Bryman
LostCousins Megastar
Don't worry if that happens, you can always ask all over again, and again, and . . . It is even possible that you might get the same answer!
-
Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!
-
It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here
Do you still print on Paper?
- Thread starter Tim
- Start date
Don't worry if that happens, you can always ask all over again, and again, and . . . It is even possible that you might get the same answer!
Gillian
LostCousins Star
Which reminds me of advice given by countless efficient family researchers (including, of course, Peter): remember to record everything you look up irrespective of whether it helps your research or not. Every now and then I start doing just. However, the spirit is willing but the flesh (kind of) is weak.
emjay
LostCousins Member
Especially when you are 'on a roll' and just want to get on with new discoveries.
I have just invested in folders for organising and storing paper documents, mostly certs. Are you all really saying that having them digitised is best and makes paper redundant? I'm not at all sure I trust computers that much, although I do have a lot of info stored on mine. So now I have to decide whether to spend time scanning everything I haven't so far, or just continue to organise these papers in a comprehensible date format. One advantage is sharing the info side by side with visiting family. Having said that, I'm not at all sure anyone in the family will be interested when I'm gone.
As long as the paper is of archival quality, as long as you use an ink that isn't going to smudge, or fade, as long as it doesn't get wet or burned, or stolen, or misplaced, or thrown away by mistake.... I think I'll stick to digital copies, thank you very much.
Bob Spiers
LostCousins Superstar
It is fine to take note of other opinions Gillian, but always remember you are free to agree or disagree. You have your reasons they have theirs. Apart from photos -which mostly these days arrive in digital format and remain stored as such - I too prefer to have print copies of everything I deem important. My wife, whose memory is not the best, would be lost without print reminders of appointments and such and I without a print off for my notice board of something I need to remember.
My filing cabinet alongside my desk which - considering its been there some years - is crammed to the gills with household files containing paperwork. Most as supplied, but with print-outs of responses. My Genealogical files are labelled and stored in cardboard boxes, and it quite regularly turned over and perused. So much so, time flies when I get carried away reading something that was not part of the reason for my search in the first place.
I do applaud receiving Statements and Invoices in digital format as I have accounting software to record the information they offer, and I often agree to receiving things in email format (rather than by post), as they too can be printed off and filed. On the other hand, I always insist on hard copy for magazines and stuff, regardless of whether available in digital format. My wife despite having a Kindle/Tablet will not read books that way and regularly uses the Library and buys second hand books from Charity Shops.
None of the above makes me an ecological denier just that I make up my own mind about what matters to the environment and what matters to me. Sometimes both sides balance, so for instance I tear unwanted print outs into strips to use for jotting down notes, and always assign unwanted paperwork to the Recycling Bin. Each to his or her own is what matters.
Pauline
LostCousins Megastar
I don't see any need to view this as an either/or. Although home computers in some shape or form have been around for most of my adult life, the ability to make decent quality digital copies is more recent. Consequently, I have amassed quite a lot of paper in the years since I started my family history, and it is debatable how practical it would be to try and digitise it all.
The actual process of scanning would likely take me many months or years to complete, and would require an awful lot of digital storage. Then it would all need to be backed up, and for anyone without access to superfast broadband, backing it all up to the cloud might take another year or two! At the same time, Peter and others are quite correct in saying that ordinary paper doesn't last for ever, and we do need to be careful how we store our paper documents.
My current practice (which works for me but isn't necessarily right for anyone else) is to do a bit of both. I have digitised some of my paper copies, focusing on those which are in more immediate danger of deteriorating or are particularly important to me. But I don't get rid of any paper copies I've digitised - particularly those I've paid for.
At the same time, although I often like to have printed copies of documents that I've acquired in digital format, I don't then delete the digital copies.
I guess at the end of the day it comes down to personal preference, the format of what we already have and the practicalities of digitising a large paper archive.
But my personal opinion is that paper isn't going to become redundant quite yet.
I have paper copies of many things. But I don't aim to have a complete collection on paper because, apart from anything else, it would take up too much space.
The advantage of digital records is that they can be easily, cheaply, and quickly copied and - should technology advance - they can be easily converted. To copy thousands of sheets of paper would take so long that most people wouldn't even attempt it.
At this point in time I don't have digital copies of all my paper records - again it's a question of time. But it is on my to do list, because otherwise I'm leaving the problem for the next generation of researchers.
The advantage of digital records is that they can be easily, cheaply, and quickly copied and - should technology advance - they can be easily converted. To copy thousands of sheets of paper would take so long that most people wouldn't even attempt it.
At this point in time I don't have digital copies of all my paper records - again it's a question of time. But it is on my to do list, because otherwise I'm leaving the problem for the next generation of researchers.
Thanks for all your views on this. I wonder if it all depends when we started researching. I've been at it for 54 years! There are things I've missed because I recorded them on paper, relatives' memories for instance, and then overlooked because I didn't have anyway to transfer that info when I first used a computer, and didn't keep checking back. So with my eye on internet records I forgot the paper ones. I do research for other people too, and there has been an instance when my very techie husband somehow deleted one family record from FTM and I had to go back to my paper copy to enter it all again. So I think I'll find a way to balance the papers I have, sorting it into some sort of order,perhaps date order to make a timeline, whilst continuing to use all the benefits of a computer, eg scanning and saving photos.
I don't think it makes any difference when you started - we all have a mix of paper records and digital records. Clearly it makes sense to scan paper records especially photographs, since you never know what might happen to them. - my aunt's photos were stolen by a burglar, which was incredibly upsetting for her and had a knock-on effect for the entire family.
I don't link my records to a program, I have my own filing system which mimics my paper filing system. In practice this means there is folder for each ancestral line, and within that folder there are sub-folders for branches.
I do need to spend more time organising my records, but to go back to the original issue, I won't be printing out digital records, I'll be scanning or photographing paper records, photographs, and ephemera.
A
At home in NZ
Guest
You very techie hubby should have known to make a backup before he did anything!
I couldn't help myself, after reading that last post, I sat down and wrote the following:
I have watched this discussion with some amusement, there is no right way and no wrong way to preserve our research, my amusement arises from the varied methods used by different people.
Having the benefit of working in the business world I feel thankful for the skills I acquired, especially from my stint in IT.
We have Microsoft Office installed in our computers at home, I find it invaluable for communication, research and filing.
Using Outlook for email I create folders where I can move the emails I want to keep.
Searching within each folder is available.
This is no doubt possible in web mail systems too.
I use Word for writing letters to elderly relatives who do not have computers, I print one copy and handwrite my sign off. Then post it.
I save the letter in Word and file it in my letters to/from xx file. Any replies are not scanned but kept in a box, unless there is something I feel should be kept in digital form. I scan that and file in my letters to_from xx file.
I use Xcel for analysing things in FTM by saving a report that I have customised.
(I do know about and use FTA but not for everything)
I rarely print from Xcel, I do everything on screen and file a copy in the relevant research folder or delete it if it’s not relevant any more.
I have my family trees in Ancestry and in FTM.
Each of our computers has its own external hard drive, everything gets backed up to that once a week
Each time I sync FTM with Ancestry I create a backup of FTM and file it in the relevant folder plus I allow the ‘what has changed’ report to run and file that in the same folder.
I always have access to what I did in the past.
I admit to using paper, for printing charts and reports from the family trees, I use them as gifts for family who do not want/are unable to do it themselves.
These are created in Word and filed in the relevant research folder.
Having been involved, twice, in the process of ‘clearing out a deceased estate’ I am more than aware of how much is literally thrown away. Most of it is paper; letters, cards, photos, postcard collection and so on. It was a sad process but you can’t keep everything.
One day somebody is going to do the same to all my ‘stuff’.
Heather
LostCousins Member
After reading all the previous posts on this subject, I think it does come down to finding a happy medium for what is best for you. The main benefit for discussions such as this is that we may be able to pick up a few suggestions that could make our storage of information easier for us.
The point of my initial post was to question why, when we view/receive so much of our family tree data electronically, that people then print that information out giving themselves a further cost, a storage issue and a filing nightmare?
I too have stuff on paper, but I don't print anything out.
I too have stuff on paper, but I don't print anything out.
Bob Spiers
LostCousins Superstar
I don't make backups of my family trees, instead I create a new version each time I make changes - the filename for each version includes the date when it was created.
This means I can go back to any previous version, which not only provides protection against disasters, it also allows me to see what the position was at a given point in time - which is very useful when I re-establish contact with a cousin I haven't corresponded with for several years.
On a sadder note, it also acts as a reminder of what I was and wasn't able to tell now-deceased relatives about prior to their death.