ARIZARD-L Archives

Archiver > ARIZARD > 2002-01 > 1010192602


From: "Wilma \(Younger\) Norton" <>
Subject: Re: [ARIZARD-L] Census CD's
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:07:20 -0800
References: <02e201c194c9$80f8a240$4b444041@hppav> <004501c194e0$3c632440$4c8f8ed1@oemcomputer> <033701c194d9$584f7160$4b444041@hppav> <008b01c194ee$ca93dda0$4c8f8ed1@oemcomputer> <038701c194e8$bf00aaa0$4b444041@hppav> <000f01c194f4$f5813020$77ac8ed1@oemcomputer> <03bf01c194ef$4b6cca40$4b444041@hppav> <002f01c1954f$42d7f9d0$13deabd0@pavilion> <000a01c19557$a962c380$2a444041@hppav>


I think the quality of the film has a lot to do with what you get on the
CD's, but also I think the company doing the filming has something to do
with it too. For instance, I bought the 1900 Marion Co. census on CD from
Census View and the quality is very poor. I have the 1850 and 1870 census
for some counties that I got from Heritage Quest, and their quality is very
good. I also subscribe to ancestry.com and their 1900 Marion Co. census is
easy to read online. I haven't looked at Izard Co. much on ancestry.com,
but I believe they do enhance them to make them easier to read.

Wilma
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandra" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 11:40 AM
Subject: [ARIZARD-L] Wilma - Smudged pages


> Wilma,
>
> I envy your eyesight, and the ability to decipher those names as you do,
my
> sight is getting so bad even with glasses at times reading some of those
> census is impossible for me.
>
> I was reading or trying to read some of the Texas census a couple of days
> ago, and on some of the pages the writing was so faded that they were
> almost white and at first glance looked blank. I simply could not make
out
> the names. In which case I assume the ink used back then either faded or
> the papers were damaged by water at some time and then were microfilmed.
I
> wonder if the process of filming them makes a difference in the darkness
and
> lightness or do they pretty much film as they look?
> Is there any possible way to read pages like that, I seem to remember
> something about using a yellow transparent sheet of something that
sometimes
> helps, but can't remember how it worked.
>
> Some of those census takers had beautiful handwriting and the pages they
> recorded are so neat , that it's a pleasure reading them!
>
> I do appreciate those who give their time in transcribing those census !
>
> And the information you have given here helps to make the facts clearer
for
> some of us who have trouble in reading and deciphering those names.
>
> I just need someone like you around when I'm trying to read some of those
> census to tell me whether I'm seeing what I think I'm seeing ! :-)
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wilma (Younger) Norton" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 12:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARIZARD-L]Smudged pages
>
>
> > I'd like to add something on this subject. I recently purchased some
1850
> > Census CD's and among them is Izard County. I worked my way through the
> > whole Izard census and compared it with what has been posted online at
> > usgenweb. There are VERY few errors, but I will post here those I
found.
> >
> > Fam. # 28 Langston - the Nathan Langston age 11 listed just below
Jehoida
> > Langston is not in that particular lineup. He is listed just below
> > HIGHTOWER, Patsy age 11. That had always confused me - why was he
listed
> > twice? He wasn't.
> >
> > Fam #53 through 62 is shown as living in Syllamore Township - they are
> > actually in Richwoods Twp.
> > Fam. #58 - WALL, Beverly D. - he is a male.
> >
> > Sylamore Twp. starts with Fam #63, Ramboth or Rainbolt? My
interpretation
> > is Rainbolt.
> > Fam. #149 (Rocky Bayou Twp) the Alexander Dillard household has a
SKELTON,
> > ? - his name looks like Jacob to me.
> > Fam. #204 - WICKERY should be VICKERY.
> > Fam. 222 - GRAY - son James F. should be 10.
> > Fam. #223 - the GRAY family - daughter Sarah P. should be Sarah J.
> > Fam. 338 - James TRIMBLE - there is a notation that he married within
the
> > year to Phebe G.
> > Fam. 347 - WIMONS should be SIMONS
> > Fam. 349 - LAWTON should be LANGSTON
> > Fam. 355 - BENNING should be HENNING
> > Fam. 372 - looks like SNEED to me
> > Fam 375 - looks like HEASLY
> > Fam 419 - looks like HAWKINS
> > Fam 444 - looks like CROSBY
> > Fam 455 - looks like FRENCH, and son Kinman age 1
> > Fam 456 looks like McElmurry and wife Parmelia
> > Fam 459 looks like McEarley and wife is Joannah and dau Lucinda's
initial
> is
> > J.
> > Fam 460 looks like CATHY
> > Fam 461 looks like DONAHOO and dau is Surilda
> > Fam 462 looks like EL.IS and son is Austin K. and Amanda? looks like
> Armanda
> > Fam 463 looks like STRANDES
> > Fam 473 looks like FOSTER
> > Fam 474 - missing is a daughter, Mary, 12 MO
> > Fam 475 - COBB family children are Rhody 4 and Rhoby 3
> > Fam 476 - looks like HUGHEY
> > Fam 479 WATKINS wife is Lucy Ann instead of Mary Ann
> > Fam 481 missing from the PITTMAN family is Mary Ann, 14 MS and Elisha ?
> > looks like Rutha
> > Fam 482 looks like BECKINS and the last child is America 3/12 AR
> > Fam 488 - James ? looks like James L.
> > Fam 490 - child's name is Tempy
> > Fam 492 child's name is Roena
> > Fam 493 - WOOD is the surname and also GILIHAN, Thomas living with them.
> > Fam 495 - looks like CASH
> > Fam 496 - looks like CASTLOW
> > Fam 497 ROSS, Joshua
> > RIGHAN, Lorenza
> > ........., David I can't read that one either.
> > ELLUMS, James
> > LANGSTON, Henry
> >
> > I only found two "missing" people!! I got my census CD from Heritage
> Quest
> > and the quality is excellent. There was only one name (above in fam
497)
> > that I could not even make a guess at.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Sandra" <>
> > To: <>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 11:13 PM
> > Subject: [ARIZARD-L] Vera - Edwin Martin Wolf
> >
> >
> > > Vera,
> > > I know what you mean by the ink, some of the old census pages look
like
> > > they have been sent through the laundry they are so blurred or
bleached
> > out,
> > > but guess we should be thankful that as many as did survived
considering
> > the
> > > various damages they received ! Not easy on my eyesight for sure !
> And
> > I
> > > can't help but think that some of the people I can't find are on some
of
> > > those smudged pages that there's no way you can possibly read ! :-)
> > >
> > > Could be Susan was in another county or state when she married the
> Renfroe
> > I
> > > suppose.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ==== ARIZARD Mailing List ====
> > Updated Message Boards Rootsweb/Ancestry.com:
> >
>
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec?http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec?htx=boar
> d&r=an&p=localities.northam.usa.states.arkansas.counties.izard
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ==== ARIZARD Mailing List ====
> Questions about Rootsweb? Go to: http://cgi.rootsweb.com/~help/index.htm
>
>



This thread: