If you are looking for photos for one of the squadrons in the 100th Bombardment
Group, you can go to www.100thbg.com.  That site has a large number of photos. 
You can also write the webmaster if you need to be directed to other groups.

Kathy Callahan
www.preservephotoimages.com



-----Original Message-----
From: hdmshort@...
To: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [genphoto] Re: WWII pictures


Type in google or what ever internet program you have WWII US Airforce
photographs and just US Air Force.
Harry
fkahuna <fkahuna@...> wrote:
--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, "tripp8908" <barbarann@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I saw a post for websites that have navel photo's of WWII and I was
> wondering if there is a simular archive for WWII photo's of the Air
> Force (or I think it was Army Air Core)
> thanks for your time.
> Barbara
>

Along those same lines are there U.S. Army photos availble for accessing

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL
at AOL.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have just found several very old daguerreotype pictures of my family
which I would like to share with others researching the same family
line. Does anyone know a way to safely copy these without running the
risk of damaging them? (And hopefully without spending an arm and a
leg!)
Thank you,
Wendy

Wendy:
   Why not just copy them with a digital camera.
   Harry

Wendy T Warner <wtwarner@...> wrote:
           I have just found several very old daguerreotype pictures of my family
which I would like to share with others researching the same family
line. Does anyone know a way to safely copy these without running the
risk of damaging them? (And hopefully without spending an arm and a
leg!)
Thank you,
Wendy






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Google has a new service called My Maps enabling anyone to create a
public or private map containing descriptive markers for just about
anything. The markers can contain rich text and images.

Card photographs make an ideal subject for mapping, since they
generally are imprinted with the location of the photographer's studio
on the back or front. This makes is possible to create a marker for
each studio. If the photograph has a known date (a tax stamp date,
indicated in writing or estimated from the card style or knowledge of
the subject), studios can be mapped as the photographer moves.

I have mapped the known studio locations for J. G. Mangold, a
significant nineteenth-century studio photographer and publisher of
stereoviews in the Quad Cities region and Florida.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=117529731627674719725.00\
000111ce6a2c5c78b56
(watch the line wrap when copying this link)

I encourage everyone to note the photographer's imprint on the back of
the card photographs in their family collection and create markers on
Google's MyMaps (or other similar collaborative or shared mapping
services). It would be a fascinating exercise and could provide useful
data on historic studio photographers to map their studios. For
example, an overview of studio distribution could be seen; the
movements of photographers as they migrated west could be made
visible.

For anyone intending to do this, I found it difficult to edit the text
in the tiny window provided. You also need to break lines very short
to keep the balloon from getting so wide it obscures the map. It was
hard to get the line breaks right. It is very easy to accidentally
drag a marker when trying to click it to open it while editing.

It is also possible to do this on wikimapia.org, which is a
collaborative project where anyone can describe a location. You may
find it a little more difficult to use than Google's MyMaps, but the
idea of an independent non-commercial (at least for now...I do not
believe they are associated with the Wikipedia, but seems to be done
in the same spirit) mapping project is appealing. I will leave that
for others unless I have time to explore this possibility. I have not
explored Flickr maps or Picasa albums or the wikimapia for this
purpose yet.

It would be nice if Google maps could associate a date with the place,
so that historical layers could be shown, so that historical locations
and descriptions could be separated from contemporary ones. I made
sure I put circa dates on the entries so people are not confused when
the map comes up in Google search. It would be helpful, for example,
to display locations between a range of dates, so that the studios
between 1861 and 1865 only could be mapped. The distribution prior to
1861 could be mapped and compared to before and after the war.

What would be truly powerful is if the collaborative mapping could be
combined with shared mapping to allow collectors of photographs and
people with family photographs from the nineteenth-century to
cooperate and somehow merge this kind of information. So that if I
create a map of studios from my card photographs and someone else does
the same, that one could look up the photographer and see a combined
list of all the locations. Or the same if everyone located the
individual photographs. I suppose this might be possible through
Picasa if it were integrated into the mapping system or through
Flickr's geotagging maps system for their albums.

What I need to do is attach an album of photographs to a location,
since there can be more than one photograph and more than one imprint
per location, but this is a good start. With Flickr or Picasa albums,
I suppose it would be possible for collectors to put their photographs
online, map them, and the display an aggregate map of all the images.

I hope to revisit the map with more data and pictures and perhaps
others can make these additional experiments.

Steve

Steve Knoblock
www.city-gallery.com
editor@...

Daguerreotypes and tintypes can be scanned without damaging them. They
can also be copied - I use a digital SLR and a bellows on a copy stand.
One problem is very shiny surfaces that may destroy detail. This can
happen with old photographs that were inadequately fixed and have silver
bleeding out.

Carroll

Steve, that is fascinating. Thanks for sharing.

It would also be fun to create family maps, showing historical
migration and including a small family photo. I think I'll give it a
try.

Cindy


>
> Google has a new service called My Maps enabling anyone to create a
> public or private map containing descriptive markers for just about
> anything. The markers can contain rich text and images.

This is an interesting site

http://www.geocities.com/uruguay_fotografos_siglo_xix/

It contains some transcribed imprints, which is in the same vein.

Steve

Steve Knoblock
www.city-gallery.com
editor@...

I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites. Are you
using ancestry.com's new photo albums and story telling features? Do
you use photo sharing websites like flickr for your family photos? Do
you use any of the other genealogy-specific photo databases? it would
be interesting to know what works the best.

BTW Given the advances in photo sharing sites and the many problems
with securing an online application against vandals, it is doubtful I
will restore the City Gallery online photo album. Although storage is
much cheaper now, it is also much more plentiful at web service
companies. Google Picasa now offers 1GB of storage free, something
unheard of when I started the album on my site. That amount of storage
would have cost thousands of dollars a year not to mention the
bandwidth.

It seems that it may be much easier today for people to store their
family photographs at Picasa or flickr than to create their own
website or use one of the genealogy specific sites.

I'd like to know what you think of the state of family photos on the
web today.

Steve

Steve Knoblock
www.city-gallery.com
editor@...

I have my own website and I store mine there (as well as on two hard disks and
cd backups).  I don't advertise my site so I don't get a lot of extra traffic -
mostly just people who are working on their family research or family members
looking at pictures of grandma and grandpa, great grandma and grandpa etc.  I do
like Picasa and I just started experimenting with photobucket tonight.  I don't
know a lot about photobucket yet.  Ancestry.com's addition of the pictures part
is a good idea but it's not widely used yet.

Hester

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Steve Knoblock
   To: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 1:35 PM
   Subject: [SPAM] [genphoto] Family photos online


   I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
   albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites. Are you
   using ancestry.com's new photo albums and story telling features? Do
   you use photo sharing websites like flickr for your family photos? Do
   you use any of the other genealogy-specific photo databases? it would
   be interesting to know what works the best.

   BTW Given the advances in photo sharing sites and the many problems
   with securing an online application against vandals, it is doubtful I
   will restore the City Gallery online photo album. Although storage is
   much cheaper now, it is also much more plentiful at web service
   companies. Google Picasa now offers 1GB of storage free, something
   unheard of when I started the album on my site. That amount of storage
   would have cost thousands of dollars a year not to mention the
   bandwidth.

   It seems that it may be much easier today for people to store their
   family photographs at Picasa or flickr than to create their own
   website or use one of the genealogy specific sites.

   I'd like to know what you think of the state of family photos on the
   web today.

   Steve

   Steve Knoblock
   www.city-gallery.com
   editor@...




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I use PHPgedview for my genealogy software, and I love it.  It has a photo
album function included as part of the software, and it is free!  Here is a
link to their site: http://www.phpgedview.net/.

-Andi Windham

I use Picasa as I am computer challenged and it is easier than making
a website for me.
I share with my family and friends from there.
It is wonderful that you can find so many older photos on the net. You
tube has some vintage home movies on it too.
Tanya H

All my family photos and many of my family members use the company I
represent because it won't delete them if I don't continue to buy
something.  People need to read the small print for whatever online
service they decide to store with.  I also like a company that will
scan hard copy photos for a small fee if I don't want to scan them
and digitize and store my home movies at a safe location.  My family
and I share special events all the time.  Also, we have through the
wonderful world of the internet and email discovered images of each
other and family members we didn't know existed.
I think everyone should and will have online storage for their photos
simply because the price is usually reasonable and the alternative is
to risk losing them from time (fading images), the elements
(tornados, hurricanes, floods) and fire.  Also, having them stored
outside the immediate location of any hard copies will assist in the
event of a major disaster as isn't uncommon in certain parts of the
country.

Kathy
www.preservephotoimages.com

--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, Steve Knoblock
<knoblock_private@...> wrote:
>
> I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain
online
> albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites. Are you
> using ancestry.com's new photo albums and story telling features? Do
> you use photo sharing websites like flickr for your family photos?
Do
> you use any of the other genealogy-specific photo databases? it
would
> be interesting to know what works the best.
>
> BTW Given the advances in photo sharing sites and the many problems
> with securing an online application against vandals, it is doubtful
I
> will restore the City Gallery online photo album. Although storage
is
> much cheaper now, it is also much more plentiful at web service
> companies. Google Picasa now offers 1GB of storage free, something
> unheard of when I started the album on my site. That amount of
storage
> would have cost thousands of dollars a year not to mention the
> bandwidth.
>
> It seems that it may be much easier today for people to store their
> family photographs at Picasa or flickr than to create their own
> website or use one of the genealogy specific sites.
>
> I'd like to know what you think of the state of family photos on the
> web today.
>
> Steve
>
> Steve Knoblock
> www.city-gallery.com
> editor@...
>

Steve:
   I store my photos at Costco so my friends that belong to Costco can order
prints. However most of my relatives (ancstors families) live in England and
Australia so I send them CD's. This works fine for me so I've never used and
other sites.
   Harry

Steve Knoblock <knoblock_private@...> wrote:
           I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites. Are you
using ancestry.com's new photo albums and story telling features? Do
you use photo sharing websites like flickr for your family photos? Do
you use any of the other genealogy-specific photo databases? it would
be interesting to know what works the best.

BTW Given the advances in photo sharing sites and the many problems
with securing an online application against vandals, it is doubtful I
will restore the City Gallery online photo album. Although storage is
much cheaper now, it is also much more plentiful at web service
companies. Google Picasa now offers 1GB of storage free, something
unheard of when I started the album on my site. That amount of storage
would have cost thousands of dollars a year not to mention the
bandwidth.

It seems that it may be much easier today for people to store their
family photographs at Picasa or flickr than to create their own
website or use one of the genealogy specific sites.

I'd like to know what you think of the state of family photos on the
web today.

Steve

Steve Knoblock
www.city-gallery.com
editor@...





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I am pasting in a post which someone had wished to have approved, since
they were still on Moderated Status.

   I am weeding through my e-mail, and found this buried in my e-mails.

   My deepest apologies...

   Dawn

   I just started creating Creative Memories scrapbooks when my son was
born 3 years ago, and I'm not sure I'm done creating books by hand, but
I'm intrigued by your comments.  Do you have any favorite websites that
you could point me to as I'm considering this idea - software that
helps you build the scrapbooks and sites to get those elements?
Thanks!!

Sylvia


On Sep 5, 2006, at 1:05 AM, Bonnie - SavingDinner.com wrote:

> Hi Debb,
>
>
>
> I am very new to digital scrapping.  It was just recently that I was
> introduced to the concept and really began exploring it.  Having been
> in the
> scrap industry for 12 years now (I was a Creative Memories consultant
> for 5
> years, had my own scrapbook organizer company and also designed
> products for
> Cropper Hopper organizers) it really intrigued me.




Really Support Our Troops - Volunteer!
Services4ServiceMembers@yahoogroups.com
Reuse, Reduce, Recycle!
www.FreeCycle.org
Caregiving Cooking Challenge?
Soft-Foods@...



---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
  Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Steve,

I've been a member of Smugmug for many years.  I'm happy to pay $35/year for
unlimited storage and ability to get backups of all my photos on CDs.
Lately, I've been trying out Picasa which is pretty amazing.  6 GB of
storage is only $25/year.  So all your photos can be backed up online.

The most important issues have to do with the captions or metadata.  What I
like about Smugmug and Picasa is that they both use the embedded captions in
the IPTC metadata of the JPEG.  So if the captions are embedded in the JPEG
according to the standards then I figure that when the next file format
comes around and we have to migrate our photos from JPEG to JPEGReplacement,
we won't lose the captions.

I researched all this last summer and put my opinions on a website:
www.boomerpix.com

Laura



On 15 Apr 2007 10:31:17 -0700, HDM SHORT <hdmshort@...> wrote:
>
>   Steve:
> I store my photos at Costco so my friends that belong to Costco can order
> prints. However most of my relatives (ancstors families) live in England and
> Australia so I send them CD's. This works fine for me so I've never used and
> other sites.
> Harry
>
> Steve Knoblock
<knoblock_private@...<knoblock_private%40city-gallery.com>>
> wrote:
> I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
> albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites. Are you
> using ancestry.com's new photo albums and story telling features? Do
> you use photo sharing websites like flickr for your family photos? Do
> you use any of the other genealogy-specific photo databases? it would
> be interesting to know what works the best.
>
> BTW Given the advances in photo sharing sites and the many problems
> with securing an online application against vandals, it is doubtful I
> will restore the City Gallery online photo album. Although storage is
> much cheaper now, it is also much more plentiful at web service
> companies. Google Picasa now offers 1GB of storage free, something
> unheard of when I started the album on my site. That amount of storage
> would have cost thousands of dollars a year not to mention the
> bandwidth.
>
> It seems that it may be much easier today for people to store their
> family photographs at Picasa or flickr than to create their own
> website or use one of the genealogy specific sites.
>
> I'd like to know what you think of the state of family photos on the
> web today.
>
> Steve
>
> Steve Knoblock
> www.city-gallery.com
> editor@... <editor%40city-gallery.com>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
Laura D. Megill
310 W. Fifth Avenue
Warren, PA  16365
814-723-2356
814-688-9359 (cell)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

As I've looked at the issues of how to archive digital photos and associated
info, I've concluded that some of my photos need to be printed.  I like the
photo books since multiple copies can go to, for example, my four kids.
I've used mypublisher.com with success.  They have software that you
download to your computer.  There is a little bit of a learning curve but
it's advantage is flexibility to do whatever you want.

I just did a book with the Creative Memories software and I'm very pleased
with it.  They have templates that you just put pics and text into.  The
templates are pretty fixed but there's an advantage to lack of choice and
that is ease of use.  What I like about the Creative Memories templates as
opposed to Shutterfly or IPhoto is that they assume you are going to write a
storyline and have plenty of room for it.  The others seem to assume only
pictures with captions.

Laura


On 4/18/07, Dawn Soger <sogerd@...> wrote:
>
>    I am pasting in a post which someone had wished to have approved, since
> they were still on Moderated Status.
>
> I am weeding through my e-mail, and found this buried in my e-mails.
>
> My deepest apologies...
>
> Dawn
>
> I just started creating Creative Memories scrapbooks when my son was
> born 3 years ago, and I'm not sure I'm done creating books by hand, but
> I'm intrigued by your comments. Do you have any favorite websites that
> you could point me to as I'm considering this idea - software that
> helps you build the scrapbooks and sites to get those elements?
> Thanks!!
>
> Sylvia
>
> On Sep 5, 2006, at 1:05 AM, Bonnie - SavingDinner.com wrote:
>
> > Hi Debb,
> >
> >
> >
> > I am very new to digital scrapping. It was just recently that I was
> > introduced to the concept and really began exploring it. Having been
> > in the
> > scrap industry for 12 years now (I was a Creative Memories consultant
> > for 5
> > years, had my own scrapbook organizer company and also designed
> > products for
> > Cropper Hopper organizers) it really intrigued me.
>
> Really Support Our Troops - Volunteer!
>
Services4ServiceMembers@yahoogroups.com<Services4ServiceMembers%40yahoogroups.co\
m>
> Reuse, Reduce, Recycle!
> www.FreeCycle.org
> Caregiving Cooking Challenge?
> Soft-Foods@... <Soft-Foods%40yahoogroups.uk.co>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
> Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
Laura D. Megill
310 W. Fifth Avenue
Warren, PA  16365
814-723-2356
814-688-9359 (cell)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Why I don't use photo-selling services for archiving photos.

It's been a while since you used Snapfish. According to the terms of the
service, you need to place an order at least once a year to keep your
account active.

With more than 30 million customers now using Snapfish to store more than a
billion photos, the terms of service require that you place an order to
reactivate your account for another 12 months. *Even ordering a 12¢ print
will do.*

Please act by MAY 19, 2007, or your online photos will be deleted.

In fairness to Snapfish, I was just testing their service and they should
delete my account, but you should always consider why someone is giving you
something for "free" - tanstaafl:

On 4/18/07, Laura Megill <ldm310@...> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> I've been a member of Smugmug for many years.  I'm happy to pay $35/year
> for unlimited storage and ability to get backups of all my photos on CDs.
> Lately, I've been trying out Picasa which is pretty amazing.  6 GB of
> storage is only $25/year.  So all your photos can be backed up online.
>
> The most important issues have to do with the captions or metadata.  What
> I like about Smugmug and Picasa is that they both use the embedded captions
> in the IPTC metadata of the JPEG.  So if the captions are embedded in the
> JPEG according to the standards then I figure that when the next file format
> comes around and we have to migrate our photos from JPEG to JPEGReplacement,
> we won't lose the captions.
>
> I researched all this last summer and put my opinions on a website:
> www.boomerpix.com
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> On 15 Apr 2007 10:31:17 -0700, HDM SHORT <hdmshort@...> wrote:
> >
> >   Steve:
> > I store my photos at Costco so my friends that belong to Costco can
> > order prints. However most of my relatives (ancstors families) live in
> > England and Australia so I send them CD's. This works fine for me so I've
> > never used and other sites.
> > Harry
> >
> > Steve Knoblock
<knoblock_private@...<knoblock_private%40city-gallery.com>>
> > wrote:
> > I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
> > albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites. Are you
> > using ancestry.com's new photo albums and story telling features? Do
> > you use photo sharing websites like flickr for your family photos? Do
> > you use any of the other genealogy-specific photo databases? it would
> > be interesting to know what works the best.
> >
> > BTW Given the advances in photo sharing sites and the many problems
> > with securing an online application against vandals, it is doubtful I
> > will restore the City Gallery online photo album. Although storage is
> > much cheaper now, it is also much more plentiful at web service
> > companies. Google Picasa now offers 1GB of storage free, something
> > unheard of when I started the album on my site. That amount of storage
> > would have cost thousands of dollars a year not to mention the
> > bandwidth.
> >
> > It seems that it may be much easier today for people to store their
> > family photographs at Picasa or flickr than to create their own
> > website or use one of the genealogy specific sites.
> >
> > I'd like to know what you think of the state of family photos on the
> > web today.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > Steve Knoblock
> > www.city-gallery.com
> > editor@... <editor%40city-gallery.com>
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Laura D. Megill
> 310 W. Fifth Avenue
> Warren, PA  16365
> 814-723-2356
> 814-688-9359 (cell)




--
Laura D. Megill
310 W. Fifth Avenue
Warren, PA  16365
814-723-2356
814-688-9359 (cell)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There are a number of reasons companies give something away free. (It is like
Mrs. Fields and her cookies: her cookies didn't start selling until people had a
chance to sample them but the people who got a great cookie for free weren't
obligated to buy any more if they so chose).
I think people should always check the small print (It is like remembering to
read to camera manual at some point so you really know what your expectations
should be).
Loss leaders are a basic principle for some businesses, and the businesses can
still be a great service.  Just remember to ask questions and you might be
pleasantly surprised by the answers.
Kathy
www.preservephotoimages.com

-----Original Message-----
From: ldm310@...
To: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: [genphoto] Family photos online


Why I don't use photo-selling services for archiving photos.

It's been a while since you used Snapfish. According to the terms of the
service, you need to place an order at least once a year to keep your
account active.

With more than 30 million customers now using Snapfish to store more than a
billion photos, the terms of service require that you place an order to
reactivate your account for another 12 months. *Even ordering a 12¢ print
will do.*

Please act by MAY 19, 2007, or your online photos will be deleted.

In fairness to Snapfish, I was just testing their service and they should
delete my account, but you should always consider why someone is giving you
something for "free" - tanstaafl:

On 4/18/07, Laura Megill <ldm310@...> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> I've been a member of Smugmug for many years. I'm happy to pay $35/year
> for unlimited storage and ability to get backups of all my photos on CDs.
> Lately, I've been trying out Picasa which is pretty amazing. 6 GB of
> storage is only $25/year. So all your photos can be backed up online.
>
> The most important issues have to do with the captions or metadata. What
> I like about Smugmug and Picasa is that they both use the embedded captions
> in the IPTC metadata of the JPEG. So if the captions are embedded in the
> JPEG according to the standards then I figure that when the next file format
> comes around and we have to migrate our photos from JPEG to JPEGReplacement,
> we won't lose the captions.
>
> I researched all this last summer and put my opinions on a website:
> www.boomerpix.com
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> On 15 Apr 2007 10:31:17 -0700, HDM SHORT <hdmshort@...> wrote:
> >
> > Steve:
> > I store my photos at Costco so my friends that belong to Costco can
> > order prints. However most of my relatives (ancstors families) live in
> > England and Australia so I send them CD's. This works fine for me so I've
> > never used and other sites.
> > Harry
> >
> > Steve Knoblock
<knoblock_private@...<knoblock_private%40city-gallery.com>>
> > wrote:
> > I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
> > albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites. Are you
> > using ancestry.com's new photo albums and story telling features? Do
> > you use photo sharing websites like flickr for your family photos? Do
> > you use any of the other genealogy-specific photo databases? it would
> > be interesting to know what works the best.
> >
> > BTW Given the advances in photo sharing sites and the many problems
> > with securing an online application against vandals, it is doubtful I
> > will restore the City Gallery online photo album. Although storage is
> > much cheaper now, it is also much more plentiful at web service
> > companies. Google Picasa now offers 1GB of storage free, something
> > unheard of when I started the album on my site. That amount of storage
> > would have cost thousands of dollars a year not to mention the
> > bandwidth.
> >
> > It seems that it may be much easier today for people to store their
> > family photographs at Picasa or flickr than to create their own
> > website or use one of the genealogy specific sites.
> >
> > I'd like to know what you think of the state of family photos on the
> > web today.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > Steve Knoblock
> > www.city-gallery.com
> > editor@... <editor%40city-gallery.com>
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Laura D. Megill
> 310 W. Fifth Avenue
> Warren, PA 16365
> 814-723-2356
> 814-688-9359 (cell)

--
Laura D. Megill
310 W. Fifth Avenue
Warren, PA 16365
814-723-2356
814-688-9359 (cell)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL
at AOL.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I also use Smugmug and have for years. I use it as a premium photo-
sharing site, more than backup or storage. Love it!  A lot of pros
use Smugmug for their online sales.

I take a lot of photos of kids' sports, and also friends and family.
I got tired of trying to print copies for people, or "email me that
shot of Katie, would you?" - so I wanted a place to put the photos
where I could control the page, the access and the results. I pay for
the privilege, but it's worth it for me. I can create an album for a
particular event, and control all aspects of the access to it.
Sometimes I want to share the album with people without giving them
access to my other photos, and I can do that with Smugmug. I can also
give them access to download full-size copies if I want (I often do)
and folks can order prints directly from Smugmug if they want.

I've become a decent amateur photographer, and it's fun to share with
others. I'm not depending on the online service for storage or
backups, although it's nice to have the option.

Cindy


> 2a. Re: Family photos online
>     Posted by: "Laura Megill" ldm310@... ldm310
>     Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:44 pm ((PDT))
>
> Steve,
>
> I've been a member of Smugmug for many years.  I'm happy to pay $35/
> year for
> unlimited storage and ability to get backups of all my photos on CDs.
> Lately, I've been trying out Picasa which is pretty amazing.  6 GB of
> storage is only $25/year.  So all your photos can be backed up online.
>
> The most important issues have to do with the captions or
> metadata.  What I
> like about Smugmug and Picasa is that they both use the embedded
> captions in
> the IPTC metadata of the JPEG.  So if the captions are embedded in
> the JPEG
> according to the standards then I figure that when the next file
> format
> comes around and we have to migrate our photos from JPEG to
> JPEGReplacement,
> we won't lose the captions.
>
> I researched all this last summer and put my opinions on a website:
> www.boomerpix.com
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> On 15 Apr 2007 10:31:17 -0700, HDM SHORT <hdmshort@...>
> wrote:
>>
>>   Steve:
>> I store my photos at Costco so my friends that belong to Costco
>> can order
>> prints. However most of my relatives (ancstors families) live in
>> England and
>> Australia so I send them CD's. This works fine for me so I've
>> never used and
>> other sites.
>> Harry
>>
>> Steve Knoblock <knoblock_private@...<knoblock_private%
>> 40city-gallery.com>>
>> wrote:
>> I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
>> albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites. Are you
>> using ancestry.com's new photo albums and story telling features? Do
>> you use photo sharing websites like flickr for your family photos? Do
>> you use any of the other genealogy-specific photo databases? it would
>> be interesting to know what works the best.

I forgot to include this. Here is a sample of a customized photo
gallery on Smugmug. I shot photos of a friend's daughter at her T-
ball game. It was a blast.f

You can change the"theme" and the "style" and the journal style has
quite large areas for captions. You could use this as a scrapbook-
type page as well. I don't usually use the themes (I like the plain
smugmug elegant theme best) but I did a baseball theme for this one
as it was a favor to my friend.

http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/2591329#138382934

(I forgot the usual disclaimer; I am just a very satisfied customer
of Smugmug and think it's well worth the cost.)

I have obtained a vintage WW-I era military unit photograph, a long photo in
a roll (It can be seen at link below).  I need help determining best method
to unroll without additional damage so I can scan - or not to do so, etc.

http://sc-unknown-pictures.blogspot.com/2007/04/pic-17.html

Your insight is appreciated.

I don't use any of those sites, I've written my own site which allows me to add
(too much!)
commentary and format the way I want.  It does require a lot of tedious
resizing, though.
One thing I am doing is copying the website to CD, with printable resolution for
the
photos, for a family reunion this summer.  The ultimate scrapbook!

(Steve, my great-grandfather's sister was married to a Knoblok, and we have
photos, did
you have kin in the Peoria IL area in the mid to late 1800s?)

--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, Steve Knoblock <knoblock_private@...> wrote:
>
> I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
> albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites.

I use my website too although since I have about 9G of pictures, I don't have
enough space for everything.  As memory sticks are getting cheaper, I'm finding
myself more comfortable backing up on those.  I've had cd's get scratched.  I
haven't lost data from it though since I make more than one back up copy.  I can
see memory sticks becoming the best option for me as they continue to decrease
in price.

I'm curious, arcosinca, do you use software to put yours up on the web or do you
code it yourself?  I've been looking for a nice, inexpensive program that
creates a nice-looking web album.  I've been using Web Album Generator but I
wanted something more customizable.

Hester

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: arcosinca
   To: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 12:27 PM
   Subject: [SPAM] [genphoto] Re: Family photos online


   I don't use any of those sites, I've written my own site which allows me to
add (too much!)
   commentary and format the way I want. It does require a lot of tedious
resizing, though.
   One thing I am doing is copying the website to CD, with printable resolution
for the
   photos, for a family reunion this summer. The ultimate scrapbook!

   (Steve, my great-grandfather's sister was married to a Knoblok, and we have
photos, did
   you have kin in the Peoria IL area in the mid to late 1800s?)

   --- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, Steve Knoblock <knoblock_private@...> wrote:
   >
   > I would be interested in knowing how many subscribers maintain online
   > albums of your family photographs using photo sharing sites.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Try contacting this conservation organisation:

http://www.ccaha.org/contact.php

They mostly deal with museums, galleries and collectors, but I hope
they would consider your project also.

Good luck.

Ken Allen
kenallenstudios.com


--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, "kudzufamhistory"
<kudzufamhistory@...> wrote:
>
> I have obtained a vintage WW-I era military unit photograph, a long
photo in
> a roll (It can be seen at link below).  I need help determining best
method
> to unroll without additional damage so I can scan - or not to do so,
etc.
>
> http://sc-unknown-pictures.blogspot.com/2007/04/pic-17.html
>
> Your insight is appreciated.
>

Thanks for sharing your experiences with online photo sharing.

I am glad to hear the online photo sites are using the meta data
contained within the images. It has been a long time since I looked
into this issue, long before EXIF became popular and there was no
standard and few editors could be relied upon to maintain the meta
data across saves. I did notice flickr was using the tag data from
Elements. I hope the meta data will migrate to the next file format
should there be one.

That reminds me. I do not have many images stored in the format, but I
cannot find any software to open and save my old Picture Publisher
images (PPF), which is orphan software. It was the leading competitor
to Photoshop on Windows for many years, but that apparently did not
help the format to be widely available. I am glad that I used to
always save duplicates in TIFF (at least most of the time). I made
sure my first digital camera supported saving in TIFF for the same
reason (before RAW was widely available in consumer cameras). So far
support for TIFF has been steady. JPEG will probably continue to be
developed for a long time with many converters available.

I wanted to develop my Mangold Family Album into a album with links to
historical data and family documents, which I did by hand to some
degree, but I have never had time to automate it. It would be very
unlikely many genealogists could use such a tool since a) it would not
be liked to a genealogy database tree b) most cannot install and
configure software to their own personal website.

BTW Web Album Generator is nice new album generator I found. It only
does JPEG images. I previously used the one in Adobe Elements for
generating static albums but they replaced it with a Flash based album
I do not like.

http://www.ornj.net/

Steve

Back to our regularly scheduled programming...for(i=0;i<=10;i++) { print i }

You are smart not to try and unroll the image. I'm sure you can probably hear it
cracking
as you try. Here is a method I used for the same type problem.
I also found a panoramic 'doughboys' image that measured roughly 18x48. The old
photo
had been glued to a board and was rough shape. It was separating  from the board
and
was cracking.
My solution was to soak it and the board in a large sink initially to release
the image and
prevent additional cracking of the image. The glue used was particularly
resistant to
softening.
I used photographic developer as a softener and after several hours was able to
seperate
the board from the print. The print had quite a coat of dirt, smoke, etc which
the
developer removed.
I used a light acid stop bath and a very dilute fix bath to remove all
developer. An hour or
more rinse with hypo eliminator  and air dried on a screen frame to reduce
curling.
I dry mounted the print to a foam board and then framed it. It was a lot of
work, but it is a
great treasure that should be preserved.
You need a sink or water tight box or frame larger than the image. Yes, you can
still buy
photographic chemicals. Take your time and good luck.

--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, "kudzufamhistory" <kudzufamhistory@...> wrote:
>
> I have obtained a vintage WW-I era military unit photograph, a long photo in
> a roll (It can be seen at link below).  I need help determining best method
> to unroll without additional damage so I can scan - or not to do so, etc.
>
> http://sc-unknown-pictures.blogspot.com/2007/04/pic-17.html
>
> Your insight is appreciated.
>

Saw this on another YahooGroup and thought it was of interest
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Candyman/message/52137

------------------------------------------------------

A new Genealogy Section is now online on Olive Tree
Genealogy. It is devoted to helping researchers
identify Ancestor Photos.

It is a companion project to Lost Faces - Photo Albums,
which is the rescue of old albums from the mid to late
1800s, found at *http://www.rootsweb.com/~ote/faces/

You can read and see graphic examples online of
*
* Types of Early Photographs
*
http://olivetreegenealogy.com/photos/photo-types.shtml
*
* Hints for Dating Old Photographs
*
http://olivetreegenealogy.com/photos/ancestor-photos.shtml
*
* Dating Old Photographs through Clothing & Hairstyle
*
http://olivetreegenealogy.com/photos/fashions-photos.shtml
*
* How Revenue Stamps Can Date Ancestor Photos
*
http://olivetreegenealogy.com/photos/revenue-stamps.shtml
*

Feel free to pass this news on to anyone you think might be
interested.

Enjoy!

Lorine
Olive Tree Genealogy
http://olivetreegenealogy.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

For those of you who have to get your photos printed at a commercial place, let
me tell you what I learned recently. I was sending my photos to Wal-Mart only to
learn that many of the prints they were printing were copyrighted. They would
print them, but not sell them to me. I then went to Walgreen's and asked for
help. They were nice enough to let me know that Wal-Mart does not have a
copyright agreement for printing pictures. If they think it is copyrighted, they
simply will not print it. However, I learned that Walgreen's has a form that you
can fill out for pictures that are 75 years or older and copyrighted, to allow
you to print the pictures. The form states that you have researched how ___ or
where ___ and that the photographer is either dead/out of business, and estate
is unknown; or that you simply do not know who the photographer was. You need a
form on file for each location where prints will be ordered. From home, I can
upload or email prints to Walgreen's, edit
  them online and order prints. I can generally order them for one hour pickup
the night before and they are ready the next morning. Prices are great too!
Something to check out if you have to order prints away from home.
Pamm


---------------------------------
Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Wow.  I wonder if that varies from store to store as far as whether or not they
enforce it.  I've used both my local Walmart and the upload service at
Walmart.com as well as the service at Samsclub.com and never had that happen.

Hester

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Pamm Garber
   To: eastern_u_s_ancestry ; family_finders ; familyandmore ; genclass ;
genie-angels ; genphoto ; KY Heritage ; midwest_states@yahoogroups.com ;
Northern Indiana Genealogy Group ; wvaroots@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 3:54 PM
   Subject: [genphoto] Printing Old Copyrighted Photos


   For those of you who have to get your photos printed at a commercial place,
let me tell you what I learned recently. I was sending my photos to Wal-Mart
only to learn that many of the prints they were printing were copyrighted. They
would print them, but not sell them to me. I then went to Walgreen's and asked
for help. They were nice enough to let me know that Wal-Mart does not have a
copyright agreement for printing pictures. If they think it is copyrighted, they
simply will not print it. However, I learned that Walgreen's has a form that you
can fill out for pictures that are 75 years or older and copyrighted, to allow
you to print the pictures. The form states that you have researched how ___ or
where ___ and that the photographer is either dead/out of business, and estate
is unknown; or that you simply do not know who the photographer was. You need a
form on file for each location where prints will be ordered. From home, I can
upload or email prints to Walgreen's, edit
   them online and order prints. I can generally order them for one hour pickup
the night before and they are ready the next morning. Prices are great too!
Something to check out if you have to order prints away from home.
   Pamm

   ---------------------------------
   Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


   No virus found in this incoming message.
   Checked by AVG Free Edition.
   Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/884 - Release Date: 7/2/2007 3:35
PM


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I tried to get some old family photos copied at my local Walmart, and
they refused because of the copyright issue.  I tried to explain that
these were personal, family photos and were well outside the usual 75
year (at least that's what I understood) statute of limitations on
copyrights. But it did no good.  It's all moot to me now since I have
a new scanner and was able to copy them myself.  I only wanted them to
copy and put them on disk so that I could have copies on my computer.
My scanner had died at the time, but now I have shiny new one and have
scanned what I need.

Elaine in the Beautiful Missouri Ozarks



On 7/3/07, Wylie E. Coyote, Supergenius <ghmceuen@...> wrote:
> Wow.  I wonder if that varies from store to store as far as whether or not
they enforce it.  I've used both my local Walmart and the upload service at
Walmart.com as well as the service at Samsclub.com and never had that happen.
>
> Hester