returning ur message
Hi Amanda, you left a message on my wikipedia page ask me to add more info to my two photos. What sort of info were you looking for? ~ Turidoth
File deletion for licence
It seems that the file File:Corse ColDeTeghime DetailCanon.jpg has been deleted for copyright questions. It's a picture from my own work. I can update the licence to the right one. What is better ? undeleting the file or uploading a new file ?
|Wishing you the happiest of holidays
and the best new year! — Vera (talk), December 2012
Picture of the Year 2013 R1 Announcement
Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!
- In other languages: العربية, български, Deutsch, English, français, italiano, македонски, മലയാളം, 日本語, русский, svenska, اردو, 中文
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.
Round 1 will end on .
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2012 Picture of the Year contest.
Whether to upload new version or new file?
I happened to drop by the Photography workshop for the first time in awhile today. While flagging some stuff for the archive bot I also looked at some of your work. Overall, it appears you've made many useful contributions. But (there's always a "but" isn't there, <wink>), after looking at:
... it occurs to me to suggest that—as the file uploaded over the original was cropped, given a new aspect ratio, and significantly retouched—it's likely preferable to upload it as a new file with an associated filename (something like "File:Molen-Geesina-Utrecht (crop, retouch).jpg") and then cross-link with the original in the file page texts. .
Similar to, for example:
I tend to ask myself to what degree I'm adjusting the existing image vs. adjusting the original artist/photographer. And I also think it's worth considering to what degree/whether information has been added/removed from the original when deciding between uploading adjusted images over an original or starting a new file. For example, globally adjusting the brightness/contrast of an image may be viewed as adjusting the quality of a print/scan, whereas substantial cropping might be viewed as adjusting the artist/photographer. There are subjective case-by-case considerations of course, but something to give thought to regardless. Somewhere-or-other there are (or at least 'were') established written guidelines along these lines which initially prompted me to give thought to such—back when I was image editing on a regular basis.
Additionally I'd like to offer a technique suggestion:
In Photography_workshop#Molen-Geesina-Utrecht.jpg the requesting user mentions "focus on the mill" and I think your crop addresses such quite well compositionally. This may also be an opportunity to tweak focus literally via—a subtle application of—unsharp mask. Might try applying it once globally throughout the image and then separately to just the windmill area. And compare. Often 'a little-goes-a-long-way'. A handy tool—which for a long time I'd not even known existed. : }
- Hello @Kevjonesin:. Thank you for your detailed suggestions. I am well aware of the the overwriting/new-file discussion. I tend to favor overwriting, especially when the original image is of such bad quality as in the given image that I don't think it is of any use compared to the color corrected version. The windmill images is so bad, that actually nothing much can save it. If you compare the two images you will see, that I used the unsharp mask over the whole image. To create separate masks for windmill and background was much to much effort for an image which is heavily underexposed, blurred and full of compression artifacts. That is also the reason I wrote in the graphic lab: Well, I did something. But overall image quality is quite bad. Not much can be done. Normally (which I didn’t do here I add that if the uploader does’t like the edit, the uploader should undo it. cheers, Amada44 talk to me 11:09, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Hallo Amada44, wie Du gesehen hast, habe ich mich bei Deinen Kategorien umgeschaut und Photos von Orchideen in die Kategorien der Arten verschoben. Nachdem ich die von Dir in neue Kategorien gesetzen Bilder von Australien gesehen habe, konnte ich nicht widerstehen, weiter Bilder zu suchen. Ich hoffe, Du bist mir nicht gram. Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 11:26, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hallo @Orchi:. Nein super! du hast mir Arbeit abgenommen :-) Als ich diesen Mass-Import gemacht hatte, bin ich davon ausgegangen, dass mehr automatisch gemacht werden kann. Also wenn du Lust, hast, kannst du auch gerne mehr machen ;-) . Danke und Liebe Grüsse, Amada44 talk to me 09:15, 17 April 2015 (UTC)