From: G6JPG@255soft.uk   
      
   On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 12:01:53, Graeme Wall    
   wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):   
   >On 26/04/2022 10:38, Geoff wrote:   
   >> Do each of the large organizations (Ancestry, FMP,  FamilySearch etc)   
   >> do their own scanning or are they all drawn from a common source?  I'm   
   >> talking about the actual physical scanning, not the transcriptions.   
   >> Might a piece of a record that is damaged or missing, possibly be   
   >> better from another source?   
   >   
   >AIUI the scanning process was supervised by the NRO and the copies   
   >licenced to the various companies.   
   >   
   >   
   >As there is only one original of each record, if it is damaged  on one,   
   >it won't be any better elsewhere.   
   >   
   I don't know for parish records, but for censuses, FMP certainly seem to   
   have different scans - they look like more greyscale, though I think it   
   means Ancestry used more the microfilm copies (and thus only two-level).   
   At least, that was the case originally; I don't know if Ancestry have   
   rescanned from different sources. Certainly, I've sometimes noticed when   
   I've gone back - certainly on Ancestry, not sure about FMP - to a census   
   I'd already looked at some years earlier, I've found it's higher   
   _resolution_ than last time, so they do redo, but I think still just   
   two-level.   
      
   I do remember the first time I came across a colour scan of an 1841 page   
   - glorious; I presume it was one where the Microfilm was either _too_   
   bad or non-existent. I think that _was_ on Ancestry.   
      
   You (Graeme) say the scanning process _was_ supervised by the NRO; in   
   the case of parish records, I thought it was still going on, as both   
   seem to announce from time to time (the LostCousins newsletter is a good   
   place to find such announcements) new areas they have added [he often   
   includes links direct to the new individual collections, too]. (I get   
   the feeling FMP more so, or maybe they just announce more often.) Or is   
   it that they've all been _scanned_, and the announcements are only made   
   when they've been _indexed_?   
      
   Then there's the Mormons^WLDS^Wfamilysearch. Who have many scans of   
   their own - particularly the ones (for my ancestry) Durham Diocese   
   (which covers most of Northumberland, as well as lots of Durham,   
   Yorkshire, and Cumberland). A lot of theirs (including the above) are   
   _not_ transcribed and thus not searchable by name, though they _are_   
   divided by parish, and within those often by year chunks and/or record   
   type, so you don't have to wade through _that_ many images.   
   --   
   J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf   
      
   "Look, if it'll help you to do what I tell you, baby, imagine that I've got a   
   blaster ray in my hand." "Uh - you _have_ got a blaster ray in your hand." "So   
   you shouldn't have to tax your imagination too hard." (Link episode)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)