File talk:NautilusCutawayLogarithmicSpiral.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
I fetched back the original picture because the structure is better recognizable. If you like to falsify the reality please make a new picture with another name.--Wickey-nl (talk) 14:32, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
- Dear Wickey, I am new to Commons but would like more information as to why you reverted this file. I am in the process of going back and replacing low resolution versions of my photos with better quality/higher resolution ones from the same source image. That seems to be the case here where the improved image had much more detail than the original. Can you help me understand, so as to avoid this issue with my photos ? Thanks much, Nick - Nhobgood (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree with the revert (and also rolled it back). Not only does the second image have twice the resolution, it is also much less grainy. --Chris 73 (talk) 20:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
- By manipulating a picture you try to make it better than the real object. So you are deceiving the spectator. If you want to keep it pure you have to upload it as a new picture under a new name, telling you have manipulated the original. Here Chris 73 has neglected to say what exactly he has changed and manipulated. Better is a very subjective term, apart from a higher resolution.--Wickey-nl (talk) 14:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- To be precise: I took the photo again using the same nautilus on the same tiles, but with better light and a better camera. The old picture was very blurry, and not very good in contrast besides the resolution. -- Chris 73 (talk) 23:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- That is clear. So it is another picture and not a new version of the old picture. I make a difference between pictures and drawings. By drawings and schema it is clear that it is artificial. Pictures are assumed to be a reflection of the reality, so the picture should remain natural. But in this case this was obvious not under discussion.
- To be precise: I took the photo again using the same nautilus on the same tiles, but with better light and a better camera. The old picture was very blurry, and not very good in contrast besides the resolution. -- Chris 73 (talk) 23:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- By manipulating a picture you try to make it better than the real object. So you are deceiving the spectator. If you want to keep it pure you have to upload it as a new picture under a new name, telling you have manipulated the original. Here Chris 73 has neglected to say what exactly he has changed and manipulated. Better is a very subjective term, apart from a higher resolution.--Wickey-nl (talk) 14:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree with the revert (and also rolled it back). Not only does the second image have twice the resolution, it is also much less grainy. --Chris 73 (talk) 20:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
- I think the better way would be to give a new picture a new name.--Wickey-nl (talk) 12:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC) By the way, I appreciate the interesting picture.
- I believe most users would prefer the new name, but i would have no problem with uploading the old picture under a new name if you really want to keep it. BTW, what do you want to use it for anyway? The commons is not a storage of all pictures, but only the ones we use/could use for Wikipedia et al. -- Chris 73 (talk) 15:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- I do not understand the question.--Wickey-nl (talk) 09:26, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Please keep the new file under this name.
- Feel free to upload the old file under a new name again
- Why do you need the old file?
- -- Chris 73 (talk) 20:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Someone who has never seen the object in real has a different view on the picture. The shadows in the new picture were a little bit confusing me (although the old one has also shadows). With your additional information I think the new one is nevertheless better. --Wickey-nl (talk) 11:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I do not understand the question.--Wickey-nl (talk) 09:26, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- I believe most users would prefer the new name, but i would have no problem with uploading the old picture under a new name if you really want to keep it. BTW, what do you want to use it for anyway? The commons is not a storage of all pictures, but only the ones we use/could use for Wikipedia et al. -- Chris 73 (talk) 15:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- I think the better way would be to give a new picture a new name.--Wickey-nl (talk) 12:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC) By the way, I appreciate the interesting picture.
