Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy.
Good quality, though I think that this photo deserves a higher resolution.. --Cccefalon 20:11, 14 February 2014 (UTC) Done High res version uploaded--Baresi franco 21:35, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi Franco, I saw your nomination - bird. I also use E-pl5. I suggest you to always extract RAW to jpeg with Olympus Studio, because it gave much better results than Adobe. Than in the end eventually use Adobe to crop or something, but colors are perfect done in Olympus software. --Mile (talk) 19:25, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Very good quality. But please make sure to mention the taxa name in the image description, not only in the file name! --Uoaei1 15:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry - now done :) --Baresi franco 17:54, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Support QI --Rjcastillo 20:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC) CommentThe taxa name is given in the file name only - please also mention it in the image description! --Uoaei1 15:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Yep, I should have thought of that - done! --Baresi franco 17:54, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
CA (see annotation), too much magenta, too much #FFFFFF. --Cccefalon 10:36, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for taking time to review. Colours aren't my strong point, but I've tried to fix the CA (yep, looks like there were loads of fringes round the shadow edges), and I've made it less bright overall --Baresi franco 20:42, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Congrats - it's considerably better and can pass as QI. --Cccefalon 21:40, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Baresi, I nominated your Mandarin Duck pair picture for VI. However there are some issues that need to be addressed. Further details are found on the page. Cheers. --(✉→ArcticKangaroo←✎) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks very much, Arctic K - I'll have a look --Baresi franco (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
No doubt, it's a QI. However, have you considered a tighter crop or a square crop? IMO the bird portrait would benefit from that. --Cccefalon 05:03, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I'd thought about it, and wasn't sure, but your second opinion has convinced me - crop uploaded. --Baresi franco 17:00, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
It's great with the new crop! --Cccefalon 20:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Very good quality. Have you considered a tighter crop at the right side to get the bird balanced in the middle? Well, thats just a question of personal taste; perhaps as second version of the photo. --Cccefalon 05:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC). Thanks for the review and interesting suggestion. I like having a bit of lead room, but I'll have a go and see how it looks. --Baresi F 22:40, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
I see you added this to Wikipedia in the box describing it as "The British subspecies, Erithacus rubecula melophilus". If this is the case, you could move it into Category:Erithacus rubecula melophilus. I'm no bird expert. It might also be useful to say where the bird was photographed. -- Colin (talk) 13:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Sure thing Colin - done. Spotted a couple of others that need location, too, so I'll do them while I'm at it --Baresi F (talk) 20:36, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Could be even better with the "Defringe amount" set to a higher level, but anyway QI. --Cccefalon 05:17, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the review and good advice - I've removed some more of the fringing that I had missed --Baresi franco 18:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Small magenta fringe around the beak. The feathers are showing too much magenta, the magenta saturation should be reduced --Cccefalon 05:20, 15 August 2014 (UTC) Thanks for reviewing - is it any better now?--Baresi franco 11:17, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Oh yes! Well done! --Cccefalon 20:30, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Baresi franco I have a FP candidate of a Nile Croc eating a wildebeest in the Masai Mara that ends tomorrow, and has got just 7 support votes... just borderline. If you could check if you like the image, and support it, I would be grateful. But please, only support it if you really think it has enough quality or dama to become FP. Thanks a lot. --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
Hi Arturo, I didn't get chance to review that candidate, but it looks like you got enough support :). Your Manta Ray photo is wonderful, btw --Baresi F (talk) 22:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello Baresi Franco, I enjoyed your stunning images. I have a Panasonic G5 with the 14-42 kit and 45-150 lenses but I am unsure which lenses I should get afterwards. Could you tell the lenses you use? Thanks. Fah112778 (talk)
Hi Fah112778 - glad you like my uploads :). I'm sure you could get some fantastic photos with your setup already, but if you're interested in bird/wildlife photography then IMO the Lumix 100-300mm is very good. I also use the Oly 60mm Macro lens for some wildlife shots, but hardy ever at macro distances - mostly just as a short telephoto. For people shots I use the Lumix 20mm f1.7 and the Olympus 45mm f1.8.--Baresi F (talk) 22:28, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Very good quality. Love the background. I think the composition can be optimized by cropping slightly on the left hand side. I propose FPC nomination. --Slaunger 20:32, 5 October 2014 (UTC) Done Thanks - it looks more balanced now --Baresi franco 22:37, 5 October 2014 (UTC) Baresi franco Thanks for the new crop, and wow! -- Slaunger 21:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Excellent! Please don't decline. -- Spurzem 00:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
A good photo, indeed. What about FP, Baresi franco? --Brateevsky 15:06, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll give it a try! --Baresi franco 22:57, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Comment Very good, but there are black parts that need brightening. For example between eye and beak. --Hockei 10:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Hockei, I'll see what I can do.--Baresi franco 22:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
A bit noisy in the sky. Jakec 15:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing. I've reduced the noise - is it any better now? --Baresi franco 12:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Better now. Nice work. Jakec 17:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
You are, like Uwe und XRay - in my opinion, one of the three "Wikimedians", which spent more then just Highlights to this common project. Therefore, your success is more important for me. I wish you good light for this and the contest in the next year! --Hubertl (talk) 14:19, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks Hubertl, that is very generous of you, and much appreciated. The foundations of Commons are its enthusiastic amateur contributors and, as you say, it is good that a few of us are represented in the top 12. Good light to you, too, sir!
Hello, Baresi franco! I recommend you visit Brazil. This vast country is home to unique natural life. It is abundant in splendid landscapes. Visit Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Brasília and many other cities! Visit Brazil someday! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the recommendation, 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk). The allure of Brazil is easy to see in these photos: lots of WOW!