User talk:CarolSpears/2008-02

Direction sign - Review

hi Carol, you have added a review comment to my QI candidate picture Borkum_Wegweiser_20071003.jpg. I have added a cropped version of it as "other version" of the image. I intentionally didn't crop it before because this original height give more the impression of pointing into the sky. How do you like the cropped version. (I'm not sure if this is the recommended way to deal with reviews. Please let me know if not). --- Ralf 08:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I tend to like the sign post images, especially the weathered ones. The problem with the crop of the original image to me was that there was so much activity that is hinted at but not in the photograph. Like, is that sign in water? It seems to have a net nailed to it. And the rope and the brace. Well, I just checked the map and it is by the water -- heh, the satellite map makes it look very beautiful there.... Probably the thing to do is to discuss the original and the crop in CR. It should be good to get the opinions of others. I'd like to see the whole sign, especially after seeing all three now, the original, the crop and the satellite map.... -- carol 09:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

The sign is kind of grown over the time. People add more information or even flotsam to it. Unfortunately this is the onyl photgraph I took of the sign. I will make sure to let you know if I ever take an other one showing the sign in it's "natural environment" at the beach. --- Ralf 07:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Powerline scene

Hi Carol,

You recently commented on my powerline image at the quality images review. I must say that while I have a program that could adjust the colour level, I am not too sure which/how much. I think a little more *green* might be appropriate, but then I already felt it was quite good compared to how the day looked in reality. Any suggestions as to what I should adjust? I'd use Irfanview, and the adjustment scale goes -250 to +250 in each colour.

PS: If you want to have a go at it, please do so and upload over the older image. Can always be changed back if necessary. Thanks again for any advice. Ingolfson 14:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I have limited experience with different applications and I am just familiar with one of them -- so, I don't really understand this type of color adjustment. The levels adjustment I was talking about is the dark point, gamma and light point. I have two different versions of this photograph lately -- with both I followed some 'rules' for adjustment that I heard a long while ago now; one version has just the Value levels changed and it keeps the colors still quite muted, just less muted; the more recent version has levels adjusted for Value, Red, Green and Blue and it is much more colorful -- but still not like a clear sunny midday photograph would be. Both are very pretty -- I will spend some time considering the permission granted. Thanks -- carol 17:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems to have hit the spot, based on the comments (I have problems even checking the look of the new version, as my connection has temporarily reverted to dial-up (AAAARGH!)). Thanks. I was getting quite frustrated that so many of my images were being judged and opposed solely on technical merit, when, admittedly, I nominated them on subject and composition. But I am unlikely to carry a larger digicam with me, always, unlike I do with my (for what it is) very good camera phone. So sometimes, I guess, colours will be a bit off, and I just barely make the megapixel requirement.Ingolfson 06:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

That is a camera phone? That's awesome! I am not one to judge the camera by the housing. I have a late 1900s point and shoot myself and it takes technically good photographs when I stay within the obvious restrictions of the device -- like the zoom is 'crap' and it can only get so close to a subject, etc. There was a camera phone photograph entered into FP and it had some technical problems (blown out whites) but I was quite impressed with that. It doesn't seem out of the question that a good enough camera workings will soon be housed in a phone. Once I suggested that they include a bottle opener on one of their cellphone projects....

That is a nice photograph of the subject. I have seen plenty of mornings like that and the image of the landscape was in the range of the camera that took it. -- carol 14:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Taken with my trusty K800i camphone. I'm quite happy with it, really. Thanks again for the help. Ingolfson 06:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Referral

Over here there was a suggestion that I contact you about a new workshop. Durova 22:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

There

..was one more vote in the same minute you made that edit ;) Regards, abf /talk to me/ 13:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I completely missed that! I just read the 'rules' a few times and if I understand them correctly, that vote means that the image gets 48 hours until promoted instead of sitting there for 8 days (ending Feb 8 or 9).

Btw, I have no idea what to do about your vote here. The "rules" (I don't usually like rules, btw) say "be careful to stay inside the braces" and I read a discussion somewhere about how QI was working 'better' than other similar arena here because there was an intellectual bar that needed to be reached when adding to the page.... -- carol 14:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pena Palace back-edit.jpg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality image candidate

Hi there, it would be useful when you 1) elaborate what is your obvious reason and 2) repair the broken frame (currently it looks that way). Cheers --S^[1] 00:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it does look that way. I suspect that others will try to clean it up (there are a lot of nice people there who try to be helpful). Additional words fail to come to my mind right now; I will work on finding different words.... -- carol 00:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh, no reason to come up with my own words when others have already said what needed to be said more adequately than I would be able to. -- carol 06:24, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Citroen AX white 1.JPG, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Even though there was in comparison a lot less editing. -- carol 00:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Powerlines Over Fields Erzhausen.jpg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Review

Hi! I would like to know some opinion about correction of vertical perspective distortion. Could you tell me the best page for it? I put my question to Graphic_Lab_School/Images_to_improve. And I would appreciate it if you could let me know your opinion in the question. Thanks! Samat 10:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I looked at that set of images before you mentioned them here. I have experience with two perspective adjustments that were attempted seriously. One was fairly successful, not for the perspective change of the building as much as the changes that I made to the background here. The second seriously attempted perspective change was not as good as others did. When I looked at your set of images, I knew that I was not much of an expert about these things and would never want to have to prove that I was without more actual background (some reading would help perhaps....) I actually am suspecting other experts for the same thing -- like, I would like to know what makes one image more encyclopedic than another and I would like to learn that from a source which is not the people who vote that way (kind of like: {{citation needed}}).

All that being said about my expertise, I liked the last image there the most. It was the most visually appealing. The lines seem straight and if there is a distortion is that the tall parts of the building seem taller where they should be. Standing and looking at such a building -- a brain might add the same distortions to the sight of it; especially if it was the first time going into the building or whatever. The distortion of the last image seems to be emotional as well (a rephrasing).

My high school is an example of that brain/emotional distortion. I was as tall as I would be when I graduated from there; yet when I went back to that building decades later, everything seemed much much smaller than my memories had them. It was bigger when I first entered as a freshman and already a good deal smaller by the time I graduated. The surprise was what the decades of real life did to make that building so much smaller. The university I attended was the same way -- everything seemed really big when I first arrived there and by the time I left, those buildings were not so big and serious as I my original view had distorted into.

So, there is my non-expertise opinion on your set of images. I like the distortion of the last version because it most matches the emotional distortion from the point of view where the camera would be located and the brain if it were entering the building for the first time. -- carol 18:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I thank you ever so much for your detailed answer! :) Samat 22:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments VI

Carol, surely, we are missing your voice on Commons:Village_pump#Test_reviews_of_Valued_Image_Candidates. I am sure you have some candidates in your sleeves (of your T-shirt). --Foroa 14:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I have been reading the VI stuff, I think I made a suggestion last month for it. The people working on it seem to be always going in the right direction with it. -- carol 17:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I am glad to read that is how you see the VI work;-) Your input is still welcome though. Slaunger 20:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

One of the things that I haven't said is that I really like how this is turning out. Negative seems to have more of a place here as far as comments go and I don't have much negative to say about what everyone involved has been doing with VI. The candidates page is really really nice and very readible and it looks as if the discussion and the purpose is to be taken seriously. Very nice! -- carol 22:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Sausage_making-H-5-edited

I am fantastic glad for you honour me by candidate my photo for Featured picture! After some comment I made a minor editing and nominate it, please see it!

THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND HAVE A NICE DAY! --Beyond silence 18:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

It is still the same version there. I think it needs to be tweaked in the reds and greens. -- carol 18:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't you see the edited or you say there isn't big changes? I agree, I only can change a bit, because the photo has been very cold after reduce on reds. Don't you want to support it too? --Beyond silence 18:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I quit voting there. I look at the images and sometimes comment. The last time I voted it was in opposition to an aquarium fish and it was more a vote of opposition to things that I saw happening over the New Year on English wikipedia. It was a vote against immaturity and I think that it was miscast when I voted sent it to CFPC. If you could point to the first version so I can compare....

I honestly had a lot of respect for that venue when I put my version of the Wright Flyer there. I think that if it had been successful, I might have in the next year nominated 6 to 10 more of those with how much renovation the image needed and also what was being depicted in the photograph being the two important first qualifiers. And it is easy to say that now since I have no way to prove this. It got one vote of opposition and the opposer returned a few days later with a girl who started (in my opinion) spamming that venue and another with renovated photographs. The 'not wanted here' feeling I get and got is very strong. The suggestion that the venue would like to see women battling is not one I would like to take the suggesters of this up on -- not with my real name and not with a fake name either because I just don't like that kind of thing. In all honesty, I started these 2000s with the age and experience to move people around and found myself instead being pushed around. I was pushed out of FPC and they have what they made room for there.

I really enjoyed looking through the few collections that I found. I really like it when there is a photograph from the early 1900s and another one from the 1990s and that was rewarding enough to find. Having other people shove themselves in front of me for access to do this -- this is old stuff and all the human systems of this world have given me experience with is how to let them do this.

I have a question for you: What do you think is the average age of the people participating in that? Probably the question can be answered two ways, one with maturity like they act like they are 14 year olds but their real average age might be mid-30s or they act like they are 68 year old men but their real age is 22 years. I am curious what you think about this. -- carol 19:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I am being very confused this morning. Sorry. -- carol 19:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I tweaked the Value levels some and it seems less gray and less bright now to me at the same time. Let me know if you like my version or yours and I will vote for whatever is at FPC after. Here. The 'noise' made me consider that my web site gets blocked because of unthoughtful url name blocking -- which is incredibly stupid because there is so much more 'porn' here. If you are unable to download that image, let me know. -- carol 20:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry for stealing your time, I made a more colour balanced version Image:Sausage making-H-5-edited2.jpg. Thanks --Beyond silence 23:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You are not stealing my time. Once I gave my free time because I loved the giving and it was nice to manage my unclocked time myself. The time that I have now is time where I don't seem to exist. Anything that I do that gives me the feeling that I exist is time not stolen. -- carol 00:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh my God, there are so many versions! Better if I stop it! Ohh... you picture is more brightt :(. May my is too dark? I can't sense it, I sit in my dark room, there is so many bright option on my lcd monitor... My eye may set on a darker level of seeing. What do you think? I don't know... I don't make more version, vote others, if somebody really can make a better v. do it, I lost in this so many version :). In genesis every is good and that is the matter! Have a nice day! (About the ages... so it is not important, only the younges take a good attitude! :)) --Beyond silence 23:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I made my version in the morning here, I was not fully awake, the light from the daytime bounces off from a red vehicle and into this room. I have noticed that I find more dust on images and more flaws in seams and other image problems when the sun has set and this room has lighting only from the little desk lamp. Without looking at the images and only knowing the conditions that they were changed in, I would (and did) support yours.

The one thing that you could do is to upload an image to your web site and mention it here. For everything that I know about the internet at this time, it would help me to know that you are who you say you are. It is not necessary though. I get to think about the stupidity of changing the vote tallies of the QICs on an 11th day of a month. To a similar credit, I also reverted vandalism that was done to the articles Ming, Wank and GIMP while logged in at English wikipedia. <muttering>...old enough to know better...

I really enjoyed working with the high schoolers at my last job and the one before that and the one before that and even in college -- the age group between 15 years old and 25 years old are great brains usually that only need a little steering and a little confidence for doing the right and good things. It is not something that is lost on older than that, but it does seem to have a greater concentration at that age and there is less problems from jealous wives and undermining peers for me. -- carol 00:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• Are support edit2? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Sausage_making-H-5.JPGThanks --Beyond silence 17:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Tasty uses for GIMP?

--Tony Wills 00:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Very nice work! That looks like it was fun :) -- carol 00:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Not my work though, just found it while sorting the kiwifruit images from the kiwi images :-) --Tony Wills 03:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it was my work. Thank you, it was indeed fun! --Manuel (Diskussion) 16:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Is this a Lewi, Liwi or a Kimon ? Might create categorisation problems for the scientifists. --Foroa 18:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Something like en:Cryptid or future hybrids? -- carol 21:18, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Plastic Basketball

Thanks for the comment. It's the same for me. Photography is almost relaxing to me, a meager divertment from the arduous process of school...

Thesauri are fun too : )! Thegreenj 22:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:2007-11-15-away-from-commons.png

Image:2007-11-15-away-from-commons.png 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 on the Requests for Deletion page..
If you created this image, 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!

guillom 18:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:2007-QI-counting-errors.png

Image:2007-QI-counting-errors.png 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 on the Requests for Deletion page..
If you created this image, 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!

guillom 18:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

You too

Nothing to worry about. Every bird sings its own song. Estrilda 09:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Hajj Images

Thanks for your kind comments about the pictures. Its a pleasure knowing that people find them useful. One of the picture is nominated at wikipedia FPC. If possible, could you perhaps vote for it so that others too may get to see it? Regards Muhammad Mahdi Karim 18:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The consensus seems to be more interested in ancient textiles than current religious observance. I wonder if in real life they could put together as many people interested in ancient textiles as take the hajj. Wikipedia consensus often seems to be not so reflective of reality to me. I personally found the discussion of if a document was actually from the United States government or not to be too comical to take seriously -- an effect that those people probably did not want. I suspect that several consensus wouldn't know their rear-ends from a hole they had dug themselves. -- carol 08:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Tell me about it. :-(

Thanks for voting, Muhammad Mahdi Karim 16:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Offer

Hi thanks for the offer to help with my Cicadia movie. I've been watching the comments come in. It looks like the biggest request is a pause at the end of the frame series. Do you know if there are other methods supported by wikimedia for animations other than animated gifs? I would love it if I could just render an .avi file of some sort. Mundhenk 00:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

AVI is one of those formats -- when I tried to make one with the linux software here, it didn't play on Windows. What I remember about AVI is that it is just another container for MPEG that restricts several of the MPEG options. Heh, I just noticed that they allow uploading of XCF here -- too bad everyone uses Photoshop....

I worked with the gif and it is less jittery now. If I were using GIMP to just add the additional time between the last and first frame, I would have edited the time lag in the layer of the last frame. As it is, I duplicated that last layer a few times and GIMPs gif optimization plug-in got rid of the extra frames and edited the time (I don't think it did too much else -- sometimes it does though).

And (for the record) I screwed that up several times! -- carol 08:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

After I uploaded the new version, I was sorry that I hadn't made some color corrections.

That is a very cool animation! Your camera took 2 hours of avi? -- carol 00:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Re-nom of Cicada molting

Please see Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Cicada molting animated-2.gif. --MichaelMaggs 07:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for renominating it. I was trying to determine if it had overstayed its time there, difficult to do when the logs aren't there. -- carol 08:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you also for finding it in the archive! -- carol 12:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)