* Migrating from TMG - taking the plunge

[A Mean Lad]

After many, many years of using TMG (The Master Genealogist) from versions 3 to 9 and highly customising it to produce reasonable (if still slightly stilted) extensive narrative to upload automatically to my website via SecondSite, I have the choice of keeping at it while it is now unsupported or switching to a new product. Family Historian seems to be a front runner. I was always slightly perturbed at the amount of time I spent trying to customise the automatic sentence generation to a state where the end product was acceptable and without repetitively repeated phrases. I think now that a free form (humanly generated) text strictly adhering to rules about making sure all sources are correctly recorded and referenced with footnotes would be better.

I am encouraged by scanning through the comments on this forum regarding FH plugins. Can anyone set my mind at ease regarding the ability of FH to record the different levels of sources - the repository, the source reference, limited text from the source itself, comments that I as user have added to the source. Also the ability to add a repository and source once and then be referenced many times whilst varying the reference, text, comments, etc.; the generation of lists of repositories, sources, bibliographies and so on?

I'd like to generate a reasonable book and website from the one tool; and of course I'm not expecting anyone to tell me how to do it - just that they think it is feasible.

I guess I'm thinking that transferring one person at a time would work best to avoid ending up with a horrible mess (groan).

Many thanks for reading this far.

[jimlad68]

I came from TMG with a no frills GEDCOM file (fairly easy), before FHv6 and the much better direct import. You should see lots of topics on this forum. But firstly I would experiment with a direct import. See what it looks like, then go back to TMG and "bulk" amend anything obvious with say TMG Utility. (Tidy up/ rename those odd Events, places etc)

As for reports and the web etc, that is very personal and subjective. Some prefer lots of narrative like sentences to create a story or similar, but I find them very repetitive and get in the way of the facts. I usually amend my sentences to make them very basic (BORN - date, place etc). Although I like the built in FH CD/Web creation (especially with the "improve" plugin), many people export to a different platform (e.g. TNG). The other thing to consider coming from TMG is to look closely at Ancestral Sources and "Method 1" sources, to replace the TMG Witnesses, to me far more logical, standard Gedcom and easier to manage.

Edit, P.S. not forgetting how_to:import_from_tmg|> Import from The Master Genealogist (TMG)

[tatewise]

Welcome to the FHUG.

The simple answer is "YES" you can do that, but as Jim says it is somewhat subjective. Some say the narrative sentence structures are a bit repetitive, but they are now much more customisable than in previous versions of FH.

Checkout how_to:key_features_for_newcomers|> Key Features for Newcomers which covers many of your points, especially Sources Methods 1 & 2. Experiment with the Family Historian Sample Project for samples of Reports and Diagrams. Experiment with Ancestral Sources.

See how_to:import_from_tmg|> Import from The Master Genealogist (TMG) for direct import. If you can create a small, say one family, database in TMG, then import that. One person will not let you explore all the features.

See links:index|> Member Web Sites and look at member Family Historian web sites, which are the ones with HOME | STATISTICS | CONTACT | INDEX tabs across the top.

[jbtapscott]

I would fully endorse Jim's recommendation to try the imports and then, where necessary, modify the data in TMG before your "final" import. I did well over two dozen trial imports (initially, the GEDCOM import and then, when it became available, the Direct import) - from each import I identified data that wasn't as I wanted it (in FH) and then made changes in TMG where possible before trying again.

I still ended up with a longish list of "manual" changes to make once the final data import was completed, but I took the view that I needed to embrace "the FH way" for data and try to get my data "right" from the start rather than constantly having to have exceptions in processing / reports. Patience is the watchword I think!

[AdrianBruce]

Re "the different levels of sources" - depending on where the relevant data gets put, the answer is, I think (I only say "think" because it depends exactly what you mean), yes, with the exception of bibliographies. FH doesn't do them. It will, of course, produce a list of source-records that can be hacked up into a bibliography and inserted somewhere but if you have a source-record per census-schedule, say, that's unlikely to be what you want.

Whether any of our American cousins may comment from experience of a point of view of trying to get to Evidence Explained compatible formats, I don't know...

[A Mean Lad]

Many thanks FH6 users. No negative comment received so I think this is my way forward, and I'll bear in mind the admirable sentiment, 'embrace "the FH way'. I appreciate your responses.