term.   ???

Looking at the old black and white pictures, which have survived pretty well, vs. some dreadfully faded 1970's prints, but then some better ones from the 1980's, how do the modern inks/papers compare?  (I mean since digital has taken over).

I suppose I really want to know if it's a waste of time/money me printing so many out, or if I should just print a small selection that the family can enjoy as photobooks or smaller albums (My husband has been 'commenting' on the number of albums and boxes stuffed full of prints that line so many of our book shelves) and if so, what printing is the best one to buy and what to look out for.   ???

Help!




7
Hello Katherine
Not sure how you get her to open up, except to show interest and sensitivity about her memories.
She may have reasons for not talking and you may just have to accept it.
I would only suggest maybe getting photos out and having a chat.

Or asking if someone else in the family is interested in talking.

In the meantime you can just use what you have and do research like any family historian assuming nothing and looking for the evidence.

I found that as I did my own research that my dad who stated he was not interested, became interested as I found out stuff and would occasionally show him and ask about photos etc. But I never got a lot from him, but what I did I really appreciate.

Back to your question about the name Harris, yes it is a traveller name, but it is also a very common non traveller name too.

I’m not sure why you have picked my post but if you have reason to believe she is related to Harris families travelling in East Anglia then go to reply 7 in this thread where there is a link to a much more involved thread that includes Harris.

But I would suggest starting a new thread on the traveller board (which that link will take you to). Put what information you are certain of and I’m sure one of the experienced researchers will point you in the right direction.

There is even a book about the Harris families, but it doesn’t have much about my line.

Honestly I have found it easier to learn about researching family history by starting on my non traveller lines first as they are generally easier to find .

Good luck

8
Thank you Sarah.  :)

9
World War Two / Re: military pic, Australian/NZ? looks WW2?, person unknown :-(
« on: Tuesday 10 October 17 15:02 BST (UK)  »
ok, I've had a 'look round' and although I'm sure I used to be able to modify a title of a thread I'd started, I just can't find how to do it now.

Is there a way to do that?  If not, should I start again?   
I wanted to replace the title with:
Military pic, WW2 Royal Artillery, possibly S. Staffs, person unknown.

So that the Rootschat military specialists who know about this might spot the query. 

Thank you.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 9