Family History Microfilm Discontinuation (info not question)

Question

Apologies if this has been pointed out before, but I've just discovered that from 1 September FamilySearch will no longer be offering their microfilm loan service.  They are apparently going to be relying on digital images only in the future.  Full notification is at https://www.lds.org/callings/temple-and-family-history/familysearch-microfilm-discontinuation?lang=eng&_r=1

Comments

Thank you, I had not heard this.

---

If they decide to "do away" with them - I'm sure there are PLENTY of takers who would want a copy for home... :)

Answer 1

I'm praying they put up the images for Melilli then and Siracusa in general. Why couldn't my ancestors live in bustling cities...

Comments

They want you to use them like a fiction library.  Don't complain at what they haven't got, just enjoy what they've got.

Answer 2

Thanks so much for this information.   What they are planning is great in theory.  The problem being not everyone has a FHC located near enough to be able to use their computers for viewing.  

I had been putting off my order for films, but thanks to your notice I just completed it .  Trying to get as much done as I can before the shutdown.

Answer 3

I didn't know about the shutdown.  But I had wondered why Family Search stopped providing cross-references to microfilm, by number, for many vital records.

I've discovered that people don't know how to load a microfilm machine in some libraries, or that broken down microfilm readers had not been repaired (in a library that features genealogy reference books).  It's been disappointing, to say the least.

Comments

If they decide they don't need to show film numbers, it'll become virtually impossible to identify sources.  It's hard enough already.

I don't just want to see an image, I want to know what I'm looking at.

---

I don't know if the "no cross-reference to a microfilm number" was by plan or by accident.  I'll show two I accessed today:  (By the way, I concluded that Sarah and Samuel were twins):

• "Connecticut Births and Christenings, 1649-1906," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:F77L-HYC : 3 December 2014), Sarah Kenedy, 31 Jul 1743; citing ; FHL microfilm unknown.

• "Connecticut Births and Christenings, 1649-1906," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:F74S-FG8 : 3 December 2014), Samuel Kenedy, 30 Jul 1743; citing ; FHL microfilm unknown.  
• Now, compare with a marriage I had sourced last year:
• "New Hampshire Marriages, 1720-1920," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:FDLR-5D2 : 31 December 2014), Auburn Simmons and Mabel Clement, 05 Apr 1882; citing reference 2:1D3MMDJ; FHL microfilm 1,001,306.

---

"Connecticut Births and Christenings" isn't a source.

---

It is a source, a database of extracted data, thus a secondary source. That said, when there is no connection to a primary source (or digitized version of that source), some of the value of the original source is lost.

I looked at the Connecticut database you cited, and was somewhat surprised that no linked images seem to be in the database. Considering the date of this database (2014) and that is was from an Internet indexing project, I find this surprising, and disappointing.

One of the good points in the old IGI, and some of the other extraction projects, was that the microfilm number was given, which would allow you to go to an image of the original record.

Like you, I also want to know exactly what I'm looking at.