User talk:Herbythyme/Arc14

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salmon leap in flood 2.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 Also good. --Cayambe 12:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

"Had I the rights…"

Herby, you are…were one of the best admins Commons had, why did you drop the rights? -- Avi (talk) 16:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - not sure about "best" - some would disagree - however I was one of the most active (pace Siebrand & Cecil :))

Time Avi though inclination played a part. I get more images contributed this way. However nothing is for ever :) Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Tiene...

... un correo en su bandeja de entrada :). Regards, —Dferg ^(disputatio) 21:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Something useful

Actually have got round to doing something worthwhile... See File:Burrator Dam Dec 2009.jpg and File:Pano from Sharpitor, Dartmoor.jpg. Don't think the pano is that high quality (stitching issues and dodgy contrast), but can work on that. Actually I'll redo the pano before noting it. Had first detailed look and the mast on North Hessary has an awful stitch error :(--Nilfanion (talk) 20:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Yep Pano was a quick bash in hugin. I think biggest problem is I forgot to keep exposure fixed. If I spend a bit longer on it should get a better result (but I have sod all free time now due to the small matter of overtime - Money > Commons anyday!).--Nilfanion (talk) 11:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Trying to figure out if this one has any real value. I do know I could not take a shot at same location tomorrow! Also can't figure out appropriate categories...--Nilfanion (talk) 00:04, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, think you are right. Weather conditions weren't ideal there that day for me to get a decent shot of the wider view. Problem, with the heads generally is you need to get a significant elevation above the source bog to actually capture a view of the place... The Plym is particularly bad due to the lack of any convenient tor (or any small rise). I have a feeling only way to actually capture a worthwhile image of that would be a low-altitude aerial shot. With my shot, I was able to follow the channel into the bog right up to the point where it became indistinct.

Incidentally I had an idea last night for potential VI set with scope "Bridges over the River Plym". Same idea would easily work for all our local rivers except the Dart (the East/West split complicates it slightly). Maybe could amend to "crossings of" to include the ferries. I'm off out now for a shortish walk somewhere then work...--Nilfanion (talk) 14:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Weather was sunny for me :) Didn't have much free time so had short walk at Warleigh Point and got a QI-worthy one of the Tavy Bridge to prepare/upload. Regarding yours, sorely tempted to start tagging but best to leave it until final version is uploaded (the image notes will be incorrectly placed then, like what happened on the Kingswear one). That's also why I haven't done the same for my pano from other day - it needs a bit of work yet!--Nilfanion (talk) 22:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

All 3 look pretty good to me. Certainly treat as drafts of course but no obvious stitching problems so just levels to play with if you want. Only real feedback that I'd want to address before annotation-mania relates to File:North moor ST3.jpg. It does not look level. Yes Tor looks too low relative to High Willhays. Quick messing around suggests to me a slight CW tilt of about 1 degree (1.5 makes the two summits nearly level - so that's too far). Short version: Good pics :)--Nilfanion (talk) 02:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Another bit of feedback (now I'm awake) is that the FG is very dark in the other 2 panos. Obviously, thats the results of the clouds but adjustment to make the shadows less deep might help. Other thing is get the geotagging done :)--Nilfanion (talk) 11:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Trojan (talk · contribs)

Hi Herby, you are active at COM:QIC, a section of commons I dont know well. In Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 2008 the tulip image File:Firetulips.JPG was proposed and promoted by Trojan and Ischa1 (talk · contribs), both are sockpuppets. Whats to do here? Can you remove the quality assessment or relist the image? Thanks, --Martin H. (talk) 22:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Martin, I'd say the best person to ask this question is user:Dschwen . Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

There is no formal method to remove QI promotions. The easiest thing to do is simply renominate it, it doesn't look too bad. If it fails then we can worry about removing it. --Tony Wills (talk) 03:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks folks :) I meant to reply yesterday but forgot.

I've actually removed a puppet vote on a current QI image today from another puppet of this user (& mailed Martin too).

The image referred to here I don't mind relisting but actually I'd probably promote it myself anyway. Other comments welcome - Mbz1, Tony, other talk page watchers :) ? --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:54, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chateaulin 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 nice view --Mbdortmund 20:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bridge at Jaujac 2.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 Very sharp and good. --Cayambe 19:00, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Old Jaujac 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 ok. --Berthold Werner 14:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coulées Basaltiques at Jaujac 3.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 I dont like the stuff in the bottom left corner, nor the tree stub. You may cut the lower part of the picture.--Lipedia 17:34, 10 December 2009 (UTC)  Support Very good image indeed! To cut off the lower part as you suggested means to cut off part of the columns too or at the very least make the crop too tight. Maybe a vertical cut will be appropriate.--Mbz1 18:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)  Neutral Very valuable image. I think CA correction would improve the technical quality. (The branch at the top left corner reveals strong CA which usually means that the overall "sharpness" will improve after CA correction.)--MattiPaavola 18:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)  Comment Re-uploaded, thanks --Herbythyme 19:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)  SupportThis way it's nice.--Lipedia 19:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Les orgues basaltiques Thueyts 2.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 Great landscape, and I see no mistakes. The stone bridge is a nice detail.--Lipedia 17:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chateauneuf du Faou 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 Excellent composition, with some acceptable noise. --Cayambe 08:28, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Roman bridge - Jaujac.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 --Lipedia 18:53, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Les orgues basaltiques Thueyts 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}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Towards crater at Jaujac 4.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}}}

Re Cross

Yeah, makes sense. I just went with the name from Dartmoor crosses. Incidentally, I don't think their listing is appropriate as "canonical list of crosses". For instanceThis one isn't a cross (now), and if you are going to include crosses in churchyards how can you exclude the gravestones? Aren't some of those crosses too? Think that shows why getting a VI set for Dartmoor Crosses isn't actually possible :(--Nilfanion (talk) 12:23, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Swanage stitch.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 Nice work. --Cayambe 16:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Swanage to Ballard stitch.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 Ok for me. --Cayambe 07:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Kingswear and the Dart s1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kingswear and the Dart s1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 16:05, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abbotsbury stitch.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}}}

Quick question

Could you do me a favour? On my Tavy Bridge pic there is a tor visible (above the rusty spans). I'm not sure which it is (I'm thinking one of Staple or Mis). Also, any suggestion for a quick trip up to moors today? No way would I go far off the beaten track, so I might just climb Leeden Tor or something.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:16, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough (housebound for now... :( ) Sure I'll think of something (and sorry if making you jealous).--Nilfanion (talk) 12:22, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Mbz1 (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Thank you, Herbythyme, for the advises you've kindly given to me at my talk page and on administrator boards. They helped me a lot. --Mbz1 (talk) 17:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

¡Feliz Navidad!

Dferg wishes you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Cheers! — Dferg ^(disputatio) 19:38, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Besides, would you be so kind to review this... something into me makes me suspect that it is not true, among other things; like the poor quality photos and the info contained on the page. Cheers, — Dferg ^(disputatio) 15:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Humm, well... — Dferg ^(disputatio) 15:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Well worth watching I think :) Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Herby. Nice photo. I also wish you lot's of good things and healht (and wealth too) for this new year. ;) Regards, — Dferg ^(disputatio) 14:02, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Thank you for your nice "postcard"! I wish you happy and relaxing holidays! BR, --MattiPaavola (talk) 17:19, 22 December 2009 (UTC) Ooo - I got a slightly personalised one :) Looking at the Holne pano for image notes now. IMO, one time saver with those things is to do a quick pass with basic tags. The content of the notes can then be expanded out in one edit (as they are just part of the description text ultimately).--Nilfanion (talk) 22:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Best wishes for the holiday season and the upcoming new year! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:09, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

:-)

Thanks for the good wishes and messages of support. I hope that taking time to enjoy photography once again has given you enjoyment and safisfaction this year! I will be out and about with my camera, but I expect the weather to be a bit too hot rather than the cold of the frozen North that you are enjoying :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 02:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks You  :)

Thanks for congratulations!
And I wish You Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! :)
--George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:14, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Courtesy of Chico, the Official Commons Christmas Puggle. :P

An intriguing and never dull year for all concerned, I'm sure you'll agree Herby. Let's hope next year is just as exciting! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 07:25, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks - have a good time now and in 2010 :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:13, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

With thanks for your greetings and your support, Herby, also my best wishes to you for a merry christmas (or happy holidays) and a lucky new year!
As in this autumn photo (left) the light at the horizon triumphs over the dark in the foreground, lets hope that next year there will be overall more cooperation than confrontation on Commons and less problems than this year. --Túrelio (talk) 16:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Royal Naval college-3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Royal Naval college-3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 08:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rippon tor pano.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 Very good result --George Chernilevsky 06:21, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hey tor stitch.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 Well done! --George Chernilevsky 06:18, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saddle tor to Hey tor pano.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 Very nice result --George Chernilevsky 06:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Volume of Latuff images

Your comments are requested at Commons:Village pump#Latuff repository. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 07:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Avi - I appreciate the note. However, looking at it, I see it involves two of the most unpleasant people I have had the misfortune to encounter in over 3 years editing on foundations sites. The most unreasonable too and on "opposing" sides. As such I think it likely that if I get involved I will get angry or blocked (or both), apologies :( --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:12, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Panos

Got out of work... :) Regarding the cache problem, I've seen it before myself and is why my latest uploads were <10000px. The highest thumbnail size you can select in preferences is 10000x10000. If a pano is <=10000px wide, then MW does not need to generate a thumbnail (it just shows the original upload). However, if it is more than that it has to generate a thumbnail that is going to be large in its own right - that take time. I'm not sure if its possible to hack the user prefs to allow a higher value there as it would make annotating panos a lot easier.

Re the North Moor stitch, yeah I think there is a bit of tilt unfortunately. I'll email you a "fixed" version - or can upload over original if you want (depending on how much is lost). I don't think the fix will lose too much :)--Nilfanion (talk) 22:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem on tilt - and yeah you got it tilt then crop! :) New upload looks about right on that aspect now, and like the additional width :)

On topic of the basin pano: The "annotations in the sky" issue is only occurring when looking at the default 800x600 image. If you change the prefs to any other thumbnail size then they are correctly placed. The 800px thumbnail is still for the original upload. There is something bizarre going on, I'll email you some stuff.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:39, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I deleted and restored the file. That seems to have fixed the caching problem.. all fine now :)--Nilfanion (talk) 02:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mont Saint-Michel de Brasparts1.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 OK -- MJJR 21:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ironwork by aquaduct.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 Good quality! -- MJJR 21:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View to Sharpitor from Meavy.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 Good. --Cayambe 10:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to you

You're very welcome :-).

I try to keep up with FP, QI and VI promotions to write french descriptions for each one of them. So, my thanks go to you for taking those great pictures ! :-)

Cheers, Jean-Fred (talk) 13:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Please do not get blocked because of me barnstar :)

		***** Please do not get blocked because of me barnstar *****
		I award you with this "Please do not get blocked because of me barnstar" Thank you for understanding me! --Mbz1 (talk) 03:00, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Please have a Happy New Year!--Mbz1 (talk) 03:00, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Apparently I'm not...:). Thanks and very best wishes for 2010 to you. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Schoolgirls in Bamozai.JPG

I wouldn't mind at all if you edited it. I'm back in Afghanistan at the moment and don't have access to Photoshop here, so I'm very limited in what adjustments I can make. Severnjc (talk) 11:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

RE the schoolboys photo: go ahead. The blowout is a bit worse near the top of the photo, but it is also one of my favorites. I was considering nominated it and the Schoolgirls photo as a set, but set nominations don't seem to be doing too well at the moment. Thanks for the assistance. Severnjc (talk) 12:29, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

The new retouch looks good; also, added the geolocation (it's about 25 feet from the photo of the girls.) Severnjc (talk) 17:35, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! North moor from Teign Basin stitch 3.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 Excellent result --George Chernilevsky 16:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Dartmoor in 2010

File:Leather and Sharpitor from Sheepstor.jpg - first one for New Year :) What I regret is being idiotic enough to go to Burrator on a bank holiday with the best weather we have had for ages. I've never seen it so busy, even in high summer, and the ice cream van at the dam getting a lot of customers!--Nilfanion (talk) 20:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Saddle tor to Hey tor pano.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Saddle tor to Hey tor pano.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! North moor ST3.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 Nice panorama. ZooFari 17:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Torquay stitch.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 There's little noise, but the ultra resolution compensates IMO. --MattiPaavola 10:25, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teign Basin stitch 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 Ok. --Berthold Werner 15:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

File:View of Sharpitor and Leather Tor across Burrator reservoir.jpg

You reckon this might have a chance at FP? I love the colours on it, but that might just be me. You're a more experience user. Jolly Janner (talk) 20:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Away a couple of days - back late on Weds, will respond after that - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

OK - back - picked the wrong day for travelling I guess!

Nice image. You went to a good spot and saw a good scene. You captured it fairly well. However it does have issues (and certainly is not qi as it stands) which are to do with the camera as much as anything.

1. There is vignetting (en:Vignetting). Look at the upper corners and see where they darken.
2. It is slightly underexposed (camera auto does the best it can but does not always work)
3. It isn't very sharp (again camera issue)
4. It is tilted - your issue but I am not one to talk - mine often are. However I can spot it when water is involved :)

Before getting fed up with this bear in mind a year ago I was in the same place you are now. The above are fixable basically. You obviously do some post processing although I am not sure that you needed to raise the saturation really. You need to work on post processing skills now (your "eye" is ok as I've said before!). Any courses available anywhere - it will be the quickest way to learn stuff.

Do get back to me - mail if you want - if you want any more info. I can fix the image but so can you and you will learn by it :) Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

As a ps - play with panos - they are not hard and you could have got the spread of the reservoir in - try it out sometime :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for all your help, much appreciated as always. I always made a panorama of my bedroom using Hugin just to test it out. It came out pretty well, apart from the very centre meeting point... it would be better if that meeting point was at the edges of the photo, but haven't worked out how to do that yet. The main problem I think for me taking panormas is that my camera has too many auto functions that I can't remove. If I was to take a panorma in the outdoors, the light levels would change a lot and so too would me camera's settings, so it looks kind of weird as each picture has different settings. Jolly Janner (talk) 13:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry too much about that. Hugin will do its best to balance it. Equally try MS's MSCE - that is actually pretty reasonable for an MS freeby and even more forgiving than Hugin.

If the camera has "scenes" (outdoor/sport/whatever) try setting it on one of them rather than auto too. Let me know if I can help. Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll have a go in the garden before it gets dark, although I won't try a 360 panorama. Jolly Janner (talk) 15:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

This is the raw output from Hugin. As you can see my tripod wasn't on very flat land, so I should probably try do another on paving slabs. My camera was set on landscape mode, but it also has a snow mode, which I might now try. Jolly Janner (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Over exposed but you can sort that and you should crop it so that you only get actual image in it but the main thing is to keep doing it! I probably shouldn't admit it here but most of mine are hand held :) The main issue is to ensure you hold a line as you move it around (I have a terrible one of the north moor where I didn't! Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

My tripod's faulty anyway. The flat part that the camera is attached to has a noticeable slant. On my second pano I put a grid up on the camera screen and held the flat part that the camera sits on by hand. The tripod's pretty good at getting even angles, as it has a protractor. Jolly Janner (talk) 16:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Second pano is very over-exposed too. I think I'll try again at midday at the weekend facing north, rather than in a shaded garden at sunset. Jolly Janner (talk) 16:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah - get out and play - you have nothing to loose and quite a bit to gain! I'm assuming a "point a shoot"? They are good at getting what they get - look hard at the settings - take the same shot with different settings so you get to know what they actually do in your eyes. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

(Sorry for butting in) Jolly Janner, the difference between hand-held and tripod isn't too important for landscape-type panoramas. The problem with hand-held is parallax, and that is only really an issue if there is something close to you when you are taking it. That may make a difference in the garden, and with architecture, but won't in the more open situations. Practice, practice, practice is the main thing, both to get used to how to take the pictures and how to work the stitching tool of choice. Herby, today's uploads look good (and yeah the second is belongs in "Dartmoor" cats). May be a possible slight tilt, so might be worth checking to see if a subtle CW rotation looks better. Also check your email :)--Nilfanion (talk) 18:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually once I've gone through tagging obvious its near as makes no difference level. Added 7 notes (all in basic form), think they are all right (and agrees with what you said earlier). Still, left some out of course.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Uploaded mine from yesterday. Identified 20 tors - not bad! Looking at map Higher Hartor may be visible too, but its such a minor one its not really resolved. Plenty of other things to tag there of course.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Greetings!

Thanks- what kind of photo was it? One of a castle? Or of musicians, perhaps? Just wondering. Also, I could sure use a friend here in Wikimedia Commons- I've uploaded hundreds of photos to Wikipedia-- check for yourself on my userpage (same username there), the list is getting too long, and is incomplete. But I don't even know how to make a category here in Commons after 3 years of Wikipedia editing full-time. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank YOU! I thought the photo was too dark, but in finding band photos for people, it's not easy. I should mention I never used a computer until about 6 years ago, and am very computer challenged. I generally have to ask an Admin. at en.WP just to trim a photo-- there's one on David Bowie's page that really needs it-- you can see it yourself! Ditto understanding how to set up the "tree" format kind of thing on Commons, even though I "get it", I'm unsure how that is done. For instance, in en.WP, my area of interest is Musicians. Within that, mainly Blues, roots, Blues-rock groups. Within that, mostly guitarists, (inc. bass guitarists), and then, in particular, slide guitar players. How would I go about visualizing that in categories here? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 13:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Devon and moors stitch.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 Very good. --Cayambe 08:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Devon fields stitch.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 Very good. --MattiPaavola 18:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I'm never sure when it's ok for nom to vote and when not. Every wiki is a world. -- Drini 17:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Mutual help!

Hey Herby, I think we can mutually assist one another. While I know zip about Wikimedia Commons, I have uploaded and placed several hundred photos of musicians via Commons to en.WP, pt.WP, and several other language Wikipedias. As I mentioned, I've kept an incomplete list after a small gallery on my userpage in Wikipedia, and then a large list of the musicians' photos I uploaded and placed. In doing so, I always emailed the photographer of the photo(s) on Flickr to be certain that they were the actual photographers, and to ask that they change their copyright to Creative Commons

I was thinking: can you can help me occasionally lighten some pics, trim them, and help create some new categories on Commons I can use to upload my photos to? (Example: right now, the band Fairport Convention should have it's own category here but I don't know how to make a new one for uploading their photos (band and individual's photos) here-- the band has had about 20 members and is 42 years old! Also, there needs to be a Folk-rock Category. A whole bunch were just uploaded by myself, and many, many, more are expected.) In exchange, if you are interested, I know a bunch of photographers with whom I have a very good relationship that will change photos to CC-BY-SA upon request. Many have amazing sets of native plants and other photos of nature, which I gather is your area of interest. Often, I develop such a rapport with the photographers that they change their entire Flickr photostreams for me-- one currently is Brian Marks, the photographer of the photo you helped to lighten! Follow his stream (he's got thousands of photos), and they only require Attribution. He only asks that you don't use his Flickr name and instead use his real name of Brian Marks.

Re: David Bowie's photo. It is under the heading of the "Thin White Duke, on his en.WP article. I think either 1/5 or 1/4 of the left side of the photo should be cropped off. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Rippon tor pano.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rippon tor pano.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 08:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Descriptions

I think I touched on this the other day but given the circumstances didn't really get chance to discuss it. You probably noticed this from last night, I added a bit of detail from Pastscape. I'm tempted to do something similar for as much as possible, fleshing the descriptions out slightly. Do you think I should link to the record as well?

One specific instance I'm not sure about is Childe's Tomb. There is a lot of information on Pastscape, which I think should be looked at for purposes of WP, not here on Commons. Thoughts?--Nilfanion (talk) 11:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah makes sense to me. IMO, this is about the appropriate level of detail. After all, if we decide to sub-categorise the crosses (by date?) that info on the pages will be helpful. Childe's Tomb is both an important and complex site, it needs WP article treatment to handle correctly and we should not attempt to do so on the description page. After all there are at least 4 phases archaeologically (Bronze age cairn, medieval cist, the cross and the restoration). This link should help if you want to do similar stuff: [1]--Nilfanion (talk) 13:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Would you assist me here?

I have two requests: One, can you tell me how to see a photo nominated for photo of the day, or whatever? I'm speaking of one I didn't take, but I did upload it. It's in my little userpage I never use but here it is, too: Image:Sweet Honey in the Rock.jpg Or: [2] Sweet Honey in the Rock is an acapella group of African American women that sing everything from hymns from slave times to everything else in life. I've seen them, without a single instrument but voices (and one is a sign language performer). They were honored by President Obama last year. I've uploaded hundreds of photos, but this one, large, untouched, etc. is easily in my top 5 I ever uploaded. Please help me with this?
The other thing was I noticed you'd commented once on the en.WP page for the band Show of Hands. They're no hoax, and I uploaded a photo of the duo to the infobox, but it's too dark, and I'm about to upload some other bands' photos which are really dark since they were taken at festivals in the evenings, but maybe you could help a little with the Show of Hands photo and maybe a couple of these new ones? Only if you have time. Thanks!--Leahtwosaints (talk) 04:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Staple etc pan.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 very good result --George Chernilevsky 17:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dartmoor Prison pan.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 Good. --Cayambe 09:51, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sharp tor and on st.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 Excellent --George Chernilevsky 17:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Re Thx

Yep, looks better (and who really cares about that bird anyway? :) ). Hope weekend isn't write off for you.--Nilfanion (talk) 13:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

FP review?

Hey Herby, hope all's well. If you get a chance, could you take a look at File:Beach house at Misquamicut Beach, Rhode Island.JPG and let me know if it has a shot at FPC? Cheers. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll give it some thought. I think the answer might be an email one. Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Devon fields stitch.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Devon fields stitch.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 00:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bonehill to Chinkwell st hug.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 Well done image, excellent --George Chernilevsky 16:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hameldon and Chinkwell st.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 Excellnt panorama --George Chernilevsky 16:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rippon tor st hug.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 very nice --George Chernilevsky 16:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I screwed up

Hey Herby, I uploaded a photo of my own, and wasn't warned by the uploader, and now, I need to delete my photo, and re-upload under a different name, since there was already an image given the same name! What should I do? The photo was under The Awakening.jpg. This is the first upload using my Wiki name you know, inspired since you asked what my photos look like. I never kept many at all; feeling them not up to par. What can I do to delete and try again? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Woolacombe beach-2.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 very good --George Chernilevsky 11:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PW cott s1 stitch.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 good --George Chernilevsky 17:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porlock Weir harbour-6.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 Very good --George Chernilevsky 17:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! From O Pupers last light-3.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 Nice! --MattiPaavola 16:43, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ringstead from White Nothe-5.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 good --George Chernilevsky 08:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bats Head from White Nothe-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 good --George Chernilevsky 08:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dunster Market-2.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 Good and useful image, though the (unavoidable) car at right is a bit disturbing.

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Towards Morte point.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 Very good. --Cayambe 18:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bull Point lighthouse-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 Good composition and great sharpness. --Cayambe 17:07, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

From leahtwosaints re: the photo of mine

Herby, when we upload photos to Commons from other places, like Flickr, or in my case, my own computer manually, it normally warns us if another photo has the same chosen name. Thus, when trying to place my photo, called "The Awakening", which I took in an underwater exercise (underwater photos) for a course some years ago, and my best of the batch was this one, which reminded me of a story I read from circa 1900 about a woman who can't take society's rules, and so drowns herself. My problem is that someone else picked the same name for some other page in Wikipedia, so when I tried to place it on a page, the result was someone else's album photo or something. NOW I am asking you for help. HOW DO I DELETE my photo I uploaded, so I can re-name it, upload it, and place it on a page for the article on the book, The Awakening? Can you tell me what to do? The upload WILL recognize the photo if it's here already and not accept another upload even if I rename it, until it has been deleted from Commons from the first try for good! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 17:45, 20 January 2010 (UTC)