Category talk:Köhlers Medizinal-Pflanzen

File names unsatisfactory?

Do you think the names of these images are unsatisfactory? I can't tell from reading 'File:Koeh-108.jpg' what that's an image of. Commons:File naming says that "Titles of media files should be meaningful, helpful and correct in the language chosen," and Commons:File renaming says that renaming files might be good when the aim is to "change completely meaningless names into suitable names, according to what the image displays" or "change meaningless bio-names into binominal scientific names" though it does state that it's also okay to "harmonize file names of a set of images (so that only one part of all names differs), to ease their usage in templates (e.g. diagram symbols, scans of pages of a book, maps)." What do you think? 207.65.109.10 11:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

original color

Nearly all images in this category are NOT of original color. It seems, that the owner of the source images has "adjusted" the original scans to get a "white paper" as background. In different to this, the original prints were not on bright, white paper (Such a paper was not available in the 19th century). Therefore all colors are "shifted" similar to change from a light brown/yellow to white.--Antonsusi 29 January 2012‎

Actually, the opposite may be true: Files like Symphytum officinale - Köhler–s Medizinal-Pflanzen-268.jpg – and maybe even the given "adjusted" example – show flower petals that should actually be white and are retained in reddish brown. Clearly the colour intended by the painter when leaving blank spots was a neutral white.

Also, white balance is a subjective compromise anyway (see dilemmas like snow in shadow under blue sky).--Cartoffel (talk) 12:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)