Hi Brian, That's a good idea. No point in gathering all of this information if it is not seen. What is the relevant GENUKI URL by the way? Cheers Peter > From: Brian Randell <Brian.Randell@ncl.ac.uk> > Reply-To: SOG-UK-L@rootsweb.com > Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:19:00 +0100 > To: SOG-UK-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [SoG] Digital Cameras > Resent-From: SOG-UK-L@rootsweb.com > Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:03:47 -0600 > > Hi Peter: > >> Whilst we are on the subject of digital cameras, members may like to take a >> look at my web page: >> >> http://www.btinternet.com/~amsden/archives/camerasinarchives.html >> >> A little out of date, but it does show the kind of variations to be expected >> in record offices. > > Thanks for posting this - I've added a link from the Archives page at > the UK&I level in GENUKI. > > Cheers > > Brian Randell > -- > School of Computing Science, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, > NE1 7RU, UK > EMAIL = Brian.Randell@ncl.ac.uk PHONE = +44 191 222 7923 > FAX = +44 191 222 8232 URL = http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/~brian.randell/ >

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:07:29 +0100, John Addis-Smith <genl@addisgen.com> wrote: > We have also found that a digital camera with flash can be used to > photograph microfilm reader screens sufficiently clearly to be able to > transcribe printed text later - microfilmed manuscripts are a > different matter and depend very much on the quality of the original > filming. I think that needs clarification John, it could be read two ways. Either that the use of flash aids the photographing of the reader screen or that the screen can be photographed despite the camera insisting on using the flash For those who don't understand the difference, the screen is a light source. The aim is to photograph that transmitted image. The use of a flash will tend to flood out that image rather than supplement it. In normal use a flash gun is substituting for the sun or some other light source, like you, the camera can se btter in bright light than dim light. However, think about how hard it is to read a screen in bright sunlight, that's what you are making the camera do if the flash is on. So what this boils down to is, if you want to use the camera for photgraphing screens, or generally in ROs, do make sure you can turn off the auto-flash-in-poor-light feature. = Malcolm.

Hi Peter: >Whilst we are on the subject of digital cameras, members may like to take a >look at my web page: > >http://www.btinternet.com/~amsden/archives/camerasinarchives.html > >A little out of date, but it does show the kind of variations to be expected >in record offices. Thanks for posting this - I've added a link from the Archives page at the UK&I level in GENUKI. Cheers Brian Randell -- School of Computing Science, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK EMAIL = Brian.Randell@ncl.ac.uk PHONE = +44 191 222 7923 FAX = +44 191 222 8232 URL = http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/~brian.randell/

Whilst we are on the subject of digital cameras, members may like to take a look at my web page: http://www.btinternet.com/~amsden/archives/camerasinarchives.html A little out of date, but it does show the kind of variations to be expected in record offices. ---- Peter Amsden, Argyll, Scotland Researching Amsden World Wide Outline History: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~amsden Books I have written: http://www.btinternet.com/~amsden AllExperts: http://www.allexperts.com/displayExpert.asp?Expert=38044 Never dump originals - they may be all that is left after the computer age.

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 04:33:36 EDT, Celia Cole wrote: >I am want to buy a digital camera for the frirst time, but don't know much >about them. Ideally I would like to be able to use it for photographing >documents. I have always favoured point and shoot type cameras. Can anyone give me >some advice about what to look out for? I have successfully photographed documents in Record Offices for several years now, using a 5 megapixel small 'point and shoot' camera and the camera's inbuilt flash. In fact about a month ago we were down at Woking History Centre and took 380 pictures of documents there over a period of a couple of days - it took my wife about a month to process these on a computer, print them out, list them and fill a lever arch file. Here are some points to consider: 1. Camera resolution 5 megapixels is a realistic minimum resolution and will work with documents up to about A3 in size. If you photograph larger documents in one shot you will probably not be able to interpret the writing unless it is very large in the original. We took several overlapping shots of larger documents, but don't expect to be able to line them up perfectly (unless you use a tripod to keep the camera the same distance from the document as you traverse it - and then barrel distortion of the lens may cause problems that can be fixed later on your computer with the right software but is time consuming). You can use so-called 'panoramic' mode software to merge these pictures into a larger whole, which you can then read on the computer screen after zooming in. But without a suitable large format printer you may not be able to print such pictures out at a readable size. My next camera will have about 10 megapixel resolution so I can deal with larger documents - 'point and click' cameras with this resolution are just coming on to the market - Casio have just bought out a 10 megapixel Exilim camera - of course professional cameras costing over £1,000 are available with higher megapixel ratings. Photography professionals will tell you that megapixels are not the only factor in getting sharp clear pictures, the quality of the lens, the area of the sensor, and the accuracy of the focus and exposure are also important. While it is true that you can buy cheap but awful cameras with reasonable megapixel ratings, I think in practice for middle range cameras megapixels rule. 'Consumer' digital single lens reflex cameras with interchangeable lenses are available in the £350 to £700 range now and are more versatile and have better lenses with less distortion than the point and click variety. For example, you need a wide angle lens if you wish to photograph buildings (exteriors and interiors) where there is not sufficient room to step back to capture the whole scene. But if you only want to use the camera for general family and family history use in addition to document copying, I have found that a simple 'point and click' camera is fine. 2. Focus range As already mentioned you will want to focus on documents only a few inches across, so this needs to be checked for the cameras you consider. In practice I have found that most cameras costing £150 or more are OK for this - in fact most have a 'macro' setting that enable close focusing on small objects. 3. Illumination and camera shake If you are able to use flash (and only certain record offices allow this) then camera shake is not such a problem. You will still get a slightly blurry picture even with flash if you are not fairly steady holding the camera. If you cannot use flash then you really need a tripod (and some record offices do not allow this for 'health and safety' reasons). Most tripods are not designed for taking pictures below them on a flat horizontal surface - you need to find one that allows the camera to point downward. Some have an extension rod so that the camera can be placed to one side of the tripod centre so the tripod legs are not in the picture with large documents. There are also so-called 'copy stands' designed to hold a camera pointing downward. Most of these cannot deal with documents much over A3 in size. In fact some record offices have them for customer use. See for example the following National Archives document: www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/photo_policy.pdf A few 'point and shoot' digital cameras (eg. Canon, Casio and Pentax) now come with anti-shake (image stabilisation) systems and I would certainly get one if I was buying now - they are not perfect but do help. Optical image-stabilisation is generally considered better than stabilisation produced by software. With no tripod or flash allowed the documents need to be well illuminated - place near a window if you can. You can now also get cameras with 'low light' sensitivity - this means that in low light the exposure time can still be quite short to eliminate the effect of camera shake. I would also want this in a new camera. Finally, there are tripod 'work arounds' such as a 'string tripod'. This basically involves fixing three cords near the corners of the camera which are tied to the table on which the document lies and stretched tight before taking the picture. 4. Reflections If the surface of the document is shiny, or the Record Office insist on placing a protective film over the document, the flash or even the room lights or window light will show up as a reflection on the document surface. One way that I have found effective in eliminating or reducing flash flare is to take the photograph at an angle to the document surface so that a rectangular document becomes trapezoidal in outline. This can then be corrected on the computer with software. At Woking History Centre there was one fragile document that they covered with film and we used an umbrella to shade from the overhead lights and took the picture at an angle to the document using flash. We still could not get rid of all the reflections this way because the surface was not completely flat and the light sources were coming from so many directions, but we removed most of the reflections later using the computer. 5. Computer processing One advantage of digital cameras is that the pictures can be transferred to a computer, processed and printed out at home. The fastest way of transferring the pictures to a computer is to use a memory card reader which if not already built in, plugs into a USB port. Using a lead between the camera and computer is much slower and runs down the camera battery. Adobe Photoshop Elements (now at version 4) is generally considered to be the best low cost (about £70) picture editing software - it is a much cheaper cut down version of their professional Photoshop CS range. But there are many other simpler and cheaper alternatives. We have also found that a digital camera with flash can be used to photograph microfilm reader screens sufficiently clearly to be able to transcribe printed text later - microfilmed manuscripts are a different matter and depend very much on the quality of the original filming. Cheers, John John Addis-Smith Thurleigh, Bedfordshire, England

Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim@powys.org> wrote on Thu, 29 Jun 2006: >You will also need to get the pics from he camera to your computer for >storage and printing. Either this can be done with a card-reader, >which is an extra, or it can be done with a direct link. Again ask to >try both out to see which you find easiest. Card readers are very cheap, well under GBP10 nowadays (eg <http://www.ebuyer.com/UK/cat/Flash-Memory/subcat/Readers-/-Writers-/-Ada pters>), and provide extra degrees of freedom. Well worth getting one imo. -- Iain Archer

For anyone who missed the start of this thread, the URL of the Search Engine is at < http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search > Many thanks Elmo for straightening out my confusion This is certainly a valuable search resource of the Rootsweb Archives I have certainly learnt some interesting lessons on how to mix the Keyword Search and Advanced Search Options. I had not appreciated that any set of criteria that works in the general Keyword Search (including the "-" exclusion terms) also works in the Body field of the Advanced Search. It is then possible to add further filter criteria in the other fields of the Advanced Search. <adshead -from:gordon@adshead.com -path:cheshire -path:goons> finds me 1112 postings mentioning my surname study but excluding messages I sent myself and excluding two of the Lists I have subscribed to for some years. Many thanks again Gordon +Z ######################################## At 11:04 29/06/2006, Keith Elmo Eldridge wrote: >Gordon Adshead < gordon@adshead.com > wrote: > > > adshead -gordon@adshead.com works in the From field to find > > postings from > > Adsheads excluding myself > > But how do I find postings from <anyone> excluding > > gordon@adshead.com > > [with say "adshead" in the body field] ? > > > > The same seems to apply to the List (or Path) field in that > > an initial "-" > > is taken as "+" > > ie -Cheshire is taken as +Cheshire > > ie How do I find postings from <any-list> excluding Cheshire ? > >Just put: > +adshead -from:gordon@adshead.com -path:Cheshire >in the Keywords: section, rather than the Advanced: section. > >If you use: > +adshead +cheshire -from:gordon@adshead.com -path:Cheshire >You will get all the messages that mention ADSHHEAD and Cheshire but not >from you and not posted to the Cheshire list (although there are some >messages that mention < CHESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com >.) +Z_______________+Z_______________+Z__________________________+Z <www.adshead.com> Gordon Adshead Manchester Design Technology Beaumont House, 2 Goodrington Road, Handforth, Cheshire, SK9 3AT, England Tel:Fax:Msg:+44-1625-549770 Mob:+44-777-6145602 <gordon@adshead.com>

Hi: Adding to Tim's comments: >Finally it might be useful to have a tripod mounting as you may not be >able to hold it steady enough to get clear pictures. Ask the shop to >demonstrate their tripods in use. I once bought a handy little tripod >that extends to about 8 inches high and is ideal for taking photos of >documents that are stood up, but not documents that are flat on a table; >a mere £10 IIRC. The rules in the National Archives and often Record Offices don't allow the use of tripods or flash - though the National Archives do have a few camera stands, so a tripod mounting is useful for this purpose. For this reason when I was in the market for a camera about a year ago I paid a lot of attention to camera speed, since I would typically have to hold the camera over the document to be photographed. And I also strongly favoured the (relatively few) cameras that have an LCD screen that can be swung out and tilted, so that you can direct the camera easily while holding it out in front of you. I bought a Canon A95 (5 mp) and am very pleased with it. Since I am not a camera expert, I was pleased to find that there is a huge amount of excellent information and general advice on digital cameras at the several independent review sites. The ones I found very useful were, in no particular order: http://www.steves-digicams.com/default.htm http://www.dcresource.com/ http://www.imaging-resource.com/ http://www.megapixel.net/ I steered clear of the various dealers and magazines and their web-sites, as I soon gained the impression that the independent sites listed above were much more informative, professional and trustworthy. Cheers Brian Randell -- School of Computing Science, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK EMAIL = Brian.Randell@ncl.ac.uk PHONE = +44 191 222 7923 FAX = +44 191 222 8232 URL = http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/~brian.randell/

Gordon Adshead < gordon@adshead.com > wrote: > adshead -gordon@adshead.com works in the From field to find > postings from > Adsheads excluding myself > But how do I find postings from <anyone> excluding > gordon@adshead.com > [with say "adshead" in the body field] ? > > The same seems to apply to the List (or Path) field in that > an initial "-" > is taken as "+" > ie -Cheshire is taken as +Cheshire > ie How do I find postings from <any-list> excluding Cheshire ? Just put: +adshead -from:gordon@adshead.com -path:Cheshire in the Keywords: section, rather than the Advanced: section. If you use: +adshead +cheshire -from:gordon@adshead.com -path:Cheshire You will get all the messages that mention ADSHHEAD and Cheshire but not from you and not posted to the Cheshire list (although there are some messages that mention < CHESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com >.) I don't know how often new messages are being added to the index, but my previous message to SOG-L isn't being picked up yet. For anyone who missed the start of this thread, the URL of the Search Engine is at < http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search >. Cheers Elmo.

Sorry people, My mail to Celia was not meant for the general list. Please ignore. -- Peter Amsden Argyll, Scotland

In message of 29 Jun, Mlc1@aol.com wrote: > Hello all, > > I am want to buy a digital camera for the frirst time, but don't know > much about them. Ideally I would like to be able to use it for > photographing documents. I have always favoured point and shoot type > cameras. Can anyone give me some advice about what to look out for? Yes this will work. But you want lots of detail in the image for it to print out clearly. This requires something around 5 MegaPixels to give the required image size. The next thing is that you will want to take photographs from a foot or so away. Check that the camera will focus as close as this. An inbuilt flash might help, though most have such these days. You'll need some software to process the pics from the camera. Ask to try this out, some are rather unfriendly. You will also need to get the pics from he camera to your computer for storage and printing. Either this can be done with a card-reader, which is an extra, or it can be done with a direct link. Again ask to try both out to see which you find easiest. Finally it might be useful to have a tripod mounting as you may not be able to hold it steady enough to get clear pictures. Ask the shop to demonstrate their tripods in use. I once bought a handy little tripod that extends to about 8 inches high and is ideal for taking photos of documents that are stood up, but not documents that are flat on a table; a mere £10 IIRC. That's all I can think of off the top of my head. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org              For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Hi Celia, I will certainly try. Can you let me know the sort of price you are willing to pay. Makes a big difference. I am dealing with this off list, so the info goes no further. Regards Peter ---------- Peter C. Amsden ARPS ABIPP Argyll, Scotland > From: Mlc1@aol.com > Reply-To: SOG-UK-L@rootsweb.com > Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 04:33:36 EDT > To: SOG-UK-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [SoG] Digital Cameras > Resent-From: SOG-UK-L@rootsweb.com > Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 02:33:48 -0600 > > Hello all, > > I am want to buy a digital camera for the frirst time, but don't know much > about them. Ideally I would like to be able to use it for photographing > documents. I have always favoured point and shoot type cameras. Can anyone > give me > some advice about what to look out for? > > Many thanks, > Celia Cole > Surrey UK >

Dear Celia, I was asking the same question of folk on FH lists about a year ago but although I looked at many, at all sorts of prices, I never really followed it up. However, my wife has been on about getting one for her work, and, not knowing what to buy her for her birthday for a difference, I decided on a digital camera. So I began with Jessops stores, always very helpful, and the started looking around on the internet. Google, Cheap digital cameras. I came up with the Pentax Optio A10 which you can pay all manner of prices for. two weeks ago, I took the plunge with a firm called in London purelygadgets.com. they were about the cheapest at £184. Mind you, you also might need a spare battery £29 and a 1Gb Sandisk SD memory card at £24. one can get these for around £13 but whether they are any good or not. Purely gadgets are about the cheapest for these also. Anyway, I have been playing around at odd moments with it and the manual ( about the thickness of the London phone book) ever since. What a wonderful tool. It has built in anti-shake and two macro ( close up ) mode, as well as zoom, plus.....a specific text setting!!! I have taken pics, in my car (parked) of the manual resting open on my knee at a distance of 2.5 inches and the clarity of results is really excellent. And that's as a rank amateur and beginner of about one week's standing! Guess who is going to wear this new toy out? It is really dinky in size though, a real James Bond job, but then most are. I personally would like a bit more to cling on to and find I have to be careful where I put my fingers.I takes great video footage. As a novice, I cannot fault it. Best of luck, Mike Tebbutt.

Hello all, I am want to buy a digital camera for the frirst time, but don't know much about them. Ideally I would like to be able to use it for photographing documents. I have always favoured point and shoot type cameras. Can anyone give me some advice about what to look out for? Many thanks, Celia Cole Surrey UK

At 00:25 28/06/2006, Keith Elmo Eldridge wrote: >Gordon Adshead < gordon@adshead.com > wrote: > > So far I cannot see an easy way to exclude posting that are > > from myself > > Or to exclude postings from Lists that I have been following > > for several years. > >Try: > +adshead -from:gordon@adshead.com >for adshead but not from you > >and > +adshead -from:gordon@adshead.com date:2001 date:"Jan 2002" >to restrict the date to 2001 or January 2002 > >To exclude a list use: > -path:"Essex-UK" >(if there are hyphens in the listname you have to use quotes) > >To search just the subjects use: > subject:whatever The new search engine page is at: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search Many thanks Keith I did get nearly this far before: but I do not think that what you suggest actually works to meet my requirements adshead -gordon@adshead.com works in the From field to find postings from Adsheads excluding myself But how do I find postings from <anyone> excluding gordon@adshead.com [with say "adshead" in the body field] ? The same seems to apply to the List (or Path) field in that an initial "-" is taken as "+" ie -Cheshire is taken as +Cheshire ie How do I find postings from <any-list> excluding Cheshire ? +Z_______________+Z_______________+Z__________________________+Z <www.adshead.com> Gordon Adshead Manchester Design Technology Beaumont House, 2 Goodrington Road, Handforth, Cheshire, SK9 3AT, England Tel:Fax:Msg:+44-1625-549770 Mob:+44-777-6145602 <gordon@adshead.com>

Gordon Adshead < gordon@adshead.com > wrote: > So far I cannot see an easy way to exclude posting that are > from myself > Or to exclude postings from Lists that I have been following > for several years. >... Try: +adshead -from:gordon@adshead.com for adshead but not from you and +adshead -from:gordon@adshead.com date:2001 date:"Jan 2002" to restrict the date to 2001 or January 2002 To exclude a list use: -path:"Essex-UK" (if there are hyphens in the listname you have to use quotes) To search just the subjects use: subject:whatever Regards Elmo -- --Keith Elmo ELDRIDGE --Buxworth, High Peak, Derbyshire, England --Elmo@aphelia.co.uk --'Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children'

At 18:16 24/06/2006, John Addis-Smith wrote: >The new engine also allows adjacent word searches if you put the words >inside double quote marks, eg "John Addis". > >The new search engine page is at: > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search Many thanks for pointing this out John It is obviously a useful resource for One-Namers But in this context it would be nice to have a bit of "jam" in the Advanced Search:- So far I cannot see an easy way to exclude posting that are from myself Or to exclude postings from Lists that I have been following for several years. ["adshead - gordon" works in the From field, but "-Cheshire" seems to have the reverse effect in the List field] +Z_______________+Z_______________+Z__________________________+Z <www.adshead.com> Gordon Adshead Manchester Design Technology Beaumont House, 2 Goodrington Road, Handforth, Cheshire, SK9 3AT, England Tel:Fax:Msg:+44-1625-549770 Mob:+44-777-6145602 <gordon@adshead.com>

A correction: The **original** Rootsweb Mailing Lists search engine page is actually at: http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl This page takes you to browse listings (month by month) for all messages on a particular mailing list, the name of which you need to enter correctly: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/ Cheers, John John Addis-Smith Thurleigh, Bedfordshire, England

I have just been using the new search engine (still in the beta testing stage) for all the Rootsweb Mailing List archives. Unlike the earlier search engine, this will search across all the mailing lists (you can restrict to one mailing list in the Advanced Search option) for their complete? time periods. The old search engine only allows searches by mailing list, by year - and you have to know the mailing list name. The new engine also allows adjacent word searches if you put the words inside double quote marks, eg "John Addis". The new search engine page is at: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search The original search engine page is at: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/ The list of Rootsweb Mailing Lists is at: http://lists.rootsweb.com/ Cheers, John John Addis-Smith Thurleigh, Bedfordshire, England

Thanks Tim and Colin. That surname change has been a 'problem' for decades (or more?) leading to a rift within the family, with some branches adopting the new name and others sticking to the old spelling. At one stage a gravestone was re-cut to remove the new spelling! It looks as if I need to do quite a bit of searching to get to the bottom of the mystery. Ian