Challenges retrieving scanned reels via microfilm or DGS # in Catalog search
Let's say I were to use a citation that looked something like this (with a microfilm # and a total images (in that scanned film):
1940 United States census population schedule for [State], [County], [City/Town], [Subdivision], enumeration district XX, sheet XX-X, rows XX-XX ([Last, First M.I.] household); FamilySearch.org microfilm XXX image XXX (of XXX).
The *challenge* with this citation design--which I haven't instituted (but want to!)--is that there doesn't seem to be an easy way to drop right into the panel view of a microfilm, by entering a Film # or DGS #. Let's take for instance microfilm # 5461666. Search that via Catalog, and you'll end up with a catalog listing for 1940 U.S. census population schedules for Michigan. Clicking that will present a list of many microfilms, requiring some scrolling and remembering before 5461666 is found in a long list. And upon arriving to there, we see that 5461666 is a DGS number (thereby making me question if I should cite it as a microfilm # in the first place).
DGS numbers don't have a search box however, in Catalog--at least that I can find--which makes my little citation idea sort of a challenge---now I have to call it a microfilm # (which is a search field in Catalog search). Where this gets a little more confusing, though, is when the camera icon is pressed for this DGS record, the thumbnail feel of the scanned images shows the "Film #" as the very same same number---a good thing!
So the question becomes: is it even feasible at this point in time, to use a shortened citation like the one I proposed above, which aims to just reference an image number followed by total images in the reel (e.g. "image 36 of 814"). Is there a way to do this right now that is reliable?
Thanks in advance!
Ryan in Michigan
ps: I put a post on here last December that was similar to this topic, though it was much too wordy and therefore probably too confusing.