User talk:Granada/Archive/2017
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! FIS WC NK Ramsau 20161218 DSC 8653.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.
|
}
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! FIS WC NK Ramsau 20161218 DSC 8751.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[survey 1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[survey 2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.
Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 20:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- ↑ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
- ↑ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.
CC-NC?
Hallo! Bei Image:FIS_WC_NK_Ramsau_20161218_DSC_8628.jpg steht nicht kommerziell in den Urheberrechten der Metadaten. Das ist mit Commmons eigentlich nicht kompatibel. Warum weichen diese Angaben von der angegeneben CC-by-sa Lizenz auf Commons ab? Gruß --Geiserich77 (talk) 08:22, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hallo Geiserich, ich weiß. Das war leider ein Versehen beim Bearbeiten meiner Ramsau-Bilder im darktable, der mir erst nach dem Hochladen aufgefallen war. Allerdings hoffe ich doch, daß die tatsächliche Lizenz nicht aus den EXIFs gilt, denn in den Bildbeschreibungen habe ich natürlich die korrekte Lizenz CC-by-sa 3.0 ohne NC (also natürlich mit der Möglichkeit der kommerziellen Weiternutzung) angegeben. Dieser Fauxpas betrifft leider ca. 40 Fotos unseres Ausfluges in die Ramsau und erst bei den später hinzugefügten habe ich dann die korrekte Lizenz auch in die EXIFs eingefügt. Wegen der Vielzahl betroffener Fotos hatte ich bisher keine Lust, von denen jeweils neue Versionen mit korrigierten EXIFs hochzuladen. --Granada (talk) 08:32, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
(Sorry to write in Engilsh)
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.
About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 07:56, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Einsetzen von Discuss in QIC
Hallo Granada,
ich habe gerade gesehen, dass Du in Moroders Dolomitenbild einen Kommentar zur Schärfe eingefügt und gleichzeitig das Bild auf Discuss gesetzt hast.
Ich vermute, dass Du neu bei den QIC bist. Falls dem so ist, natürlich erst einmal Herzlich Willkommen! Mitarbeit ist hier immer gerne gesehen.
Deine Vorgehensweise ist jedoch nicht üblich, denn der Review besteht nicht darin, das Bild auf Discuss zu setzen, denn damit würde es am nächsten Tag in den Consensual Review verschoben werden. Es ist besser, Nomination stehen zu lassen, somit gibst Du Moroder die Möglichkeit, sein Bild zu korrigieren. Falls es danach noch nicht in Ordnung ist, würde ich es auf Decline setzen (wenn Du wirklich der Meinung ist, dass es nicht gut genug ist und abgelehnt werden sollte). Wäre Moroder nicht einverstanden, würde er es selbst auf Discuss setzen, um weitere Meinungen einzuholen.
Ausserdem habe ich vorhin gesehen, dass wir gleichzeitig das gleiche Bild von Jaceks Statue bewertet haben (Du aber im falschen Bild 
). Ich habe Deinen Kommentar gesehen und Du hast Recht, die Schärfeebene liegt etwas zuweit zurück, aber ich finde, die Statue selbst ist scharf genug für ein QI.
Viele Grüsse,
--Basotxerri (talk) 12:11, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
- Hallo Basotxerri, jein, ich bin nicht wirklich neu bei QIC, aber ich hatte da schon ewig nicht mehr betätigt, denn ich mag eigentlich den ganzen QI-Quatsch überhaupt nicht, in der sich eine kleine Clique gegenseitig die Bilder mit QI-Pickerln versieht. Ich nominiere meine eigenen Fotos so gut wie nie für QI, denn ich mag keinen Schrott als QI bewerten lassen und es ist leider unglaublich viel Schrott auf QI und wird auch noch arglos promoted. Dein Foto des Jambach ist super, sowas mag ich gerne mit gut bewerten, aber Moroders Foto der Sellaronda ist gruselig. Das ist mit der neuen D850 (die ich unter anderem ebenfalls besitze) und leider mit der ganz miesen Kitscherbe 24-120 gemacht und auch nach seiner Bearbeitung noch immer unscharf. Sowas würde ich mich nichtmal trauen, überhaupt nach Commons hochzuladen geschweige denn als QI zu nominieren (vor allem wenn ich sehe, daß ein Foto an sich Potential für EBV hätte), aber immer gleich mit Decline reinhauen liegt mir auch nicht, daher erstmal Discuss. Aber das Bild ist wie gesagt auch jetzt noch immer unscharf und Du darfst es gerne auf Decline setzen.
- Mir waren bei der Artikelarbeit in den vergangenen Tagen wieder mal ein paar sogenannte QIs in Artikeln negativ aufgefallen, daher mußte ich hier mal wieder reinschauen.
- Und ad Edit Jaceks Nepomuk: da hatte ich mich in der Zeile vertan und versehentlich das falsche Bild ausgewählt. Sorry dafür!
- LG
- Julia alias --Granada (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
- OK, habe verstanden. Auch wenn ich mit Deiner Meinung zu QIC nicht 100%ig einverstanden bin, respektiere ich das zumindest. Ich habe mir Moroders Bild noch einmal angesehen und es ist auf der linken Seite tatsächlich nicht sehr scharf. Dass Leute 3000 €-Kameras kaufen und dann Billigobjektive verwenden kann ich auch nicht verstehen! Gut, dann einen schönen Tag noch :-)
- Grüsse, --Basotxerri (talk) 15:21, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- Hallo Granada und , da man mich hier zitiert möchte ich nur sagen, dass ich meistens das Nikon Objectiv 24/70/2,8 verwende. Das kostet immerhin ein paar tausend Euro. Ich lass mich aber gerne um ein besseres Objektiv belehren. LG aus Südtirol --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- Entschuldige Moroder, meine Bemerkung war nicht persönlich gemeint, bitte verstehe das nicht falsch. Vielleicht hätte ich mich auch so nicht ausdrücken sollen, denn ich weiss tatsächlich gar nicht, welche Ausrüstung Du verwendest. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- Kein Problem @Basotxerri: , aber die Ausrüstung müsste doch aus den EXIF data ersichlich sein!? Tschüss --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 22:22, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- Entschuldige Moroder, meine Bemerkung war nicht persönlich gemeint, bitte verstehe das nicht falsch. Vielleicht hätte ich mich auch so nicht ausdrücken sollen, denn ich weiss tatsächlich gar nicht, welche Ausrüstung Du verwendest. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hallo Granada und , da man mich hier zitiert möchte ich nur sagen, dass ich meistens das Nikon Objectiv 24/70/2,8 verwende. Das kostet immerhin ein paar tausend Euro. Ich lass mich aber gerne um ein besseres Objektiv belehren. LG aus Südtirol --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- Grüsse, --Basotxerri (talk) 15:21, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Danke für die Teilnahme bei WikiDaheim 2017 in Österreich!
.svg)
Hallo Granada!
Vielen Dank für Deine Teilnahme am Wettbewerb zu WikiDaheim! Von Ende Juli bis Anfang Oktober wurden so insgesamt mehr als 7.000 Bilder hochgeladen und viele Ort in Österreich in der Wikipedia und anderen Projekten mit neuen Bildern versehen, was nur dank der vielen Beiträge wie Deinem möglich war.
Die 561 besten Bilder wurden in den letzten Wochen von einer Vorjury ausgesucht, die Du dir hier anschauen kannst - vielleicht sind auch Bilder von Dir dabei! :-) Eine Jury wird nun bis Mitte November die zehn besten Bilder aussuchen, die Preisträger werden danach von uns verständigt.
Nochmals vielen Dank für Deine Beiträge. Wir würden uns freuen, wenn Du auch in Zukunft die Wikimedia-Projekte bebilderst! Im 2. Halbjahr 2018 wird WikiDaheim wahrscheinlich wieder stattfinden - wir würden uns freuen, wenn du dann wieder dabei wärst :-) Solltest Du Fragen haben, so kannst Du Dich gerne an wikidaheim
wikimedia.at wenden.
(Braveheart für das Team von WikiDaheim, 11:47, 2. Nov 2017 (UTC))
RAW files
Hallo Granada! Eine Frage, bitte: Wie organisierst Du Deine RAW Dateien? Wie findest Du eine RAW DAtei wieder? Danke fuer Deine tollen Fotos! 
--Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 14:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hallo Hedwig! Ich experimentiere immer wieder mit verschiedensten Bildbearbeitungsprogrammen sowohl unter Linux als auch in einer VM mit Windows und da kann ich nicht verschiedenste Katalogformate pflegen und grundsätzlich habe ich auch noch nie eine Beschlagwortung meiner Fotos vermißt. Meine Fotos liegen ausnahmslos auf einem NAS und ich habe mir dort eine Ordnerstruktur angelegt, die nach Jahren sortiert ist und innerhalb einzelner Jahre haben alle Ordner dasselbe Schema: "YYYMMDD_Art_der_Veranstaltung_Ort", so finde ich sehr schnell wieder, was ich mal irgendwann gemacht habe und von dem ich noch ungefähr weiß, wann das war. In der letzten Zeit und insbesondere seit ich meine D850 habe verwende ich immer öfter Lightroom zum Bilderexport, auch weil es dort den wirklich tollen Direktexport nach Commons gibt. In der Folge baue ich mir dort aber dann doch heimlich einen beschlagworteten Katalog auf, denn die Dateinamen und Kategorien für den späteren Export nach Commons muß ich dort ja "zwangsweise" vorab eingeben und dann ist das erledigt. Meine Dateinamen folgen demselben Schema wie die Ordner und fangen mit dem Datestamp an, beschreiben wer oder was zu sehen ist und tragen ganz am Ende die Bezeichner, aus welcher Kamera sie sind und die Nummer. Und danke für die Blumen! --Granada (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your advices
Dear Granada, firstly sorry for my English and thanks for your advices in Commons:Quality_images_candidates section
I saw your photos and just do not have words, very very good photos
. Do you speak french or russian? I use very simple cameras and i'm beginner in photography. I really want to learn how to make good photos and your advice is very helpful. I think it's hard to make a good photo against the sun I had to wait for the right time, what do you think about this? --Armenak Margarian (talk) 20:44, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Armenak Margarian, I only speak German and a bit of English. Your picture is too dark on the walls of the church due to your camera's automatic exposure that cannot know that you want to have the walls to be bright. If your camera does not have the feature to set the metering to center weighted or compensate for situations like with that church, then you can (hopefully) set your camera to manual exposure and hold it against the sun as done before. Then you increase the shutter speed one or two steps (take several shots) and leave the aperture unchanged. Alternatively do it the other way round and open the aperture and leave the shutter speed untouched. Or simply wait for the sun to come round. :) --Granada (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- I've checked what your Finepix S4500 is capable of. It cannot shoot RAW (which is always helpful for doing post production of images), but it can be set to spot metering and it can compensate exposure from -2 to +2 and can even do bracketing (and manual as well). So there's lot of features built into your camera to take better pictures in difficult lighting situations as above. I checked what can be done in post, but that's quite limited and raising the shadows brings up ugly noise - no good idea. --Granada (talk) 21:22, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! FIS WC NK Ramsau 20161218 Francois Braud DSC 7340.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
sharp?
What on earth do you mean that the Canon 100-400 lens is a "not really sharp lens"? Charles (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
- The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM especially when combined with a 1.4x teleconverter is not the sharpest lens anymore: [1] --Granada (talk) 06:50, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- The review you link to is not actually critical of the lens. Naturally a 100-400mm zoom lens will not be as good as a 400mm prime. A Nikon user should be wary of unfounded criticism of Canon. Have you ever taken images using a 400mm lens and 1.4 extender? Charles (talk) 09:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- Take a look at the image quality at 560mm (400mm + 1.4x extender). You can clearly see a fair amount of halos around the contrasting edges, even in the center of the frame becoming worse towards the edges. The question is not if I have ever taken pictures with a 40mm lens in combination with an extender. If I would have done so and if the results would not have been really sharp, I would probably put the resulting images into articles if necessary (i.e. it had no image at all before), but I would never nominate them as QI knowing about their faults. I happen to have a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 lying around with a 1.4x teleconverter. I once used this lens combination and took some portraits of sports people. The resulting images did meet the lowest demand - the articles had no image before at all, but the results weree ugly in terms of sharpness, contrast and detail. All things that get lost when using a teleconverter and having to raise the ISO. --Granada (talk) 09:35, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- The review you link to is not actually critical of the lens. Naturally a 100-400mm zoom lens will not be as good as a 400mm prime. A Nikon user should be wary of unfounded criticism of Canon. Have you ever taken images using a 400mm lens and 1.4 extender? Charles (talk) 09:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Daniel Steinhofer 850 8397.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Dieter Egger 850 8402.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Christoph Waibel 850 8448.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Josef Türtscher 850 8434.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Erich Schwärzler 850 8521.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Markus Wallner 850 8541.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Matthias Kucera 850 8515.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Roland Frühstück 850 8504.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Adi Gross 850 8500.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Michael Ritsch 850 8492.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Gabriele Nußbaumer 850 8537.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Sabine Scheffknecht 850 8482.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Ernst Hagen 850 8459.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Daniel Zadra 850 8455.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Johannes Rauch 850 8508.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Gabriele Sprickler-Falschlunger 850 8485.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171004 UWCL SKN-MCW StPoelten 850 1369.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20170624 Schneeberglandrallye DSC 6716.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20170624 Schneeberglandrallye DSC 6729.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20170624 Schneeberglandrallye DSC 7444.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20170624 Schneeberglandrallye Nikolaus Mayr-Melnhof DSC 7122.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Christian Gantner 850 8429.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Bernadette Mennel 850 8452.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Bernhard Feuerstein 850 8392.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Albert Hofer 850 8533.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Barbara Schöbi-Fink 850 8400.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20170621 Admira Wacker vs Vardar Skopje Vladica Brdarovski DSC 6070.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Thomas Winsauer 850 8528.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Daniel Allgäuer 850 8489.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171009 D850 rear.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
FP Promotion
|
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:20170624 Schneeberglandrallye DSC 7444.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:20170624 Schneeberglandrallye DSC 7444.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Harald Sonderegger 850 8522.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Vahide Aydin 850 8497.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Daniel Matt 850 8475.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Manuela Auer 850 8472.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Christof Bitschi 850 8462.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Beate Gruber 850 8441.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Joachim Weixlbaumer 850 8438.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Sandra Schoch 850 8427.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Monika Vonier 850 8423.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Cornelia Michalke 850 8417.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Christoph Metzler 850 8414.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Werner Huber 850 8408.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Martina Rüscher 850 8404.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Hubert Kinz 850 8387.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Nina Tomaselli 850 8381.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20170624 Schneeberglandrallye DSC 7625.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! FIS Worldcup Nordic Combined Ramsau 20161218 DSC 8887.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Julian Fässler 850 8384.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Christian Bernhard 850 8445.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.
|
_850_8376.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20171213 Nicole Hosp (FPÖ) 850 8376.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.
|
Nikon D850
Ich mache mal hier weiter, da technische Diskussionen, mehr Anwenderfälle ja wenig mit einem einzigem Bild zu tun haben: a) GPS Mich wundert einfach, das Du es nicht selber nutzt! Es soll wirklich funktionieren, nur darf man nicht vergessen das schon genug damit "rumgespielt" haben und freigegeben ist es erst mit der aller neusten SW-Release in snap-Bridge. In Deinem Fall geht es doch gar nicht um Geotaggs, aber bei Sport noch dazu unter freiem Himmel wäre eine exakte Zeit superwichtig und die Geo-Daten zumindest kein Fehler. Du reist photographisch wenig und nur wenige springen oft zwischen verschiedenen Zeitzonen, nur Ich wundere mich oft, was die Ing´s von Kameraherstellern so entwicklen. Bei Nikon war bluetooth und WLAN schon an der D500 peinlich. Viele merkten an, das sich entweder die CAM nicht "pairen" lässt oder WLAN zuviel Strom verbraucht. Beide Anwendungsfälle hast Du, daher frage ich Dich.
Bei den Portraits (indoor) macht eine sofortige WLAN-Übertragung einfach auf einen großen Screen Sinn. Indoor ist Stromverbrauch fast unwichtig. Bei Fußball und Deinen hunderten bis 1000 Bildern wird sicher kein Mensch die Bilder sofort am Platz übertragen. WLAN gibt es da meist, aber hallo Geschwindigkeit und Stromverbrauch an der Cam?? Und dann keine kontrollierte Zeit, gerade bei einem Tor??
Die Einstellung von mehr als einem vierstelligem Bildzähler ist auch nicht die Standard-Anwendung, eben PRO. Sollte daher, wie "Lens-profiles" ebenfalls über Snap-Bridge einzustellen sein oder einer Nikon PC-SW. Notfalls fällt dem der "DSC_"-Eintrag zum Opfer. Zumindest die D700 kann es ja bereits auf der Card verschiedene Ordner für verschiedene Aufgaben anzulegen. Nutze ich oft, ebenso wie verschiedene Karten für verschiedene Jobs.
Guten Rutsch! Hans-Jürgen
- Hallo Hans-Jürgen, bezüglich GPS-Koordinatenaufzeichnung bin ich es einfach nicht gewohnt, das zu tun. Wir haben hier ein diGPS für den 10-poligen Zubehöranschluß auf der linken Seite, das auch immer wieder mal benutzt wird, aber viel zu oft vergessen wird. Ich fotografiere sehr viel Sport und eher weniger Landschaften oder Gebäude. Die Koppelung mit dem Smartphone via eingebautem Bluetooth der D850 nutze ich ebenfalls nicht, denn das saugt mir den Akku zu schnell leer, obwohl ich den Batteriegriff und den Akku der D5 dazu habe.
- Beim Sport und egal ob am Fußballplatz oder in der Halle habe ich mir alles mögliche an Vorgehensweisen von den Leuten abgeschaut, die das schon länger machen, aber niemand verwendet ein GPS, zumal mir nicht bekannt ist, ob man die Uhrzeit der Kamera über das GPS synchronisieren lassen kann. Allerdings reicht für die Bestimmung des Timestamps einer Torszene die interne Uhr absolut aus, so oft hintereinander weg fallen die Tore nun auch wieder nicht und bisher habe ich alle Szenen wiedergefunden, wenn ich (viel) später noch einmal was brauchte.
- Verschiedene Ordner kann natürlich auch die 850, aber das macht damit mehr Spaß als mit älteren Nikons, denn die Eingabe von Bezeichnungen geht nun über das Touchdisplay erheblich einfacher und schneller.
- LG, Julia --Granada (talk) 08:07, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- Salü, Julia
Ich nutze auch eine Lösung am Rundstecker links. Irgendeine Nikon-Cam viel bei mir auch durch, da angeblich Profi/Semi-Model und dann eben kein 10pol-Rundstecker :( Der diGPS ist sogar noch besser, da er die Buchse für den Fernauslöser durchschleift. Meiner ist so klein, das er verriegelt immer dran ist. Eine Frage kann ich Dir zumindest beantworten: "...zumal mir nicht bekannt ist, ob man die Uhrzeit der Kamera über das GPS synchronisieren lassen kann...". Eben genau das ist der primäre Sinn und funkioniert auch wunderbar, mit zwei Einschränkungen: Einmal braucht GPS einen freien Himmel, also indoor kann es sein das er keine Satelliten findet. Zweitens hat nicht jedes Modell Kompassdaten (die Himmelsrichtungen der Kamera), gute Modelle können das, ebenso wie Höhenmeter. Sieht man an den EXIF-Daten. Was ich selber noch prüfen muss ist ober er immer GMT-Zone verwendet, ist mir nur bei den "White Temple" Aufnahmen aufgefallen, ich war in der Zeit manchmal in einer Woche in drei verschiedenen Zeitzonen. GPS ist militärisch und eine genauere Zeit gibt es kaum. Ich habe auch schon "Plätze" fotografiert die aus den Karten "gelöscht" oder "versteckt" sind und dann hat man die Einsicht, das man einen niegelnagelneuen Mietwagen hat und das größte Navi schlechter als ein smartphone mit Google-maps für 100€ ist. Ich habe viele Aufnahmen in einem Bunker gemacht, war mein mobiles Fotostudio, da brauchte ich sicher keine GPS-Daten, aber den lästigen Aufwand die Uhr der Kamera einzustellen viel da weg. Man stellt die Uhr ja nicht täglich ein, sie läuft intern weiter. Ich sehe schon, muss ich selber testen. Am smartphone merkt man es eben nicht, wenn er langsam syncronisiert. An der gps-mouse schon und das nervt, da zäh und langsam. Ich setze ja viel Hoffnung auf die D850, als großen Wurf. Liebäugle aber fast mit dem Preisverfall der 810. Für mich wäre snap-bridge (mit focus-peaking und ´nem anständigem Display) eigentlich DAS Argument der D850. Andere Sachen, wie das ein eingebauter Blitz fehlt, finde ich weniger lustig und das habe ich auch nur genutzt um die Leistung des kleinen flashs auf Null zu setzen und damit die Blitzanlage auszulösen. Klappte seltsamerweise manchmal besser als Funk und bei verschiedenen Lichtquellen sieht man es halt erst am fertigen Bild, leider zu spät. Jedenfalls Danke ist viel konstruktiver als viele (wieder nicht alle) Bildbeurteilungen hier. Daher habe ich mich auch noch nicht an FP rangewagt. Nach sehr kurzer Zeit merkt man hier einfach zu viel Cliquen-Verhalten und oft stimmen einfachste Sachen nicht. Bei manchen Kommentaren Deiner Sportbilder zieht es mir echt die Socken aus, dabei interessiert mich Sport als Bild kaum.-) Guten Rutsch und a staade Zeit, wie man hier sagt. Hans-Jürgen --Hans-Jürgen Neubert (talk) 10:37, 31 December 2017 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:24, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 20170608 U21 AUT-GIB Ritzing DSC 4876.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.
|