Reducing space between generations in charts

WBFamHist · Post by **WBFamHist** » 17 May 2005 19:12

Is there any way of reducing the amount of space between generations on charts in order to fit more generations onto a page.

ID:925

YouTube · Post by **Jane** » 17 May 2005 19:40

Which chart are you using? is it the boxes which are too deep or do you have lots of rows per generation set on the All relatives chart?

Have you tried right click draging the page corner to reduce the diagram size and increase the rows per page?

Post by **Guest** » 27 Oct 2005 18:28

I find that it is not the size of the boxes, it is the legnth of the lines joining the generations wi=hich make the diagrams so big, can these be reduced?

Post by **Guest** » 27 Oct 2005 18:32

The problem I find is that it is not the size of the boxes that causes the diagrames to be large, it is the length of the lines joining the generations. Is ther any way of shortening these sometimes?

YouTube · Post by **Jane** » 27 Oct 2005 18:36

Thats normally a function of the generations down from ancestors on an all relatives chart. You might try playing with some of those options to minimise the drops.

Post by **Guest** » 27 Oct 2005 19:13

please can you tell me what steps I need to take to do this? as you can probably tell I am new to this and still finding my way around the various fucntions and I do not want to mess up everything.

YouTube · Post by **Jane** » 27 Oct 2005 19:22

One thing with FH on most sections there is a installation settings button. If you mess it up just press the button to reset that section back again.

I presume we are talking about the All relatives chart?

Try hitting the installation settings on the first tab and let me know if the chart is still too spread out.

ganstey · Post by **ganstey** » 28 Oct 2005 08:50

I've been pondering the same thing as Ruth. The problem is that on the All Relatives diagram it uses 2 rows per generation. The options dialog won't allow you to enter a value of 1. This wastes a lot of space on the paper, meaning that for most of my diagrams I have to print on two sheets. I tried resizing so that the whole diagram fitted on a single sheet, but then the text was too small.

Is there a reason why 2 rows per generation is the minimum, or is this a 'quirk'? [confused]

G

YouTube · Post by **Jane** » 28 Oct 2005 09:10

Because FH shows cousins on a different line from siblings makes 2 the minimum for All relations reports.

Obviously Hourglass charts are much more compact as they show less of the peripheral family members.

WBFamHist · Post by **WBFamHist** » 28 Oct 2005 09:11

I've just read the follow-up comments from Ruth and Jane to my question on reducing the vertical size of charts.

My problem is purely the length of the lines between generation boxes, which I would like to reduce so that you can get more generations on a page.

I've tried to reduce the line size without success. Is there a simple answer to this or would a design change be necessary?

YouTube · Post by **Jane** » 28 Oct 2005 20:32

Have you tried all the different configurations changing the generations down etc.

If so then you have probably mimimised the gaps on the current version of FH

Fiona · Post by **Fiona** » 29 Oct 2005 12:08

I have a similar problem with the ancestors chart but it's the boxes that are the problem. I have reduced the dimensions as far as I can, but there is still a big gap at the bottom of the box. Am I missing something?

Sorry to muscle in on your question!

pwe · Post by **pwe** » 29 Oct 2005 19:49

If you go to 'diagrams' 'options' and then to 'dimensions' you can adjust the vertical distances. Does this achieve what you are looking for?

Peter E

Post by **Guest** » 30 Oct 2005 21:16

This is something I am trying to resolve as well. I have tried the suggestions for box size, but there is not a clear way of adjusting the box so that all the data I want is there without a hugh gap at the bottom. Unless I have missed it, where is something like 'footer' size on the vertical dimensions options? I cannot understand what the other dimensions can mean, as when I tinker with them nothing seems to change. Any further suggestions?

Family Historian User Group