* Lookup Ancestry BMD Records

[victor]

Talking about BMD records Ancestry have been transcribing these and the results are shown in a 'panel'. I have been using Snap my screen over the area of the 'panel'. I then go to the person on FH and under birth use the media to copy and paste what I have saved on snap my screen. I don't have to type anything from the GRO index as all the details are in that 'panel'

I do the same for baptisms where these have been transcribed. If there is an image of the baptism page I open that and use snap my screen over the baptism area. This way I don't need to use AS and it saves time. But I do use AS if the child is a close relative

I would welcome any views over what I have been doing or will it be better to use the BMD plugin from Look up missing BMD Plugin (14319).

[tatewise]

Victor, I have started a new thread as this topic is diverging from the Look up missing BMD Plugin (14319) posting.

SnapMyScreen sounds like a screenshot capture tool that you have installed, despite Windows coming with its own free fhugdownloads:contents:utility_windows_snipping_tool|> Utility ~ Windows Snipping Tool.

With a tool like that, any transcripts will only be a photographic image, rather than searchable text.
Also, I suspect the resolution of the images will depend on the resolution of your monitor screen, and may make them difficult to read.
Ancestry has document image download options and FH V6 has Drag & Drop as well as Copy & Paste features for downloading images and text as explained in how_to:copy_paste_and_drag_drop|> Copy & Paste and Drag & Drop which will use full resolution for images.

AS creates a Source record for each BMD transcript & image, then creates multiple BMD Events each with a Citation of that Source record.
It sounds like you are linking the SnapMyScreen images directly to BMD Events and not using the Source record tactics, which will result in an inconsistently structured database.

The above discussion has little to do with the Lookup Missing BMD Records Plugin.
There are various ways of discovering online records:

• Login to Ancestry or FMP or any other genealogy website and search manually.
• Use the FH V6 hints from MyHeritage or FMP as per how_to:internet_data_matches|> Internet Data Matches.
• Use the Lookup Missing BMD Records Plugin to initiate searches in Ancestry or FMP.

Once you have found the records, then the download and data entry tactics described above come into play.

[victor]

Apologise for including this in the other thread I was just thinking in terms of BMD and also to show an alternative which others may not be aware of.
As to the source record I don't regard the GRO index as a real source record. I treat these as secondary or even questionable information (depending on how sure I can be)

When I obtain the certificates I use these as the source record and this are processed by AS method.

I have been happy with snap my screen but admit I have not looked at it in narrative report. I think I have what you report about Microsoft Windows but haven't tested it out yet. Will have to give it a go.

I can't read what you have written as it is not on display with this reply. I may give another reply when I have read it again

Victor

[tatewise]

Firstly, to reveal previous Forum replies while you are replying, either use the scroll bar on the right below Expand view, or click Expand view and scroll the whole browser window.

A GRO Index is most definitely a real Source record.
The doubt is whether the person listed is the person in your tree, but that may be said about some GRO Certificates.
However, those GRO documents only go back to 1837 in UK, and Parish Registers for Baptism, Marriage & Burial must be used before then. You specifically mentioned Baptisms and I got the impression you only used AS for close relatives.
It may be quicker in the short term to bypass AS, but later on you may wish you had been more consistent.

As I said, any screen capture utility will be constrained to your monitor resolution, whereas a download will use the full resolution of the original image.

[victor]

When I talk about screen capture that is only what has been transcribed on ancestry. This includes baptisms where there is no image available.

How you regards the GRO index is fine. I think of it as secondary simply because it is not an image. The image itself is primary. There are errors and omissions from the GRO index. Omissions because a register office hadn't sent the details. My mother's two sisters marriages are not on the GRO index but I obtained the certificates from the local register office.
I have encountered errors one was when a name was spelt Ward when it should be Waud. To be fair this was a FreeBMD transcription but then most of the names are FreeBMD transcribed. YorkshireBMD did the correct spelling

You specifically mentioned Baptisms and I got the impression you only used AS for close relatives.

Some baptism details I have come across on Ancestry were only transcribed. That is no image was available. Hence I use snap my screen until I come across an image. I thnk the snap my screen image will appear where the date of baptism is shown in the project file whilst the image will appear in the appendix. I am guessing her as I have not carriied out a narrative report since I started using this

We all have our thoughts and I have been consistent in how I have done things.

Victor

[tatewise]

Victor, I have moved this to the General Usage Forum because it is no longer discussing Plugins.

I don't quite understand your point about GRO Index records. Wherever I have searched on Ancestry, FMP, FreeBMD, etc, their textual transcript is accompanied by a document image of the original GRO Index page, which I always study to check for transcription errors, and then report them. Yes, there are sometimes omissions and other errors, but that happens in every type of historical document including Certificates.

I am surprised when you say you "have not carried out a narrative report". I know you are familiar with Narrative Reports because you have posted questions about them, and it appears you have been using FH for many years. So one important check to perform is that whatever recording methods you use will appear to your satisfaction in reports.

Anyway, I hope you now understand that the process of capturing records is quite distinct from the process of search for records, whether by manual methods, by using Focus Window 'hints', or by using FH Plugins.

[Valkrider]

@Victor

Don't forget you can highlight that transcribed text and copy and paste it into FH. This gives you editable text that you can then use in your reports and saves the overhead and limitations of the screengrab.

[victor]

Thanks Colin
I have no wish to edit the text it is all fine as it is so an image will do.
If I ever decide to edit it I could type what it said and then delete the image though it is unlikely that I will do.

Victor

[davidf]

How you regards the GRO index is fine. I think of it as secondary simply because it is not an image. The image itself is primary.

I'm inclined to agree, indices are secondary as they index other documents. If the image is of the original document, I would agree that it is primary because it is the document created to record the event.

With BMD we have to be a little careful. The certificates from GRO, I believe can be certified transcriptions (therefore secondary despite their "official" status)! Local record offices will often provide an actual copy (photo or reprographic) of the original document (effectively primary if you trust the copying process).

Primary / Secondary unfortunately is not necessarily a consistent proxy for reliable / unreliable.