Moderator Control Panel ]

GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Share your thoughts with your fellow family historians – and the Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine team – here

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby Guy » Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:23 pm

I have received my copies today 2 days early.

An example of uncertified copy of an entry in a Death register may be viewed at
http://anguline.co.uk/cert/burial.html

An example of uncertified copy of an entry in a Birth register may be viewed at
http://anguline.co.uk/cert/birth.html

I would be interested in hearing what other genealogists think of the images.
Do they meet your requirements, do you have any suggestions for improvements?

Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Guy
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:56 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby junkers » Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:24 pm

I think that the copies are acceptable for genealogical purposes. There's no much you could do to improve the certificates as a certificate is a certificate.
junkers
 
Posts: 918
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby Guy » Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:31 am

junkers wrote:I think that the copies are acceptable for genealogical purposes. There's no much you could do to improve the certificates as a certificate is a certificate.


That's the point Junkers the images are not certificates they are uncertified copies of register entries made up of cut and pasted images.
Compiled of parts of the page of the register book to make a single image (more easily seen in the full size image).
For instance to reduce the file size the margins have been excluded (losing marginal notes)

Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Guy
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:56 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby AdrianB38 » Tue Nov 15, 2016 1:45 pm

Guy wrote:... the margins have been excluded (losing marginal notes) ...

Don't mind the loss of blank space - but losing marginal notes is not acceptable to me! (I think) Surely these can turn the whole certificate on its head!!!??? Can't they???

If these are the images from DOVE, which were intended for "proper" use, then surely the marginal notes would have to have been imaged? Otherwise it couldn't be a copy - certified or not. So could it just be that the image is tight when there's no marginal notes, and is larger if there are marginal notes???

I'm just tossing ideas around - I don't think I have a marginal note example to check on, so I'm a bit unclear about marginal notes.

PS - reducing file size these days is a nonsense - if the originals are .JPG, they're compressed inside the .JPG so a bit more white space (well, off-white) will have minimal size impact.
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby Guy » Tue Nov 15, 2016 3:06 pm

AdrianB38 wrote:
Guy wrote:... the margins have been excluded (losing marginal notes) ...

Don't mind the loss of blank space - but losing marginal notes is not acceptable to me! (I think) Surely these can turn the whole certificate on its head!!!??? Can't they???


I agree, I would rather see the margins and any notes made in them but I can't think of any instance when the note would turn the whole certificate on its head.

AdrianB38 wrote:If these are the images from DOVE, which were intended for "proper" use, then surely the marginal notes would have to have been imaged? Otherwise it couldn't be a copy - certified or not. So could it just be that the image is tight when there's no marginal notes, and is larger if there are marginal notes???


The images the GRO are working from are from DoVE, however the uncertified PDFs that are sent are a compiled image made from sections of the original scan.
If you click on the images on the urls I posted earlier yoy can see from the full size image where the join between the two parts is.

This has been done in order to remove the other images displayed on the register page

AdrianB38 wrote:I'm just tossing ideas around - I don't think I have a marginal note example to check on, so I'm a bit unclear about marginal notes.

PS - reducing file size these days is a nonsense - if the originals are .JPG, they're compressed inside the .JPG so a bit more white space (well, off-white) will have minimal size impact.


The images are sent as PDFs not jpg.
The death image PDF had a size of 1,409,024 bytes and the Birth image PDF a size of 1,126,400 bytes.

Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Guy
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:56 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby AdrianB38 » Tue Nov 15, 2016 4:13 pm

Guy wrote:... I can't think of any instance when the note would turn the whole certificate on its head. ...

Thanks - I hope not, if the margins are to be lost - however, I'm unsure what might be there, so am willing to take your advice of the impact. I was concerned that we might lose any forward direction to a re-registration? I guess probably not since the GRO's rules are such that we should automatically get the "correct" (i.e. re-registered) version, not the superseded one. So my worries may well be unfounded... Cross fingers.

Guy wrote:... The images the GRO are working from are from DoVE, however the uncertified PDFs that are sent are a compiled image made from sections of the original scan. ...

Sure - I was trying to get at the point that somewhere in the system, the full image is presumably available so the situation appears to be recoverable if an issue were found.

Guy wrote:... The images are sent as PDFs not jpg. ...

Indeed - I was trying desperately to avoid a discussion of how the .PDF is made up. Somewhere inside the .PDF will be an embedded image file - possibly an embedded .JPG, possibly another format. Either way it'll be a compressed image, so a bit more off-white space shouldn't materially affect the size of the compressed image within the .PDF. It's mildly amusing though, that I am casually dismissing the size of something that would barely fit on a 3.5" floppy all those years ago!
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby coopernicola » Tue Nov 15, 2016 4:16 pm

"I agree, I would rather see the margins and any notes made in them but I can't think of any instance when the note would turn the whole certificate on its head"
I have only had one instance but the margin notes were an amendment (added after sworn statements to the registrar by the mother & her sister, 2 years after the birth if her daughter) stating the father originally named was not in fact the child's father and a new name attached.
User avatar
coopernicola
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby AntonyM » Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:13 pm

Marginal notes can be very important - however, I haven't actually seen an example of where a pdf copy of an entry has such a note missing - I would hope that if there is something in the margin, the filmed image would show it.

It would usually be obvious from the content of the entry that such a note exists so if anyone does have a definite example where it has been left off the scan - please share it.
AntonyM
 
Posts: 357
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 3:12 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby AdrianB38 » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:07 pm

Or indeed - does anyone have an example of a .PDF *with* a marginal note? Not quite sure how the system would deliver it but I think that specific examples of anything relating to marginal notes would be welcome.

Sent from my MotoG3 using WDYTYA Forum mobile app
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby Guy » Wed Nov 16, 2016 7:30 am

AdrianB38 wrote:Or indeed - does anyone have an example of a .PDF *with* a marginal note? Not quite sure how the system would deliver it but I think that specific examples of anything relating to marginal notes would be welcome.

Sent from my MotoG3 using WDYTYA Forum mobile app


Hard to say in this instance but I assume the spelling correction in the death entry example I gave may have a marginal note even though the spelling was corrected on the image.
It does carry the annotation 6 showing it is correction 6.

http://anguline.co.uk/cert/burial.html

It could be that it was thought that with the correction being obvious in this case there was no need to show the note or there might not be a note.
Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Guy
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:56 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Genealogy chat


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests