How can I request a record be digitized? (many are still film only)

LegacyUser

gabe snyder said: Hi,
I'd like to request that a certain record that is currently only available on film be added to your list for digitization. Can you tell me how I can request records be digitized?
Thanks!
https://familysearch.org/search/catal...

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Tis gets requested quite often.

Requests of this nature in this forum raises the awareness about specific records and pushes them up the list of films to be digitized, if they have not already been digitized.

However...

Access is controlled by the owner of the records through the agreement reached between FamilySearch and the owners of the originals.

We do know that there are teams working on the agreements if they did not automatically include unlimited digital internet access.

LegacyUser

Paul said: Tom

You say, "Requests of this nature in this forum raises the awareness about specific records and pushes them up the list of films to be digitized." Unless you have evidence of this I would not be so sure. In the past, my response from FamilySearch about giving priority to something specific (admittedly relating to another issue) has been that it has its planned work already scheduled for the next 2 to 3 years, so is unable to meet such requests.

As you know, it is impossible to get estimated times, or other specific detail, regarding its programmes from FamilySearch, so I would think it highly unlikely that we could ever know if such a request had been heeded.

However, as the expression goes, "there's no harm in trying", so I would not wish to stop gabe snyder in following your advice.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: There has been at least one of these discussions that I remember where an employee said that just bringing the film to their attention raises the awareness level and can shove the film up the list to be digitized.

It isn't so much as giving a film priority over others, but more a matter of, "Oh, someone needs to be able to see this film."

That may not provide the desired results, but at least, the level of awareness has been raised. At the present time, the priority is on those films most often requested.

In my mind, the bigger problem is that there seems to be no plan in place to help take care of the need to view films while the collection is being digitized. And, as you said, Paul, we are not getting any kind of estimated times/details regarding the actual order or when any given film would be digitized.

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: Gabe,

The film you are requesting has been cleared for digitization and is in the queue. I don't have a count of the number of films ahead of it, so I have no idea how many months (years?) you'll have to wait. If you have my luck, there will be 2.399 million rolls ahead of it and it won't be digitized until 2020. But you can take some solace in knowing that it can be digitized and it will be available much sooner than if it were being queued up today.

Robert

LegacyUser

RealMac said: It would help some of us feel better if there were some sort of "digitometer", prominently displayed in a place where we could easily find it, such as the "search records" page, showing the progress of the digitization project. As a matter of interest, can anyone supply the number of films already processed, as well as the total number of microfilms that exist, as of August, 2017?

LegacyUser

Paul said: It would be "a first" if FamilySearch did decide to share information of this nature with their patrons!

LegacyUser

S. said: Well in that case How do we bring Films to their attention. their is a few I would like to do that to!

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: S.,

Official statement: FamilySearch is first scanning the microfilms that historically have been most requested and is considering how to prioritize individual patron requests.

My opinion: It doesn't hurt to mention films here, but until a process is established, it might have no effect.

---Robert

LegacyUser

Robert Wren said: Thank you, Robert, for verifying someone, in FS, is paying attention - and there is an official statement. But many will wonder the source and how to get more.

LegacyUser

S. said: The films I am looking for is in Italy 1880-1900

LegacyUser

Genochemist said: Robert, May I request a film to be digitized please? The some other films in this county collection have been digitized, so I don't think it's a owner authorization issue.

FHL microfilm: 2319617 for Meigs Co., OH Deed books 53-56.

Thank you so very much!

Sharon

LegacyUser

Juli said: Sharon, have you seen these instructions? https://www.familysearch.org/ask/sale...

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: Sharon, yes, please read the article Juli mentioned. One point that can be overlooked is this: If you see a DGS number but no camera icon, the film has been digitized but the images can not be viewed online. A contractual, data privacy, or other restriction prevents us from making the images available.

LegacyUser

Marie-Pierre Lessard said: **Digitization request**

Robert Raymond:

The Cochecho Massacre of 1689 is an important even in U.S. history. The genealogies of the Quaker victims (slain and taken captive), in printed works, have been turned into a farce by at least one (French Canadian) author.

The Dover Public Library has informed me that they have "Dover Friends minutes which are supposed to include births from 1678-1949" on microfilm. As a French Canadian, I am mostly interested in the earliest reels (up to about 1715), but if an agreement can be negotiated, you probably would want to digitize the whole thing, for the sake of genealogists, as well as historians. :-)

Marie-Pierre Lessard

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: Marie, thanks for the suggestion.

Are you suggesting digitization of an existing FamilySearch microfilm? If so, follow the process explained here: https://www.familysearch.org/ask/sale... Contact FamilySearch with your request using one of the methods on this page: https://www.familysearch.org/ask/help

Are you suggesting digitization of microfilm belonging to another library? If so, we cannot help you. Ask the intellectual property owner of that microfilm.

Are you suggesting digitization of original records, not already on microfilm? If so, I can give you guidance on how to request digitization of those records.

---Robert

LegacyUser

Marie-Pierre Lessard said: When I did a search in your collections and in the Catalog, I didn't see it, so I don't think that you have those minutes, no...

>>Are you suggesting digitization of microfilm belonging to another library?
It's in the Dover Public Library, yes. However, I don't know who the intellectual property owner is...

>>Are you suggesting digitization of original records, not already on microfilm? If so, I can give you guidance on how to request digitization of those records.

OK! I would have to ask where the original records are, but please do tell me how to make such a request!

LegacyUser

Marie-Pierre Lessard said: Oh, Robert!
Can you also tell me if I can submit the resulting digitized content to your collections or catalog? If I can get permission from the intellectual property owner, of course...

If I am going to pay a lot of money to get something like that done from abroad, it might as well be useable by others in the future. :-/ (If I lived in the U.S., I wouldn't have to consider this option. Interlibrary loans do exit. I am in Europe.)

Marie

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: FamilySearch is interested in requests for specific, known record collections of great genealogical value. If you don't know if the records exist, or you don't know where they are, please find them before requesting them. We do not have the resources necessary to investigate general requests such as "birth records for Washington County."

To allow us to evaluate an opportunity for digitization of original records, provide this information to begin the process:

- Name and address of the repository
- Name of the record custodian
- Title of the collection
- Collection identification number
- Geographic coverage of the collection
- Date coverage
- Size of the collection (typically, linear inches)
- Record type and description

FamilySearch focuses on genealogically-rich materials like church, civil, and census records. Especially valuable are register-type records like censuses that give names and vital facts and relationships for dozens of people on a single page. A single page of church records might document a half-dozen vital events with facts and relationships of perhaps as many as six relatives. A single civil record might document one or more events and mention several relatives; for example, a death record may document, birth, death, and burial and specify names of parents and informant.

Other record types are considered on a case-by-case basis. We consider these and other factors:
- What is the number of unique names, dates, places, and relationships per page?
- Are those named in the records already named in FamilySearch Family Tree or our existing historical records?
- Can those names, dates, and places be acquired more efficiently using other records?
- Does FamilySearch have a camera and a camera operator available near the location of the repository?
- Is that camera needed for higher priority projects?
- Are the records at risk of destruction?
- Will the repository give us permission to publish the records for free for anyone to access?
- Do the laws allow the records to be published?

If you or anyone else knows of a record collection that you think we would want, let me know.

--- Robert

LegacyUser

Marie-Pierre Lessard said: >> If you don't know if the records exist, or you don't know where they are, (...)

This is probably a form answer, but just for the record, I do know where they are. It's a set of specific reels of microfilm at the Dover Public Library, which I specificalled named above. I didn't ask about the location and the ownership of the original records, though!

OK, that's a great set of criteria. I can ask those questions.

Thank you so much, Robert!
---
One last question, if I can bother you: "Dover Friends minutes which are supposed to include births from 1678-1949". This must correspond to many different reels. I expect to find original information that I haven't been able to find elsewhere in the first few decades, and I could look at a few local inhabitants trees to see when they tend to hit walls and engage in massive speculation, but it's too complex for me to figure out if the later years (e.g. 1850 to 1900, or 1900 to 1949) have such original content. I don't know the U.S. records well enough to determine something like that.

If the original owner is willing, would would want to do the whole set of reels once you get started? Or would you prefer to keep it small and stick to early American history? I am thinking that getting permission in itself is such a milestone that it might merit getting it all done in one go, but you know what works best.

LegacyUser

Peggy Arnot said: Hi Robert, you asked "If you or anyone else knows of a records collection that you think we would want, let me know." (I bet you are sorry you asked, right?)

I'm not sure if you were talking only about items that had already been microfilmed, but I have two suggestions, both of which are deteriorating and at risk that have never been filmed. Since probate records often contain information about family relationships, they may fit your "other record types" and can be even more valuable than death records.

1. Tyler County, Texas probate records. Current contact information at http://www.co.tyler.tx.us/page/tyler.

The index for these files has been digitized (Index to probate cases, 1847-1939 1006065 Item 1, DGS 7574486), BUT the case files have never even been filmed. I spoke to the clerk who said they would love to preserve those records but it's a problem finding money. Tyler County is an important Texas settlement area with first known immigrants in at least 1809 and true settlement before 1836.

2. St. Helena Parish, Louisiana probate case files. Contact: Mildred Cyprian, Clerk of Court, Phone: (225) 222.4514, Email:mildredcyprian@yahoo.com

Although parts of these files have been extracted by a researcher in the book “Succession records of St. Helena Parish, Louisiana 1804-1854,” it is impossible to get copies of the early files, and many of the earliest original documents were not extracted because they were in Spanish.

These original records have never been filmed and are rapidly deteriorating, possibly taking with them family relationships that are only recorded here. The County Clerk reported to me after handling the documents in one file that they were crumbling as she touched them (February 2018), were too faded to read anything but a word here and there, and they had no resources to film or preserve them. As an original Louisiana Parish of colonial West Florida, St.Helena Parish existed even before West Florida was annexed to the US. making these important records to save.

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: One film I have been interested in getting digitized from an existing FS microfilm is film 571893, which are Transportregisters from Wulven, in the province Utrecht in the Netherlands. Given that all other digital records from Dutch archives are available on FS without restriction, and that archives in the Netherlands are not permitted by law to unreasonably charge for or hinder access to their records, I can't imagine there being any problem in getting permission from the record custodian. On that note, the record custodian is the Regionaal Archief Zuid-Oost Utrecht https://www.rhczuidoostutrecht.com/ not the now defunct Rijksarchief Utrecht[it is now Het Utrechts Archief]

LegacyUser

MaureenE said: The FamilySearch link "Requesting that FamilySearch digitize (scan) a microfilm"
https://www.familysearch.org/ask/sale...
says "Contact us by phone, chat, or email, and make your request", with a link provided. It does not mention this Feedback Forum, so perhaps you need to request the required digitisation via one of the other methods.

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: When you say "this must correspond to many different reels" and "the whole set of reels" it confuses me. Are we speaking of microfilm or paper records?

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: Peggy,

This is great information. I will pass these suggestions on to the respective content strategists.

--- Robert

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: A van Heisdingen,

In the catalog, the DGS column is blank. That doesn't mean there is a legal impediment. It just means it hasn't been digitized.

Please request digitization as explained here: https://www.familysearch.org/ask/sale...

Contact FamilySearch with your request using one of the methods on this page: https://www.familysearch.org/ask/help

--- Robert

LegacyUser

Marie-Pierre Lessard said: Sorry, I mispoke/got confused! I realized this after I went to bed... Obviously, you already said that you don't want to copy the microfilms. You want the original documents that correspond to the content of the microfilms. I was thinking of the quantity of documents. Would you want to stick to the Dover Quaker records covering early American history (which may correspond to one or a few reels, I don't know), or would you want to go through their whole collection up to 1949 while you are at it?

Your response will help me present the proper request after I track who owns the originals/who is in possession of them.

LegacyUser

Marie-Pierre Lessard said: Ah! This might be the stopping point depending on how their collection (reel content) is organized. This digitization might need to be done in 2 series (pre- and post-1850).
"Vital statistics were kept in separate record books after 1850." URL: https://www.familysearch.org/blog/en/...

On Ancestry, the earliest date given is 1681, so it does look like the Dover records aren't digitized (they should start in 1678).
U.S., Quaker Meeting Records, 1681-1935
https://search.ancestry.com/search/db...

I'll check what Ancestry has, and ask those questions to the Dover Public Library first. The librarian already said: "The Dover City Hall burned down 3 times and many records were lost." Therefore, vital records from city hall might be missing altogether for a long time period. I'll ask about that to figure out what the crucial time period is, and if they know where the originals are.

I already searched for such records on the sites of the Swarthmore College's Friends Historical Library and the University of Massachusetts in Amherst, and I didn't get any relevant hits. There are repositories listed here, not all of which are given on the "Source Information" of the Ancestry page: https://familytreewebinars.com/pdf/we...
However, I can also contact them to ask if they have these archives AND if they have been digitized. Quaker records seem to be spread out, so this might take a while.

Whatever request I make, it needs to be the right request, because those librarians don't use much time on each online patron. :-/

Can you see my email address and can you send me the email address (or other contact info) of someone in your organization, so that I can report on my findings when I know for sure that it's not digitized already, and if I get a positive answer from the intellectual property owner?

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: We are thinking about ways to do this. We won't have a solution anytime soon.

For individual or a small number of documents, this is already possible. You can upload documents to Memories on FamilySearch.org and tag them with the people mentioned in them.

LegacyUser

Marie-Pierre Lessard said: OK. I found quotes in books that make it seem like there are surviving Quaker records that go all the way back to 1662 (when the congregation was established in Dover). I will keep looking into this as well. The religious history of the area is fascinating!

LegacyUser

Robert Raymond said: I am afraid I cannot see your email address. Contact me at Robert. Raymond at familysearch.org (remove the extra spaces after the period).