I didn't think ahead!

[MrChips]

I, rather supidly, (although it didn't seem so at the time), included both my and my wife's family tree in the same file on FamilyTree2009.

It makes the new altogether horizontal chart totally unmanageable.

Is there any convenient way that I can 'break' the one file into two, so that there is one for the Parkers, and another for the Whaleys?

[Elaine ..Spain]

It can be done.
Out of interest how many people are in your file - just to get an idea of how easy it is going to be for you to do.
Have you looked at the option of who to include in your Ancestor chart - so that you have one for you and one for your wife?

[MrChips]

Elaine,

At the moment, just a mere 220 .... but now would be the best time to get the split made.

I have tried several ways, mainly using GEDCOM exports, but I can't get the total in each to match the 220 names!:(

i am doing something stupid again, I am sure.

[Elaine ..Spain]

I have to say I find the new Extended Family chart totally unmanageable and as your tree grows then I think you will find the same as well even if you do decide to split your tree!

I am of the belief that everything is kept on one file - just my personal preference because if I am doing a ancestral tree for one of my children or grandchildren then I need the whole familly, not just half of it!

I'll have a quick look at FTM 2009 and work out some instructions for you. Back in a mo!

[Elaine ..Spain]

FILE / EXPORT

Click SELECTED INDIVIDUALS

Now presuming you are splitting this between you and your wife, then click on your name in the left hand column and select the INCLUDE -> tab in the centre column.
Your name will move over to the right hand column.
Go back to the left hand column and select your name again.
Select ANCESTORS -> from centre column - select INCLUDE ALL PARENTS - select INCLUDE ALL SPOUSES - select INCLUDE ANCESTORS DESCENDANTS.
Click OK.

You should then find that all names of your ancestors and their descendants should be in the right hand box.
Click OK - and then just follow the instructions through for example on next screen whether you want to include all facts/notes etc.
Make sure you save your new file with a distinctive name from the original.

So decide first if this is really what you want - and then if you get lost with instructions come back and I'll try to help again.
I'm not that familiar with 2009 as although I have it installed on my computer I am still using 2006 for most things.

[MrChips]

Elaine ... I can see what you mean ... I need to think that one through a bit

[MrChips]

File / Export is obviously the way to go ... but when I tried it it didn't capture the full 220 peeps.
I can see that it needs a bit of tweaking to get the full 220 into them somehow ... I shall persevere.

The point you make, however, is a valid one.

If there is a way of just producing this massive report for just one section of the family, that would be an improvement. ... if I find a way, I will share it with you.

I shall take notice of your good council Elaine, and keep with the full file and see what can be done on the wide report.

Once again, many thanks for your time and speed of reply.

[Elaine ..Spain]

File / Export is obviously the way to go ... but when I tried it it didn't capture the full 220 peeps.

If you have total of 220 people in the existing file and you split it, then it isn´t going to capture 220 people or are you talking about the combined total of the two files after they have been split. If that is the case then it sounds as if you have some 'orphaned entries' -that is people in the file who are not connected to the main tree.

[Uncle John]

I go along with Elaine's general principle of putting everyone in one tree. I now have around 4000 people in my tree (including some very distant twigs!). I gave up printing off trees from FTM many years ago. When I need to see a section of the tree I create an ancestor or descendant report with the required number of generations.

[MrChips]

Well ... there is no point of asking for advice, and not taking it.

I shall keep one tree for all the peeps (all 220 of them).

I can't imagine getting my head round the concept of having 4000 people to manage!

[Uncle John]

I can't imagine getting my head round the concept of having 4000 people to manage!

I only look at one small part at a time. After all, most of the people in my tree are not related to each other, and quite a lot are not related to me or OH.

[Caroline]

Well ... there is no point of asking for advice, and not taking it.

I shall keep one tree for all the peeps (all 220 of them).

I can't imagine getting my head round the concept of having 4000 people to manage!

Once we join up those Taphouses there will be many more!! :D

[MrChips]

Caroline,

I am in such a disorganised mess!
I move about the tree looking for bits to follow-up, then move on ... often returning and doing the same again a few days later! I have a completely chaotic approach ... often wasting time .. and probably missing the obvious on the way.
Re Taphouse ... much the same as above. I have a few feelers out to tree owners, and am awaiting their responses.

[Caroline]

Caroline,

I am in such a disorganised mess!
I move about the tree looking for bits to follow-up, then move on ... often returning and doing the same again a few days later! I have a completely chaotic approach ... often wasting time .. and probably missing the obvious on the way.
Re Taphouse ... much the same as above. I have a few feelers out to tree owners, and am awaiting their responses.

You wont be alone. I think we will all have done that - and I still do. One thing I wish I had been more organised with, was systematically recording sources in my software in the early days, especially when I had information from other people which I would like to query with them now. Mixed up piles of printouts and scrappy bits of paper aren't much help .... :D