User talk:W.carter/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 23

Please enable e-mail to be eligible to win a prize in Wiki Loves Monuments!

Thank you for uploading images for Wiki Loves Monuments!

However, we have noticed you have not enabled e-mail. To be eligible to win a prize the contest, you need to enable e-mail. This is what to do:

1. Check the top right of your screen, and log in if you have not done so already
2. Go to your preferences
3. Scroll down to Email Options
4. Enter your email address and click "Allow other users to email me"
5. Click Save
   

• Just putting a timestamp on this for archiving bot. --Cart (talk) 09:15, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

• Goedenavond Cart,

Gelukkig dat u nog actief bent op commons. Wij kregen van u een mail over het uploaden van afbeeldingen voor Wiki Loves Monuments!

Nederland doet volgens ons niet mee. De mail is waarschijnlijk niet voor ons bedoeld. Maar als het beter is, willen we de e-mailfunctie wel inschakelen.

Met vriendelijke groet, Agnes & Dominicus.

• Hallo Dominicus, altijd leuk om van je te horen. Ja ik ben nog steeds actief op Commons, alleen niet op FPC. Ik moet de creativiteit weer terug krijgen en alle regels van FPC hebben dat een beetje onderdrukt. Vreemd over de e-mail, ik heb al lang geen e-mail meer naar iemand op Commons gestuurd. Ik heb die functie meestal niet ingeschakeld. Er moet iets mis zijn met het systeem dat de Zweedse WLM gebruikt. Ik zal de e-mail nu alleen een tijdje inschakelen tijdens de WLM en later weer uitschakelen. Ik gebruik het normaal gesproken niet omdat het in het verleden tot veel onaangenaam situaties heeft geleid. Ik hoop dat het met jullie allebei goed gaat! Al het beste, --Cart (talk) 16:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

• Hartelijk dank voor uw antwoord. Met ons gaat het goed, al komt de corona steeds dichterbij. Hopelijk bent u ook nog in goede gezondheid. Groeten uit het mooie Friesland --Famberhorst (talk) 16:44, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

• Famberhorst, Ik ben nog steeds goed. Ik had een klein gezondheidsincident, dus ik werd in het ziekenhuis op corona getest, maar gelukkig kwam de test negatief terug. Het is erg saai om van alles op afstand gehouden te moeten worden. Ik gebruik deze tijd om mijn oude foto's te sorteren, zowel digitaal als van film. Sommigen van hen zijn geüpload naar mijn Flickr-account (u bent van harte welkom om het te bezoeken!), zowel vrij foto's als auteursrechtelijk beschermd. Na verloop van tijd zal ik de vrij ook uploaden naar Commons. Het is goed om iets te doen te hebben en terug te kunnen dromen naar een tijd waarin de wereld minder besmettelijk was. --Cart (talk) 17:14, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

• Goed om te horen, dat het goed met u gaat. Ik zal het even aan Agnes doorgeven. Hartelijke groeten van ons beide. En ook tot ziens bij FP's. We zullen ook uw Flickr-account bezoeken. Om eerlijk te zijn: wij weten niets van Flickr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Famberhorst (talk • contribs)

• Famberhorst, Flickr is als het hebben van een persoonlijk online fotoalbum voor alle soorten foto's onder elke soort licentie. De eerste 1000 foto's zijn gratis te uploaden, daarna betaal je een kleine vergoeding. --Cart (talk) 17:50, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Set Promoted to FP

• 
• 
• 

★ This set has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The set Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/NASA Exoplanet Exploration Halloween posters 2020, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/NASA Exoplanet Exploration Halloween posters 2020 has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another set, please do so !

/FPCBot (talk) 05:03, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020! Please help with this survey

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear W.carter,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2020, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again for a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 200K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey.

Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2020.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team, 08:24, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

POTD Notification

⭐ The file you uploaded, is on the main page! ⭐ The file File:Apple cake with vanilla ice cream 2.jpg, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Nu presenterar vi vinnarna i Wiki Loves Monuments 2020!

Wiki Loves Monuments 2020

Hej,
(For information in English, see here.)
Årets WLM-jury har efter hårt kämpande och stor vånda kommit till ett resultat, och på fredag 11 december, 10.00 (SNT), tar vi första steget i tillkännagivandet när vi i en livestream på youtube presenterar de tio bilder som går vidare till internationella finalen. Du, och alla andra, är välkommen att vara med när bilderna presenteras av Eric Luth och Johanna Berg.
Passa även på att boka in 15 januari då pallplatserna kommer att tillkännages under födelsedagsfirande i samband med Wikipedias 20-årsdag. /Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 10:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy holidays 2020/2021!

		* Happy Holidays 2020/2021, W.carter! *
		Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël! Bonne année! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!    -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy holidays 2020/2021!

Hello Cart,

thank you very much for all your pictures and contributions on Commons!
I wish you and your loved ones a Merry Christmas and a happy and healthy 2021.

All the best, --Aristeas (talk) 11:58, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

FYI

The FPC nomination was a test to see if I could still edit a photo well enough. What better way to get an honest opinion than to submit one to the scrutinizing gaze of the FPC community. ;-) It is heartening to see that the first comments were not about the photo's quality. I may drop in for a nom now and then, but I will not be doing any voting since I don't trust my eyes to make fair judgments.

Over more than a year now, I've lost about half my eyesight. The doctors experimented with strong drugs to mend my crappy lungs. It didn't work, instead it affected my eyes and not in a good way. They didn't inform me of this possible side-effect, which of course pissed me off royally when I found out. Dealing with all of this made me cranky and irritable. After some “incidents” I realized it would be best if I stayed away from forums where I might snap at people for the wrong reasons.

Anyway, you adapt and learn. When I edit photos these days, I do it by looking at numbers, histograms and relying on my past experience. I compare with other photos on cranked up hi-res screens and hope for the best. The thing I have most problem with is contrast. I must keep in mind not to boost it to levels that are comfortable to me. I'm not writing this to get any sympathy or pity (please don't!), just to explain the situation. Of course, I can see colors and compositions just fine, and comment on facts, but I think it's best if I refrain from voting. Hope that's ok. And should I go into bitch-mode again, just tell me to back down and shut up. :-) Cheers, --Cart (talk) 18:42, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Goedemorgen Carter

Fijn om weer van u te horen. U heeft veel meegemaakt de laatste tijd zo lezen wij hierboven. Hopelijk is er nog verbetering van uw gezichtsvermogen mogelijk. Wij hopen het voor u. Veel goeds toegewenst. Agnes & --Famberhorst (talk) 06:11, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I fully agree with Agnes and Famberhorst. I am sorry that I abruptly rejected your current FPC as soon as you returned. If I had known the background, I would have been more sensitive. But I only followed the first impulse after looking at the image. I wish you well-founded optimism that your situation will get better again. --Milseburg (talk) 22:14, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Milseburg, no need to apologize at all!! I wanted a fair assessment of the photo, and you did exactly as I wanted by treating me like any other FPC-er. Thank you! I didn't object to your vote other than to ask you to take a closer look at where the horizon was. No hard feelings, and I hope you vote as you find necessary when you examine the photo the next time I try something at FPC. As for getting better, well, eyes are like any other limb (hand or foot), if you lose them they can't grow back, the only thing is to become better at handling the situation as it is. Thank for dropping by here, that was kind of you! --Cart (talk) 22:24, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Cart, because you mention above that especially contrast is difficult: just an idea. If you are unsure about the contrast of a photo, upload a preliminary version and add a simple link to it on my talk page. Then I can have a look and give you a second opinion. (Please don’t take this as a condescending offer – I really like your photos, so it’s a pleasure for me to look at them ;–).) All the best, --Aristeas (talk) 10:24, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Aristeas, Thank you! I don't see this as condescending at all, just extremely kind. :-) To be honest, learning to ask for help when needed, has been the greatest challenge for me. I love photography so much and I want to keep doing it as long as I can. Most of the time it's also a great experience for me, since enlarged on my screens, I can see all the details I couldn't see IRL. I will take you up on your generous offer if I feel very uncertain about a photo. Thanks again, --Cart (talk) 10:38, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, please do so, it’s really a pleasure for me. All the best, --Aristeas (talk) 11:06, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Vassholmen island outside Väjern harbor, Kungshamn 4.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vassholmen island outside Väjern harbor, Kungshamn 4.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:New ice cracking on stone as tide goes out at Govik.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:New ice cracking on stone as tide goes out at Govik.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:International Space Station star trails - JSC2012E039800.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:International Space Station star trails - JSC2012E039800.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Email from me?

No, it was not. Not from me, and I don't think my account was hacked. I don't write that way (I am defiant about capitalizing my "I"'s), and you are about the fifth person tonight (only the second outside my family) to ask me what's going on.

From what I have been able to discover, I think someone spoofed my email addy and sent this message to a bunch of addresses that either email me a lot (certain spam and political junk mail sources) or that I send, or have sent, a lot of email to ... that is how I think yours came up. It suggests to me that someone hacked a server or packetsniffed a feed somewhere.

I got the notice that you have sent me an email, but uncharacteristically I have not received the email (In fact, since this seems to have happened late this afternoon North American EDT (so probably late at night European time), I've actually gotten very little email, and certainly none of the spam I usually get (perhaps I should be grateful). So I wonder if something else happened.

Some people said they have written back asking what was going on; my father forwarded me what he got, but I haven't gotten any of those. I suspect that perhaps whoever is behind this has diverted the replies (hopefully for a while) or any email from the addresses they harvested to themselves. My guess is that what they are after is valid email addresses to sell spammers, and by sending them an email back you may have gotten the Wikimedia address into their data base. Oh well ... Daniel Case (talk) 01:30, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: Sorry to hear about the mess you find yourself in with your e-mail. This thing happens to my company e-mail from time to time, annoying as hell, but thankfully it settles down after a while. I wouldn't worry about the Wikimedia address too much, it's such a 'big' address it's probably in every spam register there is. A tip there is to not reply via that e-mail, that's when you trigger the spam-bombing, instead you send your reply out via 'E-mail this user'. Or if you have the person's e-mail, start a new thread/conversation. Hope your e-mail is back to normal soon. --Cart (talk) 11:37, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I actually wasn't worried; like you said that's probably already happened before. It's just really weird, though, not getting any of the spam I usually get (some of which I did appreciate) and worrying that most of my non-commercial contacts can't get through either.

I mean, in the headers of the email I looked at I found people I haven't sent emails to in almost 20 years ... I mean, I wonder, could the email have somehow edited people's contacts files? I guess if your experience is any guide, normal should start coming back in a while. Daniel Case (talk) 03:57, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Santuário Dom Bosco 2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Santuário Dom Bosco 2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Fishing huts reflected in the ice at Fisketången, Kungshamn.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fishing huts reflected in the ice at Fisketången, Kungshamn.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Pacific oyster from Brofjorden on a chopping board in Tuntorp.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pacific oyster from Brofjorden on a chopping board in Tuntorp.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Here is a cookie to accompany the offered cup of tea :) I share your view. Opposing images that are textbook examples of photography and that define what photography is, without good logical foundation, is strange. It is the same as opposing Beethoven's 9th symphony or Michelangelo's David. I am very surprised that some of my own pictures, that were very easy to make, were promoted to FP, while some really unique ones by serious (even in some cases genius) photographers were rejected. I can take my 100-400 and make many more pictures of the wall of windows that will be promoted. The wall is not going anywhere and anyone can make that picture. But I will never ever make such a picture as "Kombat", for example. This picture is a dream for any photographer (and is beyond most photographers) Maksim Sokolov (talk). 03:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Maksim, the cookie was really delicious. :-) You are doing very well with learning coding, interacting with other users and all around getting the hang of things on this site. If you have any questions, you can always drop by and ask them here on my talk page. All the best, --Cart (talk) 09:13, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Cart! Maksim Sokolov (talk). 11:43, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Cart, thank you for your support. You have provided welcoming atmosphere. I am leaving now, as I cannot except the treatment I received in FPC. Once again, thank you a lot, Maksim Maksim Sokolov (talk). 02:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks Maksim, sorry that you got such a bad start at FPC, but I'm glad you will still be contributing to Commons. There are always some odd characters at FPC and I too lose patience with the forum on a regular basis. But they are not the worst thing I've encountered in my life, so I stick around. For better or worse, FPC is the display window of the Wikimedia project that I care very much about. There are also a lot of friendly people at FPC even if most of them are not very verbal. See you around the Commons then, --Cart (talk) 07:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi, Cart. I just want to thank you. I thought your comment was excellent, and I don't think it was deterring voters any more than my reply of "You're most welcome!" on the Notgeld nom is deterring voters. I almost posted a reply to the latest comments on the food pic nom that I won't be surprised if people nitpick another food picture to death but thought better of it (I got my second Pfizer shot on Monday and I'm experiencing exhaustion, depression and irritability as side effects). It's frustrating when hardly anyone seems interested in a photo you really like, particularly when hardly anything in that entire category seems to pass, but though overall trends and probabilities fall into some patterns on FPC, there's a fair degree of unpredictability, and some people take longer than others to make up their minds, so who knows? All I can do is make the nomination. I should say, my girlfriend and I have had the pleasure of sharing a dessert and a couple of paired wines before and it was pleasant indeed. :-)

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment Ikan. I know that poetic/mood interpretations do not go down well on this very technical forum, so better safe than sorry. It is astonishing how FPC can be so ignorant and adverse to a whole large genre of photography, such as modern food photography. Then again, people like what they are used to and comfortable with, and food photography and the development of it is championed by women. Maybe there's the answer. It's a shame people can't broaden their horizons more, instead we get sterile focus stacked photos where food components are treated like specimens in a lab.

Very glad you got your vaccine, you are one of the treasures on FPC, --Cart (talk) 07:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

That's very kind of you to say, and I'm a bit taken aback at the idea of being a treasure on FPC without contributing any of my own photos (because I take them on an iPhone and they're not nearly good enough). I'd hate to think there's an element of sexism in which kinds of photos get supported, but I know very well that subconscious preferences are very common, so you could be onto something. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:06, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Ikan, well maybe it's because you don't have any photos of your own. You are a curator and a balancing presence, an invaluable asset among all the rest of us hotheads. I have no idea how you stay so polite and focused in all the chaos of FPC! Maybe living in New York is good training to block out shit, because Rhododendrites also has a hint of this. :-) And yes, there is a hidden, albeit subconscious, sexism at FPC and I've ranted about it several times before. With so many excellent women photographers, why else are there so few at FPC. It takes a good deal of rhino hide to stand up to all the Mid-European male ideals there. --Cart (talk) 10:33, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Yeah. I know that for example Granada posted some fantastic nominations but stopped nominating her work after some of it was rejected in ways she found insulting (and I'm not saying it wasn't). Speaking of which, I should look at her uploads and see whether there's more work that should be nominated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I get frustrated now and then, both by some of what does/doesn't get promoted and by the way people express their opinions, but I'm largely used to it, I guess. I chalk a lot of it up to translation (which I find helps assume good faith, whereas it's easier to assume nuanced intent when arguing with people on enwiki). Regarding the food photos, assuming it's the cheesecake photo which started this? I tend to think of the "lab specimen" photos as just a completely different genre from food photography. More like product photography. I think they're both useful, but the implications for voting is that carefully presented single foods/ingredients are easier to support. The support wouldn't be as strong as for a food photo that really resonates with someone, but it allows us to check all the boxes for FP and does have its purpose. A shot of someone's fancy dinner in its real context is going to involve a higher level of subjectivity. It's not just different, but different in a way that some people will like and some people won't, while another food-in-context may appeal to different people. There may be some people who don't like any of those, granted, and I suppose that's a good reason to be frustrated. :) To use my own perennial topical pet peeve, yes, if I find someone at a protest and separate them from the crowd, putting them up on a step in the right light, ask them to freeze in the perfect dramatic pose with fist raised and bring some red lighting to create some drama on one side, etc. that could probably get promoted. But as soon as you exert that much control over a situation, it's a very different kind of photo you're working on. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  15:44, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Of course, the ingredient photos are useful in one way, we need all kinds of good photos. But photography of food is not the same as food photography, the same way a photo of a protester is not a photo of a protest. We need both. To discard whole genres of photography (such as modern food photography and street photography) simply because they follow other "rules" than say landscape photography, that is was gets me worked up most. That is like having a museum say no to modern art or a library ban contemporary literature. You can expose FPC to genres other than the same old, same old, as much as you want just to try to get the forum to get used to variety (lord knows I've tried!) but it doesn't work. The FPC is teflon coated against new views/ideas, because too many of the voters don't want to try out new things. Unless it is new technical gadgets. --Cart (talk) 16:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Nu är det snart dags: Wiki Loves Earth 2021!

Förra årets vinnarbild i Wiki Loves Earth!

Hej,
(For information in English, see Wiki Loves Earth 2021 in Sweden or other participating countries.)

Du får det här meddelandet eftersom du tidigare har bidragit med bilder till den svenska deltävlingen av Wiki Loves Earth. Jag hoppas att du vill vara med i år också! Som vanligt ingår naturreservat och nationalparker i tävlingen – samt förra årets uppdateringar med biosfärområden och naturminnen! Tävlingen börjar 1 maj, och pågår under hela maj månad. Om du har varit ute i världen och rest kan du även se om resorna sammanfaller med övriga internationella deltävlingar, och i så fall vara med och tävla även där. På grund av Covid-19 kan inga gemensamma evenemang anordnas i år heller, så passa på att fotografera naturen i ditt närområde – eller varför inte damma av fotoalbumen och tävla med bilder du har tagit tidigare?

Välkommen till tävlingen, och lycka till! /Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 14:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

FP

File:Soffione - Pappo di dente di Leone, infruttescenza di Tarassaco.jpg ON FP. I ask for help for the FP candidacy File: Dandelion Pappus, Dandelion infructescence.jpg The photo looks huge to me. Thanks in advance (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)PROPOLI87(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Ok PROPOLI87, I've fixed it for you. The photo gets that huge since you keep messing with the code when you create the nomination. Like you did right here at the beginning. You should NOT write the name of the file anywhere in that edit window. You only write the file name once when you start the nomination on the COM:FPC page, the rest is done automatically when you 'save' the nomination the first time. You only fill in the things 'Gallery' and your name. If you try to add anything else, that is when it goes wrong and gets messy.

There is a simple tutorial on the page if you click on the button at Commons:Featured picture candidates#Simple tutorial for new users. Perhaps that can help you. --Cart (talk) 16:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 10:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)PROPOLI87(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 10:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Submerged buoy with algae at Rågårdsdal 2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Submerged buoy with algae at Rågårdsdal 2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Three moon jellyfishes captured by a lion's mane jellyfish 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Three moon jellyfishes captured by a lion's mane jellyfish 1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:03, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

wikifa

Your image is used on the Wikifa main page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammad.darg (talk • contribs) 05:26, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Two images: File:Lion's mane jellyfish in Gullmarn fjord at Sämstad 3.jpg File:Lion's mane jellyfish in Gullmarn fjord at Sämstad 8.jpg Mohammad.darg (talk) 05:42, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Fout

Goedenavond mevrouw Carter, Als u het niet erg vind even een vraagje. Ik ontdekte op mijn FP foto File:Natuurgebied Petgatten De Feanhoop. 19-10-2020. (actm.) 29a.jpg een fout. Er staat onder de foto in het rood "This file does not link to the relevant nomination page! Please refer to". Kan u zien wat er fout is gegaan en hoe ik de eventuele fout kan herstellen? Bij voorbaat hartelijk dank dat u er even naar wilt kijken! Met vriendelijke groet,--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC) Ps: ik ben vanavond niet meer on-line.

Hallo Agnes, ik zal er eens naar kijken en zien wat er is gebeurd. Ik zal u spoedig antwoorden. --Cart (talk) 18:03, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

• Agnes: Alles is opgelost! De rode tekst verschijnt wanneer de naam van de foto niet overeenkomt met de nominatie. Dit gebeurt wanneer je foto's hernoemt tijdens een nominatie, of wanneer in plaats daarvan een alternatieve foto wordt genomineerd. Hier was het een alternatief. Dan moet je een parameter aan de code toevoegen om de foto te koppelen aan de nominatie die onder een andere naam heeft plaatsgevonden. Die parameter heet "| com-nom =". Je kunt hier zien hoe ik het heb toegevoegd: [1]. Dat de link niet klopte deed XRay ook ten onrechte denken dat het geen FP was, en hij verwijderde de categorieën ervoor. Ik heb het nu opgelost: [2]. Met vriendelijke groet, --Cart (talk) 18:40, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

• Goedemorgen Cart, Hartelijk dank dat u de problemen voor mij hebt opgelost, daar ben ik erg blij mee. (Het is voor mij een ingewikkelde materie.) Met vriendelijke groet uit een zwaarbewolkt Friesland van --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:41, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Three cups of tea for you

Sorry, I did not find a better photo with three cups of tea, and I don’t know if you like tea the Turkish style. Well, please just imagine the kind of tea you really like ;–).

Hello Cart,

I wanted to offer you a cup of tea for all your contributions to the FPC page and elsewhere, but then I realized it had to be at least three cups:

• Thank you you for your insightful explanations on all kinds of topics, from the production of paper over the identification of taxa to special geek tricks for handling the Wikimedia software.

• Thank you for your tireless efforts to make Wikimedia Commons, especially the FPC page, a friendlier place; to avoid the lapses of social tone that unfortunately keep occurring; to reconcile quarrelling photographers, and to reassure childishly sulky contributors (including myself ;–). I’m afraid that Commons often feels a bit like kindergarten to you.

• Thank you for your courageous nominations of unusual, often minimalist photos, without which the FPC page would become a boring place and the whole business here would rust. Please keep on the good work.

All the best, --Aristeas (talk) 16:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

+1 Thank you! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:50, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

• Aristeas, Frank Schulenburg: Oh Sirs! I'm quite overwhelmed by this unexpected tea party and you kindness! Thank You both! I'm blushing all over. I love trying out new sorts of tea, and this style is very similar to Russian style, something I'm familiar with. (My old art mentor/teacher was married to a woman of Russian heritage.) Glad you think my contributions are useful. I've had a long life to gather knowledge and experienced things, and this is a way to put it all to good use. I don't think everyone appreciates it though, but I can live with that. :-) Again: Thank you so much! --Cart (talk) 18:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

+1 Thanks again! Please don't give up on FPC. I know this place turns rather toxic now and then - but the (sometimes all too) silent majority does appreciate your tireless and bold contributions. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:31, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Tnx! ;-) Don't worry Martin, I think you misunderstood me. I'm not giving up, I just needed a "mental shower" to cleanse my mind after the latest bunch of craziness at FPC. --Cart (talk) 09:40, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

• Well, the funny thing is that your noms aren't even that bold by usual standards. It's just that FPC seems to be the most conservative place in the whole world of serious photography. And that's not to be understood in any flattering way. Says rather conservative Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

• Martin, I know. I spend a lot of time on other photography sites and people there are always encouraging me to make bolder photos. They think I'm too shy. Imagine that...

I wouldn't call FPC conservative, I have another theory. Ideally FPC should be "the best photos on Commons". That implies that it should be our version of the Tate, the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum or some other great collection of art. However, instead of curated, the photos selected are voted on with the help of a bunch of rules and templates (written and implied). That boils down to that we are left with pictures that are palatable to people all over the world, made under an aegis that makes sure they follow the same rules no matter where they are made. In short: FPC is the McDonald's of Commons. :-) --Cart (talk) 09:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Today's POTD is wonderful

I'm not sure McDonalds is a fair comparison, as there is no variety there and it is always bland. Of course, any forum where popularity voting plays a part will tend towards populist images and away from difficult images, but a lot of populist images really are great, not some lousy hamburger (see today's POTD). I think one of our problems is actually the broad scope. We have paintings and bird-identification photos and endless single-flower on blurred background, shells on black background, fruit in isolation, front elevation of historic building, pretty landscape, etc, and those are all so lacking in any originality that all we can do is comment on the technical merits. And there are lot of voters who, to be frank, are only capable of commenting on "defects" they see when looking at the image at 100% on a 100dpi monitor. Or who have, as noted, conservative and often just plain odd views on composition or lighting. "Black subject on a black background is a no-go" for example, or complaining if a plate is cropped. Buy a book on Lighting or on Composition for crying out loud, and enough with the Rule of Thirds please. So when we get presented with something that is a work of art or has some meaning beyond mere pixels of colour, many voters fall back on the same methods they used to look at the flower bud. Is the subject all in focus? Is anything cropped off? Are the verticals vertical? Is it all well lit? Is the background out of focus? Trying to have both kinds of photography in scope hits the problem that they should be assessed differently. The classic example, in my book, is Obama bending down. Some voters assessed it like a studio family portrait. One even claimed it had no educational value. Like any of us have taken photos that have their own Wikipedia article. -- Colin (talk) 10:56, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Of course some populist photos are great too, but I think you just reinforced one of my points that photos at FPC "follow the same rules no matter where they are made", and that excludes a lot of photos. One of my favorite examples. And can you Imagine (sorry bad pun) what FPC would do to Leibovitz's Lennon/Ono photo. --Cart (talk) 11:39, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

You don't have to imagine: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eileen Collins photographed by Annie Leibovitz as part of the NASA Art Program.jpg (I think the deleted photo was this one). -- Colin (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

+1 Thank you! Never expected FPC to become "toxic", but now know better. Thanks for speaking up! --Axel ^(talk) 02:31, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Crop & Tilt: Best Practices

Hi Cart,

thanks again for helping me out with the clouds-bridges-nomination. I thought about the left crop before, but didn't want to shift the center. Will think about it again...

My question is your tilt correction. That's great. How did you do it? (I usually work with Capture1, but also have Photoshop available.)

Best, Axel

Wait: Managed to replicate you changes with the non-complex tools. Thanks again!

The photo certainly looks better now, good job Axel. FYI, since you asked, I used one of the perspective correction tools in Lightroom. You define up to four lines that you know must be absolutely vertical or horizontal and <<kaaahpofff!!>> things are fixed. --Cart (talk) 08:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Ah, thanks so much: Must try Lightroom again. Have not used it in years. --Axel ^(talk) 12:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Apropos of “small-sensor camera”

Hello Cart,

in the FPC discussion about your photo Wake waves on Åbyfjorden at Rågårdsdal 5, you wrote: “[…] but I also understand that my small-sensor camera was not up for the challenge of a difficult light single shot photo.” This is certainly because two fellows have criticized that photo as “very grainy and poor detail”.

I was very surprised by these comments; I decided not to comment on these comments again because I did not want to add even more fuel to the flames of the (currently rather hot) FP discussion; when they see grain, I will not be able to convince them that there is no grain worth mentioning. But I have to tell you that on the contrary I have often been surprised by the very low level of noise in your photos; you manage to get excellent image quality from the 1" sensor of the DMC-FZ1000.

In the photo in question the rocks and the trees show some minor grain and traces of noise removal, but it is in no means worse than in some photos from full-frame cameras which have been promoted to FP in the last years, so this is again an excellent result for an 1"-sensor camera. (And anyway, I don’t understand at all that obsession about a little bit noise in photos; IMHO some well-distributed, grain-like, monochrome noise is far less irritating than the ugly mush created by excessive noise removal; but some fellows still prefer “painterly” mush.)

Don’t get me wrong: I do not want to advise you against switching to some more lavish camera if you want to do that; on the contrary, you are one of the Commons photographers which would most deserve the best photographic equipment, and I am sure you would really get the full power out it; but you do not need at all to switch and please do not stop making difficult photos with your current camera just because somebody has seen some noise.

All the best, --Aristeas (talk) 14:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Aristeas, thanks for your kind comment. I'm not stopping taking difficult images, I'm just not nominating (most of) them at FPC. The limits of my small-sensor cameras are a reoccurring problem with many of the shots I (want to) take. Those sensors are simply not good enough to get detail instead of noise in difficult situations. There are lots of ways to get the most out of the sensor anyway, and over the years I have got a lot of tips from the community here and come up with some creative solutions all by my self, so I can't complain. And I really can't switch (even if I'd love to!!!!) because I don't have the economy. Some day perhaps. :-)

First of all, I pride myself with being rather good at using editing programs and that takes care of a lot. Second is light. In extremely good light, the sensor can do wonders, and it helps that the Panasonic has a nice Leica lens. After that it is knowing your camera and do some unorthodox tricks. ;-)

The sensor is lousy for gradients, they get polarized. It's not light-sensitive enough to do good night shots and it's not big enough to get enough detail in landscape shots. Also, only about 60-70% of the frame (the central part) is actually sharp under the best of circumstances. That is why most of my photos are cropped a bit to get rid of the worst of the unsharp rim of the photo. Although, in some cases, the unsharp rim doesn't matter.

For studio shots, or whenever it's doable, ISO 80 is king for me, as is f/4. Stacking also makes for better quality and will work if I add some extra shots in a pano-manner for the rim. For real panos, I have to take about twice as many shot (and crop away the rim) as is necessary with a larger sensor, but it works. I often take some extra shots, more zoomed in and then downsized, for the center of such shots. That also works, kind of, for handheld shots like this one, where an extra zoomed in shot of the fisher is superimposed on the general shot of the scene.

Doing layers is also a great way to get better quality and detail, plus reduce noise. It's a trick astronomy photographers have used for years. I set the camera for "rapid fire" and take 3-4 shots of the exact same moment (the Panasonic is really fast with these, so it works very well). To the eye, the photos are identical, but the "noise" in them is slightly different and when you merge them you get better quality in your photo. This one came out so well because it is actually three identical shots merged. More info. So you don't focus stack, you just stack to get the details better, the nerd way. :-)

That trick can also be used to get better gradients. You complete your usual focus stacking with some noise stacking of the background.

All this is well, but when you stand by a fjord and hear a boat go by, you turn and you have about 3 sek to set your camera to try a wide landscape shot against the light, there aren't many tricks you can use. Or when you see a fantastic cloud blowing across a field, there is no way you can start with a pano or noise stacking.

I'm also a bit allergic to too much noise reduction in photos, the get mushy and look like plastic, especially with that infernal AI Topaz. In the old days at FPC, people looked more at the moment captured, than at noise, but with the departure of so many real photographers, focus has changed from artistic to technical reviews. I'm writing all of this, mainly because someone else might have use for these tricks. All the best to you too! --Cart (talk) 15:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Cart, for your detailed answer – it’s a whole textbook in the nutshell ;–). You have given an excellent explanation how you manage to get that good image quality from a camera with an 1" sensor – yes, it’s all about the light, about knowing your camera thoroughly, about clever and perceptive post-processing, and, well, also about choosing suitable subjects and situations. I take my hat off to your diligence and the effort you put in to get the best results. Some of the methods mentioned by you will also be useful with very different cameras, e.g. the stacking for details and against noise (this is an approach I am currently exploring myself, because today even full-frame cameras tend to increasing shot noise due to their always increasing resolution and shrinking pixel pitch; so thank you for the informative link!). This confirms the usefulness of your write-up.

You have also pointed out the limits of this approach. But let me (maybe stubbornly ;–) repeat that you are handling even these limits remarkably; that photo is certainly difficult for many cameras, but your results are still solid. Best regards, --Aristeas (talk) 16:35, 22 June 2021 (UTC)