Jump to content

Rick Landrum's Content

There have been 136 items by Rick Landrum (Search limited from 23-July 18)

By content type

See this member's

Sort by                Order  

#94504 PDF File will not attach to RM

Posted by Rick Landrum on 18 July 2019 - 09:03 AM in Discussion

I had the last Win 10 update a few days ago and no issue in attaching pdf's in source (media tab) or directly event (picture next to source)….but had an Adobe update at about the same time.

Just to confirm - reloading the Windows 10 update, and reinstalling Adobe Viewer, seems to have corrected the issue with PDF's not attaching to RM7.



#94500 PDF File will not attach to RM

Posted by Rick Landrum on 17 July 2019 - 09:30 AM in Discussion

My "wild" idea was probably approximately correct but by no means 100% correct. I suspect the linkage between PDF files and Adobe Viewer was partially broken as I approximately described and that the reinstall of Adobe Viewer fully re-established Adobe Viewer as the default app for PDF files. In any case, I'm pleased that it's working again.




Your post reminded me that there was a Windows 10 update a few days ago and that was when this problem popped up. I just thought that maybe there was a connection and, since the problem was with PDF's, that a reinstall of Adobe might help. Guess it did.

Thanks again for the hints.


#94496 PDF File will not attach to RM

Posted by Rick Landrum on 17 July 2019 - 08:36 AM in Discussion

Here is one more wild idea, and it's really pretty vague. Somewhere along the way - perhaps with the release of Windows 10 or perhaps with an update to Windows 10 after its initial release - Microsoft made a change in how default programs were assigned to file extensions. This is the feature where, for example, txt files will open in Notepad by default and docx files will open in Microsoft Word by default. - and you can change the default programs to whatever programs you wish.


Previous to the change, when you installed a piece of software the software could easily take over as the default program for any number of file extensions. This was considered a security exposure and Microsoft tightened things up considerably. I don't know chapter and verse of all the details, but sometimes you end up with no program being the default for a file extension- or at least some parts of Windows don't quite know what the proper program is for a particular file extension.


I ran into the problem when I upgraded from Infanview (the 32 bit version) to IrvanView64 (the 64 bit version). This is a program which is excellent at displaying all manner of image files. Subsequent to my upgrade, RM couldn't open JPG files entered as "Files" without me getting a dialog from Windows asking what program to use to open JPG files. In that dialog, I would tell Windows to use Irfanview64 and I would tell Windows  to make Irfanview64 the default, but the problem persisted. During this time, JPG files would open in Irfanview64 just fine if I opened them from outside of RM.


I was never quite sure how I fixed it - I just played with it. But just yesterday I ran into a similar problem with PNG files on my other computer. I apparently fixed it by changing the default program for PNG files to another program and by changing it back. They now open smoothly from RM.


Windows 10 has made it awkward to change the default. Unless I'm missing it, there is no longer a direct way in Windows to change the default. Instead, you have to do it very indirectly using the Open With ... dialog, pick Other, pick your program, and choose the Make this the Default program option. So maybe you could go outside of RM, change the default for PDF to some other program, then change the default for PDF back to your preferred program. Having done so, see if RM can then open PDF files smoothly. I know this sounds wild and I don't have high hopes, but it might work.


I'm sure I have said this before on these forums and these forums don't deserve it, but Microsoft has been doing a lot of dumb stuff lately to Windows. And those dumb things can have an adverse impact on RM.




This sounds wierd, but I think it is fixed. I tried reassigning the default app for the pdf files, like you suggsted, but it seemed to have no effect. Next, I re-installed my Adobe Viewer. Then I tested with a brand new file, downloaded from Ancestry, converted it from a jpeg to a pdf, and it loaded fine. I also tested reloading an old pdf from my media directory to a different person's record, and it worked fine. So I'm not sure what fixed it, but it seems to be OK now.

Thanks for the help


#94490 PDF File will not attach to RM

Posted by Rick Landrum on 16 July 2019 - 07:30 PM in Discussion

I may have missed it, but are you still successful in linking in JPG and PNG files and such into RM?


The red square makes it sound like the path to the file is not correct - like it's a broken link. But you report that the file path actually IS correct and you shouldn't be able to create a broken link from the get go. To get a broken link, you have to create a correct link and subsequently  do something to break it. So it's a great mystery.


Here is an interesting experiment you can try. For any of your "won't open files" that you have just linked in, go to any of the screens in RM where you can see the full file path. The full file path can be copied. Having copied it, open a Windows File Explorer window and paste the entire file path you just copied into the "address box" (I'm not sure what it's officially called) at the top of Windows File Explorer. It should be the case the Windows File Explorer can find the file and can open it. This test should help distinguish between a Windows problem and an RM problem.




Yes, as far as I can tell all other file types are attaching with no problem (jpg etc). I conducted the test you suggested and had the same results in RM, and I was able to go to the link with no problem in Windows.PDF seems to be the only problem. This seems to confirm the problem must be in RM.



#94488 PDF File will not attach to RM

Posted by Rick Landrum on 16 July 2019 - 04:30 PM in Discussion


Yes, I knew this. However, the program is not acting normally. I have tested all sorts of different ways of loading the PDF to events, sources, etc. I also ran all the RM database tools and ran fix on my Adobe program, but nothing has helped. Old PDF's, loaded previously, are still working OK, new ones do not.



#94486 PDF File will not attach to RM

Posted by Rick Landrum on 16 July 2019 - 03:30 PM in Discussion

I have never had RM refuse to link a media file. Probably 99% of my media files are linked as File rather than Image, even if the underlying file is a JPG or PNG. I do have lots of PDF's linked into RM as well.


However, in the cases where I am linking to a person's general record (is that what you are calling a "person's profile", the file I'm linking is always truly an image file (e.g., JPG or PNG) and I link it is Image. That way, the image can print in a narrative report.


Maybe RM won't link a File or a PDF to the person's general record. If that's not it, then I have no explanation.



Thanks Jerry,

I'm confused also....I've tried to load it three different ways 1) against the "general record", 2) against and event, and 3) against a source record. In all three cases I have selected "file" instead of "image". I get a red square where the thumbnail should be, but no image. If I try to open it nothing happens. However, the properties show the path to the file, like normal. I also have tried various sample files to see if that makes a difference, but they all reacted the same.


I have hundreds of PDF files loaded to my tree in the past with no problems. Now, I'm not sure if this is an RM problem, a PDF software problem, or a PC problem.


Appreciate the feedback.


#94484 PDF File will not attach to RM

Posted by Rick Landrum on 16 July 2019 - 12:39 PM in Discussion

Suddenly, I am having trouble attaching PDF's to my RM data base. I select "File" and then the file but it will not load in the media field for a person's profile. I've loaded hundreds of these before??


Is anyone else having this issue?



#94483 Search for media in Ancestry

Posted by Rick Landrum on 15 July 2019 - 04:14 PM in Discussion

I really don't think they are searchable by the filenames you receive in TreeShare, but you can try contacting Ancestry support to find out. You could do it backwards by looking at the MediaTags in RM and who it is connected to. Then visiting them on Ancestry to find the media attached to them there. 

Thanks Renee,

I was kind of afraid that would be the answer. I knew you could "reverse search" by the person's name, but I was hoping that being able to directly search would save the time of going through what comes up in Ancestry to find the media being searched. I'll try their support to see if they have a different answer.

Appreciate the response.


#94480 Search for media in Ancestry

Posted by Rick Landrum on 15 July 2019 - 09:26 AM in Discussion

Does anyone know how to search for a media file in Ancestry by the Ancestry media ID number?


I no longer save Ancestry media in RM by the Ancestry ID.


However, I stil have many media files in my RM database that were added earlier through TreeShare. It would be helpful in identifying (and renaming) these files if I could search by the ID number in Ancestry and see the file info there.


I have been unable to find instructions for doing this in Ancestry, RM, or this forum.


Any help appreciated.



#94397 Color Coding Events

Posted by Rick Landrum on 07 July 2019 - 12:54 PM in Discussion

You could use the Proof setting on the fact level and set it to Disputed. It will place a red line through it helping you to see what fact you are needing to resolve with further research. 

Thanks Renee,

TIhis is a function that I had previously overlooked. I was thinking it was only for confirming proof of an event etc. However, it can be used, as you suggested, to "color code" additional research needed, by fact/event. I noticed the red strike through does not carry over to the "People View" (obviously), but I am trying this technique in combination with it. I created a group called "Research Still In Work". I selected the color code field and selected "Red". Now I use the "Quick Group" function to assign the person to this group if any events/facts have been coded "Proof/Disputed". This color codes the person in the "People View" making it easy to spot those persons with more work needed. When you open the person's profile you can see the events/facts that were also coded red by the "Proof/Disputed" function. Once all items have been worked, you just change the color for the person to a different color and the person disappears from the "Research Still In Work" group.

Appreciate the help


#94372 Color Coding Events

Posted by Rick Landrum on 06 July 2019 - 02:39 PM in Discussion

Here is a PS to my last post on this topic...
After a few days of trying the different methods suggested, I have found there are a few problems (at least for me). If you create a "dummy" fact, you first of all have to add it to the person's profile, and then you have to populate the fact detail to allow for sorting in the People view. If the status of your research changes, you have to revisit the "dummy" fact and change the detail to reflect the change.
My original problem was trying to find a way to highlight events that need additional research. The "dummy" fact does not do that per se. In addition, the "dummy" fact transfers to other platforms, such as Ancestry.com.
A refinement of my original method would go something like this -
1) place a flag in the person's "prefix" field. (ie - √, meaning "research considered complete", or W - meaning "research is still in work". (this field does not transfer to Ancestry.com). Change the flag as needed when status changes. Very fast.
2) create groupings based on these flags to allow sorting in the "People" view. (have done this and it works great). Groupings also work well to generate reports showing status.
3) use the "quick groups" tool to add or delete the person to or from the appropriate group, depending on status. (this also works great).
4) Use the "Proof - Disputed" tool to highlight facts/events in the persons profile that need additional research/work. Toggle off when work is complete. (this suggestion I like a lot - it really helps).
I realize this is a work around, but it makes reviewing my tree(s) much easier and faster. I may find issues with this going forward, but so far it seems to be working well. It would be great if RM added some sort of similar functionality.
Thanks again to all

#94357 Color Coding Events

Posted by Rick Landrum on 05 July 2019 - 10:08 AM in Discussion

Jerry, Tom, and Renee -
Thank you for the quick responses. These are all excellent suggestions. After thinking it over, and trying various tests, I'm thinking that the best solution for me is as follows:
1) Create a dummy "Research Status" fact.
2) Load it with no date (automatically sorts to the end of the persons profile).
3) If research is complete, leave as is. The sentence template states "Research Complete".
4) If research is not complete, use the "proof-disputed" function to "cross through" and "color red" the dummy fact. Change it back when research has been completed. (You also have to add something to the dummy fact description field if you want to use the "People View" to see the status of the idividual. Otherwise it will be blank.)
5) Also use the "proof-disputed" function to identify any regular facts where more research is needed. This can be combined with the "To-Do" function, if desired,  to capture what research is needed.
These ideas will really help me to make some sense out of the chaos...... :wacko:
Thanks again,

#94345 Color Coding Events

Posted by Rick Landrum on 04 July 2019 - 10:23 AM in Discussion

As part of my RM database housekeeping I would like to have the ability to color code specific events. I would use this to "flag" events that need further research for confirmation. I have not found this feature, only the ability to flag persons or groups.


My current method is to enter a text flag in the prefix field {I don't use prefix for any other purpose) and then group all persons with that flag. I then color code the group to signify some future action is required. However, this only identifies the people/group and does not highlight the event needing action.


For example:

I find a birth date for a person in say an unsourced public family tree. I go ahead and post the date to my tree

 and flag the person's prefix field with a code (say (W) meaning "in work"). I then color code the group with say "yellow". Now I can quickly tell that the person has "unfinished research", but I do not know where or which event. 


If the given event could be color coded, this in combination with the grouping, would make it a snap to identify what needs work.


Is this possible today?


Does anyone have an alternative method to accomplish this?


(Note: I know how to use the ToDo's but that gets pretty involved and data entry intensive. I just want something that will give me quick visual clues and the abiity to search).


Any help appreciated


#94245 Source Record Form Fill

Posted by Rick Landrum on 19 June 2019 - 08:51 AM in Discussion

I do not download a source to RM.  If there is a source with the data you have found on ancestry.com, I do download the source with the data to OneNote/ or use Evernote.  But I create my copy of any Source on those sites when entering into RM.  The only copy ing I do of a source template is when I have one that mentions 4 or more people, Once I have it completed in RM then I copy it to the clipboard and pass it in the next persons card file.  But you do have to manually add the date of , Place /Place details. Before placing opening the Citation Manager, then paste [alt + p]. or click the paste button.  


I do basically the same as you except that I use a clip board manager tool named "ClipClip". I've found it to be very well suited for copy/pasting source type data from other platforms to RM.

Thanks for the hints


#94227 Source Record Form Fill

Posted by Rick Landrum on 17 June 2019 - 08:00 AM in Discussion

Other users may have some useful suggestions, but honestly I don't have a good answer for you. But let me wax philosophical for just a second.


Many or most genealogy database type sites these days will present you with a completed "citation sentence" - what RM calls a footnote sentence - that can be copied and pasted into your desktop genealogy software or can be copied and pasted into your word processor if you were simply creating a report with a word processor. But if you were to paste such a "citation sentence" into RM, where would you paste it? I don't think there is a good place. It's like you would have to deconstruct the sentence so you could put the data elements into RM's source templates so RM's source templates can reconstruct the sentence. For example, why can't TreeShare simply transmit ancestry.com's "citation sentence" to RM and why can't RM just use it as is without the mediation of Source Templates on the RM side of the house? 


RM (and I think a good bit of other desktop genealogy software) is all about source templates and fill in the blank with individual data items and the software will generate the "citation sentences" for you. And RM (and I think a good bit of other desktop genealogy software) is all about the "Source + Citation" model which RM calls "Master Source + Source Detail". What sense does that make if other software will already create your "citation sentences" for you?


I get older and crankier every day. And the older and crankier I get the more I wonder if the "Source + Citation" model even makes sense anymore. And at the same time, I suspect that if you were to get the exact same census page from ancestry.com vs. familysearch.org vs. findmypast.com that the "citation sentence" that you could copy and paste from the various sites would not be even remotely compatible with each other. I would like my footnotes and end-notes to at least have some sort of internal consistency within my own database and within my own reports.


So I use source templates of my own design in RM and I enter all sourcing data manually to achieve a sort of internal consistency for my "citation sentences". I don't use ancestry's pre-constructed sentences or familysearch's pre-constructed sentences. I'm sure you can see the contradictions and internal inconsistencies in my arguments here. I think it's all a mess. I can't think of any good way to make it not be a mess. And there is surely nothing you can do to make me happy about any of it!   :)



I agree with what you are saying about sentence structure, and I have been struggling with how to handle sources and citations for quite some time. I really don't see the benefit in having to enter source citation details into the RM source templates, just so RM can create sentences. All this seems like redundant work to me. I also agree that TreeShare should just simply transfer the "citation sentence" into the source details tab. 
I am currently doing the following:
1. Create and name my own "master sources" (using one of RM's templates).
2. Use my "master source" instead of allowing TreeShare to insert a new one in my database.
3. Copy the "citation sentence" from the external source (Ancestry, FamilySearch, etc) and paste it into the "citation details-research notes" section.
4. Copy any remaining "citation details" from the external source, and paste them into the "citation details-comments" section.
5. Do not populate the "citation template" fields, leave them blank for now (in case needed in future), with maybe the exception of the "person of interest" field.
This seems to be working well for me, and I have not noticed any significant report issues. Assuming that I cannot find some tool or method that can "form fill" for me, I will just continue to do the above.
Thanks for the feedback.

#94224 Source Record Form Fill

Posted by Rick Landrum on 16 June 2019 - 01:32 PM in Discussion

Seeking advice regarding completion of details in an RM Source record


I am looking for a way of automating (or at least making more efficient) the process of entering record details obtained from other platforms (i.e. Ancestry TreeShare) into the appropriate record fields in RM.


For example, I currently use the source templates in RM. Tree Share populates some of the fields in the RM record, but it does not load all of the available information from Ancestry into the details in the RM source record. As a result, I capture the remaining research details/notes from the record in Ancestry, and then paste them into the details tab of the RM source record. All of the detail is saved, but the detail fields in the RM record template are not all populated. I am searching for a way to load the source, with data captured in Ancestry, without having to copy/paste each field's data, or retype the data into each field.


Does anyone have any experience with a copy/paste (form fill) tool or method  that will help automate the population of the fields in RM in these instances? Having to manually retype all the captured data into RM is very time consuming, and the only other alternative is just to save the data in mass in the details tab, but leave some of the template fields empty.


(There are also probably many other record types in RM where a better process of loading copied information would be of help.)


Any thoughts appreciated



#94122 Storage of Media Files

Posted by Rick Landrum on 06 June 2019 - 02:35 PM in Discussion

OK, Thanks Jerry

That is what I thought, but I have never tested an RM and PC/Media directory restore. I assume you would direct the media directory restore to the media directory path established by the RM restore. This makes me feel more comfortable in case I ever have to.

Appreciate the feed back.


#94118 Storage of Media Files

Posted by Rick Landrum on 06 June 2019 - 09:26 AM in Discussion

I have also been following this thread with interest, and I was also not aware that backing up my media files using RM Backup could result in a loss of sub-folder structure; and that this could require that the media file links would have to be recreated.
My concern now, after reading the various posts on this topic, is that if I have to restore my data base from an RM backup, that my links to the media files, in sub-folders, in my media directory may be lost.
However, I had decided some time ago not to store my media using media directory sub-folders. Instead, I use a combination of my personal media file naming conventions, and Windows tagging, to make searching easier. I save all my media in one single RM media directory.
I do not use RM to back up my media files, only my data base. I do back up my media files as part of my usual periodic PC backup to an external drive. I also make a separate, insurance, media directory backup to another external drive, on a weekly basis.
I had assumed that so long as the path to my media directory was not changed, regardless of whether or not the media directory had to be restored from one of my non-RM backups, that the media links in my RM database would be OK.
Am I understanding this correctly?

#94008 Handling unknown last names

Posted by Rick Landrum on 26 May 2019 - 09:14 AM in Discussion

Hello! I came upon this topic by accident, but thought I would add my two cents' worth. Even though it is not in a timely manner.  :)


When I have a wife without a known maiden name, I simply use her husband's surname, followed by ', nee?'. For example, John Smith married Mary, whose surname has not yet been found. Mary's entry would then be Given Name: Mary; Surname: Smith, nee?


To me, it seemed a logical thing to do. When I first started out with genealogy twenty years ago, the first question I would ask of myself was (for example), 'What was John Smith's wife Mary's maiden name? Mary Smith, nee... what?' So, that was why I entered it that way.


This keeps me from having a long list of given names with blanks for surnames; it keeps all the wives with unknown maiden names together at the end of their particular families' alphabetical list of entries in the Person Index; and it alerts me to the fact that I still have to find those missing maiden names. 


I haven't had any problems with sorting... or anything else. :)


I hope this suggested method might be of use to someone. 

Kind regards,



I came across this post while searching for "handling alternate names in Ancestry.com". Your method of handling unknown maiden names is simple, easy to do, and easy to find if and when the person's maiden name is discovered. I was using the method of posting unknown in the surname field and "Wife of husbands first name and surname", (or "wife of John Doe") in the suffix field. Your method is better and I am switching over to it.

Thanks for posting


#93950 Posting shared sources & media by memorizing

Posted by Rick Landrum on 18 May 2019 - 09:16 AM in Discussion

Have not been very active here but need to re copy an old discussion on census records.  I do it different than others do.  So here is my copy of the way I do them.  Or go look at 2015 Forum, Tips and Hints for 

Census Records using one record per census year   or one Master Source record per census year. 


Thanks for your post, especially the tip about using an " * " to force flagged master sources  to the top of the list.

I am doing about the same as you, except that I create a census master source for each census year for both Ancestry and for Family search (where I do most of my census searches). Like you, I name all my master sources with a prefix. (Example: Census = "[CEN]".) This groups my entire master census list by type.

Now that I have brought some semblance of order to all this, I am working to correct all my assigned sources (past sloppiness) by using the Merge tool. 

Thanks again for the tips,


#93921 Posting shared sources & media by memorizing

Posted by Rick Landrum on 15 May 2019 - 03:51 PM in Discussion

This is very helpful. With the exception of creating unique master sources for every instance, I am doing basically the same as you. I also use the Windows CTL-C and CTL-V to paste data into the source and citation in RM. Depending on how much editing I think I may need to do, I'll paste it into Notepad first and then copy/paste it into RM when I'm done. I also pick up a lot of text from Ancestry by going to (for example) a hint, view on line, then click the print button and capture the data from the print preview screen. This also is helpful to pick up the master source and citation data. When editing the text, I also make extensive use of a clipboard manager tool called "ClipClip".


Anyway, sounds like I'm on the right track.


Thanks again,


#93919 Posting shared sources & media by memorizing

Posted by Rick Landrum on 15 May 2019 - 12:16 PM in Discussion

Memorize/paste is the totally standard procedure that I suspect most experienced RM users use. Indeed, for a document such as an obituary that mentions lots of names I might end up pasting the same citation as many as 20 or 30 times.
There is a subtle design deficiency in RM's underlying data model that in turn creates a subtle problem with the citation memorize/paste procedure. Suppose you paste the same citation 20 or 30 times, and then suppose you discover a typo or other error. Or suppose you forgot to link in media before you did the memorize/paste. In any of these kinds of situations, you typically have to find all the many places you pasted the erroneous citation and correct the error in each place.
I solved the problem, but I suspect that most RM users are not very enthusiastic about my solution. Namely, I only enter data into RM's Master Source fields and I enter no data into RM's Source Details field. The result is that I am an extreme source splitter and my list of Master Sources is extremely long. But any data that I need to correct that is in a Master Source (which in my case is all my source data) needs to be corrected only once instead of many, many times.


I understand your point, and indeed have run into some of the problems that you mentioned. However, I guess it boils down to a judgment call as to when to create a "unique" master source for memorizing, vs a standard one to be used with citations. If a user goes full on to all unique master sources (like you have), and no citation details, then how do you enter individual notes about a specific person or event without filling up the master source with a lot of individual details. I can see creating a unique master source in cases like an obituary, where you might think that you woud not encounter that source again (local newspaper etc). But others, like census records, seem to make sense to create a "standard" master source, and then enter specific details in the citation. This will just take more thought and experience to decide.


In any case, I'm glad to hear that others are using the memorization and pasting  of source/citations/media without any program or platform sharing issues.


Thanks for the feed back.


#93904 Posting shared sources & media by memorizing

Posted by Rick Landrum on 14 May 2019 - 02:27 PM in Discussion

Thank you Renee
Appreciate it


#93901 Posting shared sources & media by memorizing

Posted by Rick Landrum on 14 May 2019 - 12:46 PM in Discussion

Seeking Opinions

I've got a quick RM question and would appreciate any feedback.

I have started using a new process (for me anyway) to enter fact sources for multiple persons who "share" common facts/events. I would like to know if others are doing this, and if anyone sees any issues as a result.

I have found that in many cases it is easier to create a source/citation for one person, attach any relevant media, and then memorize and paste it against a fact or event for another person, or group of persons, rather than create a new citation for each person. (Of course, there are cases where the source/citation is only for a single person and this would not apply.)

An example would be to create a census fact, assign a master source/citation, with a copy of the census media, for the head of the family, and then memorizing and pasting it to a census fact for each census family member. A new fact/event does have to be created for each person, but the master source/citation/media only have to be entered once. This is very fast and also seems to work well for data transfers with Ancestry, etc.

It seems very similar to RM sharing, but it really is not. Each memorized source/citation, and media instance, is unique to the person it is pasted to, with none of the "links" associated with sharing. (You may need to annotate some specific citation details for each person.) The media transfers fine and is automatically attached to the citation for each person.

So far, I have not found any significant issues with this process. However, I am concerned that I may be missing something that may cause me significant family tree rework later.

Any comments or suggestions appreciated.



#93879 when a record is wrong.

Posted by Rick Landrum on 12 May 2019 - 02:57 PM in Discussion

I just dipped my toe into the field of Jewish genealogy. I'm finding that one person may have a transliteration of their name from Yiddish, a transliteration from Hebrew and an Anglicization of the name, all different. Additionally they will sometimes use a family surname and sometimes use a patronymic. Makes Swedish genealogy look like a walk in the park.

While my tree is probably not as complex as the Jewish Genealogy you describe, I have had similar issues. A lot of my family came from Scotland. I've found numerous cases where they changed their names, or at least "Americanized" the spelling to agree with the phonetic pronunciation of the original name, after they arrived in America..