[or-roots] Ancestry.com vs HQ census

[cklooster at aol.com]

I haven't done this for awhile (several years, in fact), but...in the upper right hand corner of the census image page on Ancestry there is a "Having problems viewing this image?" statement.? If you click on this it opens a window that lets you communicate with Ancestry about the quality of the specific?image/page you are trying to view.? In several instances a better quality image was available within a few days.? In another instance there was a reply that the original document was so damaged that the image could not be improved.? Worth a try.

Carla


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris & Bill Strickland <lechevrier at earthlink.net>
To: or-roots mail list <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:39 pm
Subject: Re: [or-roots] Ancestry.com vs HQ census



For me, the big difference is in the Search algorithms,  Ancestry will 
try to find what you think you want, and with HQ, you almost need to 
*know* where the entry is and how it is spelled to find it.  So, if you 
are looking for Welliver and HQ can't find it, Ancestry might find the 
entry where it is spelled Woolover.

In addition to the hundreds of duplicate rolls, there are different 
original filmings of some of the census records due to poor quality of 
some of the original films.  There are probably lists of these multiple 
filmings somewhere. And since the copies are not made directly off the 
original master copies, there is more room for variance comparing reel 
to reel, not to mention any digitizing process involved.

Bill Strickland
_______________________________________________
or-roots mailing list
or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/or-roots

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/or-roots/attachments/20090224/f210a991/attachment.html>