- 1 Please read
- 2 Your comment on QI
- 3 Something went wrong...
- 4 Thanks a lot
- 5 FP nom
- 6 Important proposal
- 7 Bird ID
- 8 Re:file uploads
- 9 Nomination/FPX
- 10 File:Calidris alba running 6.jpg
- 11 an unendurable number of quality and featured nominations?
- 12 Thank You
- 13 Bohemian Waxwing
- 14 Savannah Sparrow
- 15 You forgot...
- 16 Low resolution Magic Eye images
- 17 Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dagestani man and woman.jpg
- 18 Commons:Valued image candidates/sea turtle nests SE FL change of scope
- 19 Purple line
- 20 Photographers Blackbelt
Ianare, please read proposal for FPC gudelines in the discussion page #REDIRECT []. I believe that concensus could and should be built in order to improve quality of the page, project, etc. It is clear that there are disagreements on the personal level for some, but I believe that everybody agrees that there is definitely room for improvement. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Your comment on QI
Hi Ianare, I'm not sure you saw this edit. I tried to explain why I do not think the image is tilted. I've also added one more version. I'm sorry I botherd you, if you saw it and simply did not want to comment. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Something went wrong...
Thanks a lot
Hello, many thanks for your praise. I never used a SLR type camera in my life - and I really don´t know whether the result would be approximately passable then. In addition: animals do not wait ... . Best wishes, --3268zauber (talk) 11:53, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Having a look through you galleries this image caught my eye, I have taken the liberty of nominating it at FPC a link for your convienence Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Larus delawarensis portrait.JPG Gnangarra 03:43, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I wrote a proposal for equalizing the different picture formats on FPC Please have a look. Best regards --Richard Bartz (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ianare. May I please ask you to help me to ID the common bird. File:Birds nest in a cable box.jpg. The image was taken in San Francisco. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey, That sounds promising but I will probably get faster internet later this year so it will be fine then. In the meantime I will upload the new images with a tad more compression and slightly higher res. Thanks for the offer :-) --Muhammad (talk) 15:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much for nominating my two images for Quality Image status. I understand the oppose votes and your decision to close for my leopard image, because of bad post processing. Greetings from Speyer --Gentry (talk) 20:17, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ianare, I left a comment on this image that you've put up for QI. It's a lovely shot but there seems to be an obvious dust spot that should be fixed first. Looking at the other shot you've put up I'm certain it's dust and not sand colour. - Peripitus (talk) 12:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help. I can't really see it though ... is it in the sand or on the bird ? --ianaré (talk) 14:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've had some free time, so I retouched these spots and that black "something" on the right, but I don't know how to upload it on Commons. You can download it from here. Yours, Von.grzanka (talk) 18:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
an unendurable number of quality and featured nominations?
I would find it extremely difficult to endure an equal number of nominations of that same family of birds if they were svg and clearly labeled with all of the names of the animal parts as detailed as you have displayed your knowledge of plant parts to be.
You know, more than ten diagrammed images of birds running on the sand, with little circles and arrows and all of the very technical names of the parts clearly displayed.
Don't you think that this would be just too much to endure?
I am deeply impressed and so happily humbled with and by your knowledge of the names of the plant parts and am seriously not interested in seeing more display of your knowledge of bird parts.
- I have just considered the effects that a fear of failure or acceptance might provide you. I am also very interested that you be sensitive to these messages that your sub and semi-conscienceness might be sending you and don't do anything unless you get approval from these senses. I want you to always listen to what your soul tells you. -- carol (talk) 09:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry I did get a little carried away. It's just that I would go out, take some pictures I was happy with and then post them here. Then I would go out again, and taker a better picture, so I withdrew the ones I felt were obviously worse. I like to use QI to get feedback, I have no problems with most of the running piper pics being rejected, keeping the one or two which are definitly better. I'm not trying to get as many of my pics to be QI, I want to improve as a photographer and the QI process is very helpful for that.
- In any case I can promise you that the whole sandpiper thing is finished, and although I will continue to take pictures of birds, they will be different species ;-)
- p.s. regarding the flower parts - you started :-p I had to look that stuff up.
I was surprised and flattered that you thought enough of my Image:Calvin Borel.jpg to nominate it for Featured Image. I am a novice at the Wikimedia and Wikipedia procedures and slow at the editing necessary to participate. --JMSchneid (talk) 21:27, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello ianaré, I uploaded the original jpeg image of the Bohemian Waxwing for the quality images candidates (the original is in RAW). You can tell me how to do something good with it? Thank you. --Cephas (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Low resolution Magic Eye images
Thanks for the quick review of my submission (Image:Stereogram Tut Random Dot Shark.png). I was under the impression that technical images such as this one may have the resolution requirement lowered. It is the title image of the featured article en:Autostereogram and has been reposted by bloggers around the world without aknowledgement. Google-image-search for "shark autostereogram" to see what I mean. Well, maybe one day I will create a higher resolution one. It is too bad though, as I was about to submit another type of autostereogram by a brilliant artist Image:Chess Single Image Stereogram by 3Dimka.jpg. That one is slightly bigger (800x600). Do you think it will pass muster with our review community? Fredhsu (talk) 00:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Commons:Valued image candidates/sea turtle nests SE FL change of scope
Hello Ianare, concerning your comment on File:Pano-moskva-kadashev.jpg I really cannot follow; could you describe a bit more precise, where you see this mysterious purple line? Thanks and regards, --S 08:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
THE PHOTOGRAPHER'S BLACKBELT