User talk:Ram-Man

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Jump to: navigation, search
See also my English Wikipedia user talk page at User talk:Ram-Man.
User talk:ramman and User talk:rambot redirect to here.

My Archives: 1*2*photo awards    [perform archive]

Contents

[edit] Commons:Picture of the Year/2008/Preparation

We are starting the discussion on POTY 2008. Would you like to join? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Raising the bar

Hi Derek,

You might want take a look at this discussion -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Link between photographers page

Hello.

I have made a topic called "More good photographers" on my user page. You could create a similar topic on your user page and you could include me in it. --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hi, I wanna Make some friends, would you like to be one of them?....write me if you want so (I'm Lmiguel)

[edit] Hello

Hi, Derek I´m looking for some friends...are you abailable?...

[edit] Templates trademarked and OTRS.

You took a photograph and uploaded the File:Philadelphia Zoo Sign 1065px.jpg, which now has two templates added:

Orange trademark.svg This work contains material which may be subject to trademark laws in one or more jurisdictions. Before using this content, please ensure that you have the right to use it under the laws which apply in the circumstances of your intended use. You are solely responsible for ensuring that you do not infringe the rights to this trademark. See our general disclaimer. The use of this trademark does not indicate endorsement of the holder by Wikimedia Commons or the Wikimedia Foundation, nor vice versa.
This is an informational tag and not a license tag. A normal copyright tag is required as well.

Alemannisch | Беларуская (тарашкевіца) | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Español | Euskara | Suomi | Français | עברית | Hrvatski | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Русский | Slovenčina | Српски / Srpski | ไทย | 中文 | ‪中文(简体)‬ | ‪中文(繁體)‬ | +/−


Crystal Clear app error.png An email containing details of the permission for this file has been sent in accordance with Commons:OTRS.

Note to uploaders:

  • Please copy the URL of this file in the email to assist OTRS volunteers to find it.
  • Do not send emails containing only the text "OTRS pending", as this is not of any use.
  • If an email cannot be found in the OTRS system, this file may be deleted for lack of valid licensing information.

Note to OTRS volunteers: Please use {{OTRS received|id=xxxxxx}} once the ticket has been identified, or if the email contains sufficient confirmation of the validity of the license, please replace this template with {{PermissionOTRS|id=xxxxxx}}
 If the permission provided is not acceptable, nominate the file for deletion or delete it.

Català | Česky | Deutsch | English | Esperanto | Español | Suomi | Français | 한국어 | Magyar | Македонски | Nederlands | Português | Русский | ‪中文(简体)‬ | ‪中文(繁體)‬ | +/−


Have you ever done anything about these templates? I have had the same templates added to one of my photographs, so I learning about what happens.


[edit] Important proposal

I wrote a proposal for equalizing the different picture formats on FPC Please have a look. Best regards --Richard Bartz (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Philadelphia Zoo Sign 1065px.jpg may be deleted

Česky | Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Nederlands | Português | Русский | +/−

The File:Philadelphia Zoo Sign 1065px.jpg which you uploaded has been tagged {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the OTRS team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the OTRS team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to "permissions-commons-at-wikimedia.org" now. At the same time, please leave a message at the OTRS noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up. Alternatively, you can contact an OTRS volunteer directly. HersfoldOTRSBot(talk) 20:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


[edit] File:False Sunflower Heliopsis helianthoides 'Summer Nights' Bee.jpg

File deletion warning File:False Sunflower Heliopsis helianthoides 'Summer Nights' Bee.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has 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 it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца) | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form) | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | ‪Norsk (nynorsk)‬ | ‪Norsk (bokmål)‬ | Occitan | Polski | Português | Русский | Српски / Srpski | Tiếng Việt | ‪中文(简体)‬ | ‪中文(繁體)‬ | +/−

--78.51.0.200 18:05, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Quality Image Promotion

Purple Milkweed Asclepias purpurascens Flower Heads Wide 2300px.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Image File:Purple Milkweed Asclepias purpurascens Flower Heads Wide 2300px.jpg, which was nominated by you for Quality Image status, was reviewed and has now been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.
False Sunflower Heliopsis helianthoides 'Summer Nights' Flower.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Image File:False Sunflower Heliopsis helianthoides 'Summer Nights' Flower.jpg, which was nominated by you for Quality Image status, was reviewed and has now been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

[edit] Quality Image Promotion

Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus clarus Milkweed.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Image File:Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus clarus Milkweed.jpg, which was nominated by you for Quality Image status, was reviewed and has now been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

[edit] Please enlighten me.

Hi. Do I blast you for your opinions? No. Did I oppose your images? No. So why the heavy reaction? Lycaon (talk) 00:41, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Opinions are fine when they have to do with the image itself or according to the normal terms of evaluation. But licensing terms? These have nothing to do with featured pictures. In addition, I have no problem if you have personal views on what licenses are good or bad, but when you try to push your agenda on the FP process, then yes, I have a problem with that because it affects others. When you choose to make a posting about it (rather than just silently abstaining) your only purpose can be to let everyone else know why you object. That's proselytizing, pure and simple, and it is that which I take strong offense. If you had a problem with my licensing, bring it up on my talk page where such discussion belongs.
I make a big deal when people upload exactly 2MP images because I think they are just trying to play the system. But unlike your complaint with my licensing terms, the FP guidelines specifically state that we want the largest images possible, so I have a perfectly legitimate reason to complain about it. Others choose which principles they find most important and choose to ignore others. Its a subjective process. But I have a problem whenever someone brings outside negative comments (e.g. when someone opposed my image because of "too many well-done flower pictures").
It is this simple: You didn't have to say anything, but you chose to say something. The only purpose can be to try to persuade others, otherwise what was the point? Whether your vote was support, neutral or oppose is immaterial. I really care most about your comment because I care more about the Wikimedia projects than I do about some silly star attached to an image. I try to get FPs mostly for fun.
If there was a strong copyleft license practically identical to the GFDL but without the restrictive need to include a physical copy of the license, I'd happily license my images under those terms. However, I can't create my own personal license because it won't be acceptable here, so I use the one that is closest. I used to license all my works under the CC-by-sa, but I had issues with the weak copyleft in the license and problems with people using my images inappropriately, so I stopped using it in hopes that the future GFDL license would cure the various problems. The Creative Commons organization seems to encourage such behavior (and why shouldn't they, as they are just enforcing the terms of their license?).
I've contributed more than a hundred thousands edits to the English Wikipedia and have uploaded well over a thousand pictures (and images) to Commons. The implication that I'm choosing a "restrictive" license intentionally so as not to be useful is something that I take offense. I strongly approve of the various Wikimedia projects, but I can't fail to defend my own copyright and the principles of copyleft.
-- Ram-Man 18:41, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


I appreciate your thorough reply and will act accordingly. Lycaon (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] FP promotion

Lotus Nelumbo 'Mrs. Perry D. Slocum' Dried Seed Head 2000px.jpg
The image has been promoted to Featured picture

The image File:Lotus Nelumbo 'Mrs. Perry D. Slocum' Dried Seed Head 2000px.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lotus Nelumbo 'Mrs. Perry D. Slocum' Dried Seed Head 2000px.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

[edit] FP promotion

Black Swallowtail Papilio polyxenes Closeup.jpg
The image has been promoted to Featured picture

The image File:Black Swallowtail Papilio polyxenes Closeup.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Black Swallowtail Papilio polyxenes Closeup.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

[edit] Photographers Blackbelt

Wikipedia laurier photo.png
Judo black belt.PNG
THE PHOTOGRAPHER'S BLACKBELT
I hereby award at you this Photographers Blackbelt for your outstanding and excellent pictures.
--ComputerHotline (talk) 07:38, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please link images

Afrikaans | العربية | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form) | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | ‪Norsk (bokmål)‬ | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Српски / Srpski | Svenska | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | ‪中文(繁體)‬ | +/−

Hello Ram-Man!

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Commons images are used by editors on many projects in many languages. Each image is put into categories. This helps other editors find them. Please add categories to each image you upload.

To add an image to a category, add the following code to the end of the page.

[[Category:Category Name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbit of comets, add the following to the image description page:

[[Category:Astronomy diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories: Astronomy diagrams, Comets.

For further information on categories read Commons:Categories.

The CommonSense Tool often helps you find the best category for your image.

Here is a gallery of your images. Please check that each image has a category. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the help desk. Thank you.

BotMultichillT 23:54, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Papaver orientale 'Pattys Plum' Plant 2112px.jpg

Hi! The name of the poppy in a series of images of yours has wrong id. The cultivar 'Patty's Plum' (Papaver Oriental Group not P. orientale) has a different color. See File:Papaver Pattys Plum.jpg. epibase (talk) 09:04, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Nikon D5000 Lens

Hello Ram-man!! I would like some recommendations with you about lens to Nikon D-5000 machine... I bought about a month a Nikon D-5000 and am not a professional at all... I would like to take macro photos as you took but i´am not sure what kind of lens i need to make this...

I take a look of these ones :

  • 17-70mm / F2.8-4.5 DC Macro Sigma
  • 18-200mm / F3.5-6.3 DC Sigma
  • 70-300mm / 4.0-5.6 DG Macro Sigma

What do you recommend?!

All the best, Light Warrior Conspiracy?!? 22:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

While these can take macro shots, they usually only are macro to a 1:2 or 1:4 ratio (I didn't check). You probably want a fixed focal-length macro lens (e.g. 70mm or 105mm) that can do 1:1. Examples:
  • Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Auto Focus Macro Lens (This is the cheapest macro lens option)
  • Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG Auto Focus Macro Lens (This is the lens that I use, and it is very sharp if done properly)
  • Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor (This is more expensive, but a popular macro lens)
In general the longer the focal length the farther away you can be from the subject. The 50mm is cheap, but you have to get a few inches closer than the 70mm. This may or may not be a problem with certain insects. Of course other shots (like this one) are only possible because I did not use a 105mm lens. There was a limited distance between the flower and the ground such that I could put the sky in the picture and not the surrounding trees. -- Ram-Man 23:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your help Ram-Man!! But in this small list, there any lens with this function?! PS: You have great photos!! Thank you!!

Light Warrior Conspiracy?!? 09:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, I forgot that the D5000 does not have a focusing motor and so the lens has to be internally focused. That does limit your options. -- Ram-Man 12:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Nikon 18-200mm VR: 1:4.5
  • Nikon 55-200mm VR: 1:4.3
  • Sigma 17-70mm: 1:2.3
  • Sigma 70-200mm 2.8: 1:3.5
  • etc...
None of them are very good at macro because they are zooms. Most zooms are not good at macro. For your camera you want the Nikon 105mm macro lens or the Sigma 150mm Macro lens. I think it must have internal focusing. -- Ram-Man 12:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!! i have very difficult to find something similar with this... but i found these ones..i don´t know if it good...

F number : maximum - F 3.5 minimum - F 22

I have also this list... :-S

I´'m despairing.. beacause i don´t find anything with about it... :-( sorry if I'm bothering or being annoying you about it ... but I do not know much about it and saw that you would be the ideal person to help me ... Thanks!! Light Warrior Conspiracy?!? 18:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ram-Man"