* Incorrect Mapping in Places

[bruntsfield]

I have just started using FH7 and like it (I also use FTM). However, I'm really disappointed with the inaccuracy of the mapping.

FTM is really accurate in this regard, and I have imported the Gedcom file from it, but the mapping results are poor in FH.

Is this because FTM uses Bing Maps?

[jbtapscott]

What Map Type do you have set in the FH Preferences?

[bruntsfield]

I have only two options - OpenStreetMap (default) and NLS Historical Maps of Great Britain.

I use the default.

[jbtapscott]

Have you tried using the Map Life Facts plugin?. I find it a more reliable option than the mapping built in to FH, although its reliability will obviously depend on the structure and location of your Places.

[tatewise]

Welcome to the FHUG bruntsfield.
Certainly, different mapping geocoders have different accuracies and also depend on the place details provided.
I think FH is significantly cheaper than FTM and uses a mapping geocoder that I believe is free of licence fees, whereas I suspect some of the FTM cost may be Bing Maps licence fees. Google Maps also charge licence fees.

I don't think the displayed Map Type affects the geocoding. See the FH Help > About Family Historian... and its link to https://www.family-historian.co.uk/geocoding that provides details.

See the FHUG Knowledge Base on Working with Places and Addresses that may give you some options to consider.

[AdrianBruce]

Have you tried using the Map Life Facts plugin?. I find it a more reliable option than the mapping built in to FH, ...

I'd agree with Brent. Though as I recall, it is more hassle to set up if you need the (free) Google licence.

A couple of things if I may - firstly you need to ensure that your place-names are complete according to today's standards. I had some place names ending in "Victoria" (because this was the colony of Victoria prior to the formation of the Commonwealth of Australia). I'd not checked the resulting coordinates on a map and found that whichever geocoding system I had used, had decided that I meant Victoria in British Columbia. The key there is to leave the "proper" place name ending in "Victoria" but add a Standardized place name (in the same Place record) ending in "Victoria, Australia".

Secondly, as implied above, check the result on a map as you're going along. Probably not viable if you're importing a mass, but for small numbers of additions or as an audit, it's do-able.

Oh - and In Preferences / Map Window, tick "Block Refresh for Non-tentative Geocodes". Took me ages to work out what it means, but it's basically, "If you got it right once, don't do it again (and mess it up)". This applies particularly if you've used the Geocoding as a base but then "nudged" the coordinates around on the map.

[bruntsfield]

Thanks for the replies. I'll look at the various suggestions.

As I say, the FTM places are almost 100% accurate and I had hoped they'd be carried across.

[tatewise]

They may be carried across but possibly not in the GEDCOM format preferred by FH.
See Import from FTM - UDFs .MAP, .MAP.LATI and .MAP.LONG (15504) that is a similar topic.

BTW: Did you see the FHUG Knowledge Base Importing to Family Historian advice for Import from Family Tree Maker (FTM)?