I've been making good progress toward finishing my Albea family book as part of the Family History Writing Challenge. I've gotten some writing done for another generation and done a good amount of formatting. But as I've been working, I've been wondering if I have too little text and too many images. My book is currently 76 pages long, which is the exact same number of images that I have in the book. This makes me wonder if I have too many images.
Here's my concept: each generation gets a genealogy sketch, about 1,000 - 2,000 words. This usually focuses on the father of the family, since I'm fallowing a paternal line. The subsequent pages spotlight individual documents, such as census, court, or marriage records, as well as grave stone photos or whatever else I might have. If needed, I'll have a paragraph or two explaining the document and what I learned from it. I want to include as many images as possible for a couple of reasons: (1) they're cool, (2) so that I can cite my sources by including my sources.
Here's an (unfinished) example. It shows a 1920 census page and a mortgage deed. I explain a bit about each record. In other instances, I don't explain anything about a record if I've already talked about it in the genealogy sketch.
I wonder if I have enough writing in this book, or am relying too much on the images? I know a lot about these ancestors and I wonder if that is affecting my book. Do I need to write more and explain more about the documents, or is that redundant when I've included images of the document? Is using an image in place of words a cop out?