User talk:Alvesgaspar/archive4

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Chichilianne[edit]

You reviewed and declined my picture called Mont Aiguile Chichilianne.jpg because of a left tilt. Thanks for the input. I fixed the tilt. Can I resubmit or my picture has other big flows? Berrucomons 11:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyright of Image:Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-2.jpg[edit]

Michael, I'm not sure about the copyright of these panel. The author died in 1942 (less than 70 years ago) but the work is in a public place, in the outside wall of a building. As far as I know, it is not forbidden to take pictures of that building. Can you help? - Alvesgaspar 23:21, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Joaquim, I'm not totally sure, I'm afraid. Generally, photographing a copyright work without the consent of the copyright owner, and uploading it here, will be a copyright infringement even if the work is on display in a public place - in other words the copyright owner does not give up his or her rights by displaying in public. But in some countries, Portugal included, there is an exception called Freedom of Panorama which allows buildings and sometimes other works as well to be photographed freely. The problem is that generally, this freedom applies only to three-dimensional objects, and it's very unusual for 2D designs to be covered. The relevant part of the Portuguese law appears to be §75(2)q of the Copyright Act which reads "A utilização de obras, como, por exemplo, obras de arquitectura ou escultura, feitas para serem mantidas permanentemente em locais públicos.." Can you tell me whether that states or implies that 2D works are covered? If it uses language equivalent to the English "Works of Artistic Craftsmanship" they probably aren't as that's code for a type of 3D work. I don't know if that helps. --MichaelMaggs 20:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

As it doesn't seem clear either way I think you can reasonably give yourself the benefit of the doubt. --MichaelMaggs 06:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Wind Rose Aguiar[edit]

It's done. You may now check the corrected svg drawing. --Fibonacci 01:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

dinosaurs[edit]

i do know him, we work together at the wikipedia proyect -LadyofHats 10:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion[edit]

Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-2.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image Image:Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

--Simonizer 08:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Back[edit]

Hi, Joaquim! Welcome back. Lycaon 11:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Yeah, from me too. Hope you had a good trip to Bern and some nice days at Porto Covo? --Simonizer 11:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you to both, it feels good to be welcome by my Commons friends. How is FPC running, do we have more talented authors? My stay in Berne was excellent, though very tiring. Can you recognize anyone in here? I now have my new 18-200 Nikkor lens. It is not easy to use in macro photos and in the high focal end, due to motion blur and barrel distortion. What do you think of the sample in my page? - Regards, Alvesgaspar 12:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Are you the man on the second picture? The word on the nameplate looks like Joaquim. The colours of the sample pictures are pretty good and the quality is ok for a allround lens. Did you use a tripod? There are no really new talented authors. MichaD, Böhringer and of course Lycaon, with his excellent Namibia pictures, are the one, who are contributing most of the new FPs at the moment. --Simonizer 12:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Am i right? --Simonizer 09:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • It was a nice experience. Entlebuch is really a journey worth. There are several breathtaking landscapes. Of course i have taken a lot of pictures and also tested my new lens a lot. I am still working on the postprocessing, but i will share my pictures with commons. Maybe I will upload a punch of pics today in the evening. --Simonizer 10:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mother and daughter.jpg[edit]

Hi Joaquim. I learned a few tricks since you were gone ;-). I tried a little noise reduction on you pretty mother and daughter (shouldn't it be big and little sister, btw?) here. Hope you like it. Lycaon 17:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

firefox layout[edit]

hey, really great pictures! just wanted to let you know that the layout of the "recent photos" section in your user page doesnt work well in mozilla firefox. Canislupusarctos 13:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Acrididae grasshopper-2.jpg[edit]

Hi Joaquim. This is not a Locusta migratorius, but most likely an Anacridium aegyptium. De striped eyes give it away. You may want to change your description on Wikimania. Regards. Lycaon 19:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Tokina lens[edit]

Yeah wind is always an unwelcome thing for a macro photographer. Iam looking forward for your first pictures with the new lens. Good luck. --Simonizer 12:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Felis silvestris - July 2007-1.jpg[edit]

With "she-cat" do you mean a female? --Beyond silence 12:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


Transformer[edit]

Hi Joaquim. This week they spent me some leisure-time :) ... to make it not a lazy-time, I decided to contribute some pictures. I saw that there could be more competition on the FP list, so I took the bait, but trying to keep out from voting and getting involved to much ... just stay S I L E N T. Huch! --Richard Bartz 16:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Pollen wasp ??[edit]

Hi, Joaquim, me again. You 've been fooled by the mimicry of a hoverfly! It's a Chrysotoxum likely C. bicinctum. In Dutch we call it the Grote Fopwesp wich would translate something like the large hoax wasp. Look at the two yellow halteres and the eyes. Regards. Lycaon 16:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

They are good aren't they? They walk, fly and look like a wasp, but they are hoverflies, be assured. Diptera are characterized by the possession of only two wings and a pair of halteres, Hymenoptera have two pair of connected wings and no halteres. Here you can see a picture of Celonites abbreviatus. Check out the abdomen (wider and not smooth), the antennae (clubs, not pointed) and the eyes (much smaller). I'm only 95% sure about the species (though they can be quite variable in pattern, with or without an extra thin yellow line), I'm 100% certain about the genus Chrysotoxum. Regards. -- Lycaon 16:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Darter[edit]

Insects are not easy, I'm the first one to admit. I've been doing a bit of resarch on your specimen and lo and behold it is a different one. Sympetrum striolatum has brownish to dark red pterostigmata (the small rectangular spots at the end of the wings), while yours has pale ones with dark borders. It is a Sympetrum fonscolombii. Regards -- Lycaon 17:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


Great collection of new darter pics!! If I find a minute, I'll look into your unknown one. -- Lycaon 16:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi Joaquim. I did a small edit on one of your darters. I removed the white fringing caused by sharpening. Comments? Lycaon 17:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


For the green darter and the one with the wide abdomen, see FPC. Regards. Lycaon 18:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wasp_August_2007-1.jpg[edit]

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 16:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania Awards[edit]

Image:Felis silvestris - July 2007-1.jpg[edit]

With "she-cat" do you mean a female? --Beyond silence 12:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes, like "she-bear" means a female bear, etc. - Alvesgaspar 23:19, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Felis silvestris - July 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Felis silvestris - July 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Hoverfly - July 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hoverfly - July 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

New darters.[edit]

Stubbornness is the right way forwards. Very nice progress! I'm coming halfway your way this week: I'll be in Andorra. Have fun on FPC and continue the pretty darter (and other) pics. See you next week. Lycaon 02:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion[edit]

Mother and daughter edit.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image Image:Mother and daughter edit.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Mother and daughter edit.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

--Simonizer 09:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Solitary bee June 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Solitary bee June 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Image:Darter_August_2007-26.jpg[edit]

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 17:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Wasp August 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wasp August 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Raw converter[edit]

Hi Joaquim. Iam still looking for the optimal but cheap workflow (best raw converter is adobe lightroom in my opinion but it is too expensive) for my raw files. At the moment iam working with the free Nikon Picture Project, but you are very restricted in functions, they are mostly automated too and you can only export jpg-Files. But it works in most cases. If i need more functions, like colour or luminance curve adjusting, i use the open source program Raw Therapee.

There is also a Raw Plugin for Gimp, but i didnt get it work until now.

If you take pictures in Raw its important that you switch off things like whitebalance, sharpening and colour-adjustments at your camera. You can better adjust that with your converter. But as good as a converter is, it cant make a unsharp photographed picture sharp. It can only make a sharp picture sharper/better. So use your tripod if possible as much as you can and make the same shot with multiple settings. --Simonizer 13:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I have to accept the votes from[edit]

Me too, I have to accept the votes from you, even I think some of your votes are not justly. --Beyond silence 23:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Play the ball, not the man. If you disagree with specific votes, then let's discuss those those specific votes. Comments like "some of your votes are unjust" are unhelpful, because we don't know which ones you object to or why, so whether you are right or wrong, there is no opportunity for us all to learn from each other. Regards, Ben Aveling 10:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)



ljlkj[edit]

Olá Joaquim. Não sei se reparou mas a sua fotografia da Inês está na "capa" da wiki-pt. É linda! muriel@pt 21:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

  • E aposto que não é só ela... Da próxima vez que fotografar flores, procure na wiki-pt se temos o artigo - há Muitos artigos sobre géneros de plantas sem imagem e tenho a certeza que as suas fotos iam fazer a diferença. muriel@pt 21:36, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mittlist Gfaell 02 edit.jpg[edit]

A good edit, also the clouds are loosing some contrast. Ive tried to make this by myself but didnt find a suitable solution until now. But go ahaed and nominate your edit. Lets see what the others will say. Thanks --Simonizer 07:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Darter August 2007-13.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Darter August 2007-13.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Darter August 2007-17.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Darter August 2007-17.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Darter August 2007-8.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Darter August 2007-8.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Gull Porto Covo July 2007-7.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gull Porto Covo July 2007-7.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Darter August 2007-12.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Darter August 2007-12.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Contre-jour talk.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Contre-jour talk.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Wasp August 2007-9.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wasp August 2007-9.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Eristalis sp - July 2007-2.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Eristalis sp - July 2007-2.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Vespa cabro[edit]

My dear Joaquim. It is surely not a Hornet, but what it is, I don't really know now (I'm at work, so I haven't got the time to do some research). But hold on, I'm not giving up (yet). Wasps are quite difficult though, especially with mainly internet sources... Regards. Lycaon 14:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Bingo! Got your critter! It is a Philanthus triangulum, or the European beewolf. Regards. Lycaon 16:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Wasps[edit]

Me again. I'm sorry to have to tell you that your Common Wasps are something else again. V. vulgaris has all black antennae and yellow mandibles, in your species it is the other way round (and there are other issues). As soon as I find out the correct species, I'll let you know. But for now you should remove the name Vespula vulgaris as it is misleading the casual visitor to your galleries. Regards. Lycaon 18:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok found it. It is a French paper wasp, Polistes gallicus Regards. Lycaon 19:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

FP[edit]

Hi Joaquim. Have a look a the last four votes in this case. Looks like vote rigging or worse, sockpuppetry. (BTW same happened here). Opinion? Lycaon 11:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't this look suspicious? It's interesting that Ddenkel, Alperx and KIZILSUNGUR all appear to be Turkish, and all have accounts under the same names on tr.WP. The proposer, White Cat, as well as the uploader of the image Vikimach also have accounts on that Wiki. White Cat is of course well known here, and several of the others appear to have established accounts so I don't think all four voters are likely to be sockpuppets. However, if you look at the user page of Uannis on the Turkish Wikipedia ([1]) you will see what I think may be be a 'Blocked as sockpuppet' notice (though that needs to be checked as I don't speak Turkish). It seems probable we have a least one sockpuppet and at least several others who are supporting for nationalistic reasons rather than voting for the image on its merits. We have seen that before - but I'm not sure what we can realistically do about it. We could ask for Checkuser on Uannis, though. --MichaelMaggs 20:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Lycaon's good news show ;-)[edit]

The hoverfly I tentatively named Chrysotoxum is actually Ceriana conopsoides!! Lycaon 16:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

C. vespiformis! Well it's those little details that do it!! Yellow femurs indeed. We desperately need an entomologist on board here ;-). Lycaon 10:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

ID[edit]

If you are not shure, Lycaon is not shure and you ask your Referend in the church and hes not shure, too, then, yes then you should open a account on this adress ... they know everything. :) Best regards, Richie --Richard Bartz 17:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

PS here is a example --Richard Bartz 17:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Macro[edit]

My SLR won't show much noise at ISO 400, and practically none on the bright areas. this was taken at 400 ISO, and I think it's pretty much noise free. I'm sure D80 is at least as good as my camera on the noise side. Do you take jpeg straight out of the camera, or do you convert RAWs ? Benh 21:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Darter August 2007-3.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Darter August 2007-3.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Darter August 2007-18.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Darter August 2007-18.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.


Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Graphosoma italicum August 2007-3.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Graphosoma italicum August 2007-3.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Graphosoma italicum August 2007-5.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Graphosoma italicum August 2007-5.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

POTY 2007[edit]

I've just come across this page Commons:Picture of the Year/2007/Preparation, and thought I'd mention it in case you don't yet have it on your watch list. --MichaelMaggs 10:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

FP promotion[edit]

Wasp August 2007-12.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image Image:Wasp August 2007-12.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Wasp August 2007-12.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Nerium oleander flowers leaves.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nerium oleander flowers leaves.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Wasp August 2007-16.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wasp August 2007-16.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Mantid August 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mantid August 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Gazania August 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gazania August 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Ipomoea August 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ipomoea August 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Verbascum sinuatum August 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Verbascum sinuatum August 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Fly August 2007-4.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fly August 2007-4.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Hoverfly August 2007-4.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hoverfly August 2007-4.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Lantana August 2007-2.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lantana August 2007-2.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Mantid August 2007-3.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mantid August 2007-3.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Lantana August 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lantana August 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

bugs[edit]

You will soon be an entomologist honoris causa ;) -- Lycaon 18:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

  • "On the shoulders of giants". Or should I say "through the eyes" ?... Alvesgaspar 18:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Rio Douro.jpg[edit]

A imagem não foi ampliada, sofreu um pouco de aturação, para avivar a cor, mas nada mais. Está quase completamente original. Cumps. Tiago Vasconcelos 18:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


Picture[edit]

Can I nominate my picture Image:Bee1.jpg again, or do you think it won´t become a featured picture.--Lucas Löffler 11:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

  • There is a way to withdraw a nomination wthout taking it off the FPC list, just use the {{Withdraw}} template. With the big improvement of the quality of macro shots, verified during the last months, I really don't think your picture has a chance to be featured. But you should put it back there, we never know... Alvesgaspar 14:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Biological naming conventions[edit]

Hi Joaquim. A small remark. You should only italicize genus and species name, no higher taxa such as families. That's an international convention for scientific names of organisms. There are exceptions such as in Lithuania where they italicize all foreign names, but generally this rule is followed. (BTW, I found the name of another of your wasps: Sceliphron caementarium). Cheers. Lycaon 18:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

A new version is available[edit]

Dear Joaquim, Iam very disapointed about the polling-progress on this Image. So i uploaded a new improved version and would ask if you can drop an eye on it, that would be very kind. Regards Richie --Richard Bartz 20:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Dear Richard, you should know that I'm one of your fans (those who pass the nigh near the stage, right at the fence). But I give much more importance to aesthetics and originality than to technical achievements (assuming that the "quality bar" is respected, of course). Being 1:0.5 instead of 1:1 is not relevant by itself as long as the image is technically good (QI) and has exceptional value or beauty (FP) (btw, I only have a 1:2 lens). The difficulty of the shots and the swet we had to expend to get them shouldn't be mentioned either. - Alvesgaspar 22:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I understand, but if you ever will have a 1:1 or bigger lens i guarantee you, your mind will total change, it also changed when you started diving into the cosmos of Darters, Hoovers etc. i recognized how you got fascinated of the behaviour of this wonderful creatures, when you wrote about they characteristics etc. There is a scientific side in me .. the fascination of magnification, making unseen thing visible. A example was the jaws of my last contrib. This is fascinating, maybe not fancy like a flower or cute like a ladybug but it has a imense value. Yours, --Richard Bartz 23:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wasp August 2007-23.jpg[edit]

I really felt that it should have made FP, I would only fault it on the DOF being slightly too shallow so that the prey isn't sharply focused. But it is an impressive shot even if it is an everyday part of the wasps life! Certainly one of wikimedia's best :-) --Tony Wills 10:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah it was close :) --Richard Bartz 12:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Eristalinus September 2007-2.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Eristalinus September 2007-2.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Yellow flower with critters.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Yellow flower with critters.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

You forgot to sign, and QICbot gave me some undeserved recognition :) - just putting it where it belongs. Thegreenj 01:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

YABP[edit]

Yet Another Boring Picture. Not a very civil comment if you ask me... Lycaon 22:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Boring, eheheh... Well, I'm not offended. As I commented in the page that is just lack of basic scientific culture ;-) Alvesgaspar 22:40, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  •  :-))) Lycaon 22:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I thought it meant Yet Another Brilliant Picture. --MichaelMaggs 17:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Award[edit]

Multo obrigado! :-) Lycaon 11:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

How do insects grow?[edit]

Answered on my talk page. Regards. Lycaon 12:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Hoverfly September 2007-8.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hoverfly September 2007-8.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Bee September 2007-9.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bee September 2007-9.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Opinião[edit]

Olá! O MarioM andou a carregar algumas fotos muito interessantes. Os meus conhecimentos técnicos são muito limitados, mas parece-me que algumas delas poderiam ser quality pictures. Achei esta, esta, esta e esta muito boas. A segunda tem o problema de ter um elemento que distrai visualmente (o braço), mas como digo, não percebo muito do assunto. Também gostei desta e desta, mas se calhar estão muito sobrexpostas; talvez melhorassem com algum processamento? Também achei esta interessante, mas talez a DOF não seja óptima. Se tiveres tempo e paciência, poderias comentar? Desde já, muito obrigada :) PatríciaR msg 12:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Obrigada! Aprendo muito a ler os debates das Quality e Featured, mas não participo por causa dos meus limitados conhecimentos técnicos. Mas sei quem vir "chatear" ;). Cumprimentos! PatríciaR msg 15:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Opinião[edit]

Olá, Alvesgaspar
Antes de mais espero que te não aborreça vir te chatear e dirigir-me a ti directamente. Muito agradeço os comentários sobre as minhas fotos. Tenho consciência das minhas limitações técnicas e artísticas. A minha intenção é antes de mais contribuir para a WP, ter fotos classificadas como quality pictures será secundário. Em todo o caso quero aprender e melhorar, por isso comento os teus comentários:
Foto 1 - Referes-te a usar um software tipo Photoshop? Pois, tenho que aprender a trabalhar com isso. A Nikon tem tb software próprio. Conheces/recomendas?
Foto 2 - É, enquadramento falhado. Parece-me que não tem solução, pois esta está não editada. Poderia melhorar um pouco cortando o tal dedo e reduzindo a área atrás da cauda, mas é impossível dar mais espaço acima. Carreguei-a por ser documental, mostra a águia-cobreira de corpo inteiro.
Foto 4 - A ideia desta e da seguinte é documentar o funcionamento da membrana nictante. Na segunda os olhos estão abertos, o que está fechado é a tal membrana que pisca muito rapidamente, nem conseguimos ver a vista desarmada. Devem ser vistas em conjunto.
Foto 5 - Sobre o peito queimado. Haveria alguma solução para evitar isso?
Mais uma vez, obrigado. MarioM 17:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Obrigado pela ajuda e parabéns pelas tuas. MarioM 22:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Anthidium September 2007-7.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Anthidium September 2007-7.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Volucella September 2007-2.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Volucella September 2007-2.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Eristalis September 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Eristalis September 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Bee September 2007-13.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bee September 2007-13.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

peanuts[edit]

First you asked me: *Pictogram voting question.svg Question - How could such a low shutter speed be used, in both photos? I'm asking the question because that is normally my hardest problem to solve. Was the beetle sleeping? I answered: In the morning after a cold night its easier to catch insects, because they are moreless dizzy. Thats why you see waterdrops in many macros. I think it is more difficult in Portugal because its too warm in the morning .. your conclusion was: Few things are in perfect focus in this picture. If the insect was half asleep why not use a smaller F number? ... and you gave it a neutral. I just said that for making my point clear that it would better for me to say nothing in the future. Its not against you --Richard Bartz 21:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Nerium oleander September 2007-1.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nerium oleander September 2007-1.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Wasp September 2007-5.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wasp September 2007-5.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Image:PanoMontBlancHDR.jpg[edit]

Thank you for nominating this picture as Quality Image and Featured Picture...

Don't listen to Benh... I'm not shy but I Don't spent a lot of time on commons... and my english is very poor...

FP Promotion[edit]

Anthidium September 2007-2.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image Image:Anthidium September 2007-2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Anthidium September 2007-2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

--Simonizer 19:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Vue en montant à Vallonpierre.jpg nomination for FP[edit]

Hi Joaquim,

you voted for this picture on FPC and the author uploaded a new version. Peut être que tu voudras voter de nouveau ? ;)

merci ! Benh 20:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Missing square.gif
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Missing square.gif, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Missing square edit.gif
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Missing square edit.gif, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Pythagoras-2.gif
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pythagoras-2.gif, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

A much improved version :-) --Tony Wills 22:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Darter September 2007-5.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Darter September 2007-5.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

YOU DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT![edit]

YOU DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT to undo my dicuss edits. You can't fail the my right to make to discuss any promotion. --Beyond silence 22.5px 14:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I contested a promotion or decline vote! Who said that other users are my servants? What are your talknig aaaabbooutt??? --Beyond silence 22.5px 20:23, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes, we know that you have some difficulties in understanding and writing in English, nothing wrong with that (though your English babel template looks a bit ridiculous). But that should be a good reason for you to talk less and listen more... Alvesgaspar 20:28, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
If you assume good faith even when you suspect people are being provocative you will settle things down rather than fanning flames, never a good idea to revert peoples edits unless it is straight vandalism :-) --Tony Wills 21:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I understand your frustration, and it appears his edits were done in haste in reaction to other reviews, but calling someone a child and questioning their understanding is not the best way to change someones behaviour (they tend not to listen to your reason, but just see the attack! :-). It is not a matter of being politically correct, but being effective. Strictly speaking his actions were not a mistake, his intentions were obvious even if you question the motives. The moving of reviews to CR is a little messy, but you are right in expecting someone who has a reasonable amount of participation here to do things properly. But reversing peoples edits that aren't vandalism usually has unwanted reactions and leads to more work rather than fixing the problem :-). --Tony Wills 22:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)