User talk:MarcusGR

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, MarcusGR!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- 16:37, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, MarcusGR!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 19:17, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

• Image:Image sensor sizes in current digital cameras (updated as of Sep. 21st 2011).png was uncategorized on 21 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:17, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Sensor sizes - updated Jul 2012 svg.png

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 06:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

File:SensorSizes.svg

Hi, I see that you recently uploaded an update to this image. I reverted to the previous version because your version rendered at a very poor resolution, converted the text to paths (which makes future editing difficult), and lacked the transparent background of all the previous versions. I'm not sure what SVG-editing software you used to edit it, but you may want to try Inkscape. — Moxfyre (t|c) 18:16, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Moxfyre. I agree the image I had uploaded in order to update yours was of very poor quality. Problem is I had tried to update it passing to a different (= more popular and easy to manipulate) file format, such as .bmp or .jpg. But Wikipedia didn't allow me to (unless I opted for defining my file my "own work" and - in doing so - binned the whole previous .svg file history). So I "transformed" my .bmp file into an .svg by some freeware I found online. With very poor results. I think your (now very old) file needs the updates I proposed, though: why don't you update it by yourself? Personally, I had enough of struggling with .svg and with Wikipedia's contorted and discouraging images upload system: which - I think - is the main reason why your file has become obsolete, with nobody willing to sustain the chore of updating it). Thanks, Marco

@MarcusGR: , SVG is not in any way equivalent to raster image formats such as BMP/JPG/PNG; it encodes information about the image in a completely different way and there is no straightforward way to convert from BMP into SVG without losing all the useful information about the contents of the image. Have you read Help:SVG? "SVG is highly appreciated on Commons because it describes graphical objects with a sourcecode and thus currently provides the best way to modify and improve content." — Moxfyre (t|c) 16:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

OOOps..! Sorry, Moxfyre. I overcame lazyness, downloaded Inkscape and tried it at editing your file (as you had suggested). It turned out being a very easy task indeed ... Thanks a lot for your advice, Marco — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcusGR (talk • contribs)

Glad to hear it. Why did you want to remove the medium format (KAF 39000) image sensor size from the list? — Moxfyre (t|c) 16:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

For two reasons: a) digital medium format sensors are by far less "popular" than the other ones in the chart (i.e.: only some professionals or very affluent amateurs can afford them); b) at first glance, non-expert readers may get confused by the fact that "full frame" is actually much smaller than "medium format" and equivocate their respective dimensions. I remember that I myself was puzzled by similar illustrations, years ago. In illustrating popular formats, there is no need to risk misunderstandigs by quoting a "specialized" format, whose (comparatively rare) users are perfectly aware of its features.--MarcusGR (talk) 11:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)