Family Historian User Group

Aye Mike,

Thank you and all the other correspondents for your contributions to this thread and the thread of 'Barnowl' of 26th December 2015 15:58.

I have been a user of FH since v2 in the early 2000's and when I say "user", I mean in the simplest terms! Enter the name and other attribute data, but no connection to individuals of images or documents etc. I updated to v6.04 of FH, when it first came out, but "time and tide" have been against me using it.

Whilst I use Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for my work and can find my way about having used a variety of software since the late 1980's; may I ask that any answers are 'Simple' in that I don't use C++, Python or even DOS! I'm the technical/grubby hands side of partnerships, with fluent database programmers, they write the code and I break it, if the result doesn't make for ease of use in day to day data input or doesn't result in easy interpretation of the data it puts people off using it. I would like some guidance on a basic 'Folder' structure please; so that if I make links to files (images, documents, etc) I do not have to restore them as my 'Folder' structure needs re-arranging, due to new individuals or families. I suspect after reading the "Organise your files, Sub Folder Structure" on this forum that the power of 'Search' is used rather than my preferred:

Hard Drive
Family History
GED
Family surname
Family [Documents, images, certificates for family groups in date order "yyyy-mm-dd", even if only by "yyyy"]
Individual [Documents, images, certificates for individuals in date order "yyyy-mm-dd", even if only by "yyyy"]

I have also read about "Ancestral Sources" (AS) on this FHUG and the AS site and can see that it makes multiple entries easier, I am not sure if my folder layout would work with it or cause problems?

Finally, in the 'Advanced Guide' section of the FHUG I spied the 'Create a locations database of place and address details'. Now this sounds like "Manna from Heaven" as I have a lot of individuals whom travelled widely and a lot of images and documents that need to be linked to them. But, "How" and "When" does this information get entered in the data entry sequence? And if I were to use AS, would this make this a separate data entry operation?

I suppose I'm similar to Darryl, with my data, but without the coding skills or website consideration at the moment, though the latter is definitely a consideration, probably using 'WordPress'. Any comments would be welcome.

I apologise for my "procrastination = stagnation" and thank you for your time to consider my questions. Are you a reiving Scott?

My regards, Bill

Bill, I'm not sure these words will be of much help, more consolation to some of your points.

I have been disheartened in recent years that many software products "for the masses" have become designed for mobiles, and PC users are expected to just go along with the dumbed down screens and paucity of actual data on a screen. That is great for out and about and "browsing", but I find inputting and "work" almost impossible on these devices, and the software they use. You can't beat a keyboard and mouse.

So it seems increasingly that there are 2 types of software, simplistic where you have to accept what the software developer gives you, and often decides what you want (e.g. Facebook Top Stories), dubious backups, limited portability of data etc. OR PC based software that is often of a complicated nature and increasingly less development. This seems to fall into 2 camps of "instant/current/lossy" information as opposed to medium to long term information and retention.

I would put FH into the latter, and as I suspect genealogy programs have a relatively lower user base, I would much rather have one good developing product with good "portability" features than one that tried to be all things to all people which I suspect would have big development costs.

I would also put FH into the "middling" category, in that as well as being "a programmer's paradise" it can be used for serious data manipulation without being too technical, and it is very important that it stays that way, as, as with any technology, the vast majority of users have no idea what is happening "inside the machine", and if they get the results, fine.

The FHUG forum is wonderful, but can be very technically daunting. So we all need to take a stance, which you can change later, to decide at what technical level you want to jump in, get stuck in, and accept the results available.

Bill, I have started a new thread because your questions are going in a new direction.

It sounds like you have upgraded directly from FH V2 to FH V6 in which case I wonder if you have realised the need to adopt the Project structure introduced with FH V4?

If my guess is correct, then please confirm, and that can be dealt with first.
Projects can accommodate a folder structure based on your current structure.

There are potential risks in changing your folder and file structure. Changes may break the links between the FH Media records and the filenames themselves. But FH V6.1 due to be released soon has a new feature that should automatically repair such broken links.

Once the Project structure is adopted, then Ancestral Sources will work with any folder structure.

FH V6 has Place records that may be sufficient to hold the details you require without needing the FHUG Advanced feature, that was devised before FH V6 was released.

When the above more basic issues have been resolved, then questions about a Place database, and websites can be considered.

Good evening Jim and Mike,

Thank you both for your prompt replies.

Jim's statement:

The FHUG forum is wonderful, but can be very technically daunting. So we all need to take a stance, which you can change later, to decide at what technical level you want to jump in, get stuck in, and accept the results available.

That sums it up for me Jim. I use a Desktop PC, a Canon 9000 scanner, digital camera, old photographs, libraries, paper notes and online archives, NOT the "Family Tree" parts of them. As others have mentioned elsewhere on FHUG, so often when taking a sneak peek at an online tree (of which you are part!), you know that it is just plain wrong.

Mike, I understand why you instigated a new 'Thread' and title that is more appropriate than my initial try and in reply to your questions:

It sounds like you have upgraded directly from FH V2 to FH V6 in which case I wonder if you have realised the need to adopt the Project structure introduced with FH V4?

I made the upgrade from v2 to v4 and then on to v5 before taking on v6 as it appeared to have all the basic "bells and whistles" that I would need. However, because of my work commitments, I have only used the software infrequently up to now and omitted to be scrupulous in my data entry!

Your comforting words about 'Folder' structure are good to read and I understand that moving 'Folders' removes 'data links'. I have spent many 'happy' hours repairing data links in ESRI products so that I can then view data, maps and diagrams as the originator intended and also the tedium of completing badly written and inappropriate 'Metadata' input screens. By likening 'Sources' and 'Citations' to GIS 'Metadata' I find it easier to comprehend this process, that in the past would have been the paper notes and card index system that my late Mother used when she started this "adventure" over 20 years ago!

I will also investigate more thoroughly, the 'Place' records that you mention, I am sure it will suffice my needs, rather than adding complication.

Having written and posted my query, I changed my 'Search' words and did come up with this useful thread; workflow and getting organized (10946) and as 'jmurphy' suggests in that 'Topic' and 'jimlad68' suggests in this thread, "crack on", and get my 'Metadata' entry sorted, rather than suffering from my "paralysis by analysis".

And by the way Mike; Reiver or no?

Good health in 2016.

My regards, Bill

Bill, I asked about FH Project structure, because your preferred hierarchy made no mention of FH Project nor its Media folder that are essential for 'safe' FH Project management.

Sorry Bill, I do not understand the question: "And by the way Mike; Reiver or no?"
If it answers the question, my surname is Tate and my wife's maiden surname is Scott and neither of us have any ancestral connection with Scotland that I have discovered.

Mike,

Thank you for your further querying of my folder structure.

Hard Drive
Family History
GED
Family surname
Family [Documents, images, certificates for family groups in date order "yyyy-mm-dd", even if only by "yyyy"]
Individual [Documents, images, certificates for individuals in date order "yyyy-mm-dd", even if only by "yyyy"]

I understand "Why?" as my 'Family_History" folder and its sub folders are on a separate hard drive (E:) in my Desktop PC from my (C:) drive that I use for MSWindows and Programme folders alone. Putting everything onto a single hard drive and then adding everything to the 'My*' Folders does not appear to be a good idea to me. So, I keep my data separate on another hard drive and then back this up again onto another hard drive using 'SyncToy 2.1' at regular intervals. Centralised tape data backup, without indexing has made me very wary of data going AWOL!

My intention was to place the 'Family Historian Projects' folder in my proposed 'Family History' folder, but separate from the 'Family surname' folders hierarchy. I suspect that you would advise individual 'Family Projects' be stored in the 'Family surname' folders for good housekeeping and backup ease? Your comments would be welcome.

Having read the 'Media Records' section of the FH Help, I understand why you ask where I propose to place this folder in the hierarchy. In a wee trial linking images to individuals, I selected to create a link to the image stored 'elsewhere' on my E: drive, but can appreciate why it would be better to keep all the media within the 'Project Folder' on the E: drive, so as to make the management of the 'Projects' easier. This will entail duplication of some 'Media Records' on my hard drives, but not within the GEDCOM data. Multi-terrabyte data storage is cheap, compared with the late '80's!

So, the folder structure would be:
Family History
Family surname
Family_FH Project_Media [Documents, images, certificates for family groups in date order "yyyy-mm-dd", even if only by "yyyy"]
Individual [Documents, images, certificates for individuals in date order "yyyy-mm-dd", even if only by "yyyy"]
I am now unsure about retaining the 'Individual' level of folders in the structure!

As for my wee ambiguous query "And by the way Mike; Reiver or no?". You have assumed correctly that I was wondering if either your Tate ancestors or your wifes Scott ancestors came from the Scottish Borders. I understand the Tate spelling is generally from the English side of the Border, with Tait being more generally used by the reiving clan from the Innerleithen/Peebles area. This latter spelling is also frequent in the Orkney and Shetland Isles. The Scott's too, with their Duke of Buccleuch family amongst many others, whom were reiving families of the Scottish Border, but not exclusively. My wifes lineage is entwined with the Scott's of Ettrick and "Oh what a tangled web we weave: When first we practise to deceive!"

My regards, Bill

Bill, many users, including me, relocate the Family Historian Projects folder from its default C: drive My Documents folder onto another drive, for exactly the reasons you give. That is explained in how_to:v4:understanding_projects|> Understanding Projects and the Family Historian Sample Project acts as a model.

Unless there are very strong reasons against it, I would advise you have just one Project for everyone, and lets say that Project name is My Ancestry.

Then the Project folder structure for media would be:
E:\Family History\Family Historian Projects\My Ancestry\My Ancestry.fh_data\Media\
You can arrange sub-folders within that Media folder to suit yourself.

A major benefit of using the Media folder 'relative file links' within the FH Media records, is that you can move the Family Historian Projects folder and its contents to another drive, or another PC, without breaking any of the Media file links.

Keeping a duplicate set of Media files/records elsewhere outside FH Projects is quite a common belt & braces strategy.

For backups, many users employ cloud storage services such as Dropbox and OneDrive by locating the Family Historian Projects folder within the Dropbox or OneDrive folder (which can be on any drive).

Mike,

That's grand, thank you very much for your time and I apologies for the "round the houses" correspondence, but that makes it very clear in my mind and I hope for others whom may read this thread.

Now for some genealogy!

My regards, Bill