User talk:C1cada

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, C1cada!

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.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 17:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Gauguin

Sorry, your source was correct, at the Gauguin painting page. That was where WGA got the image from (nice detective work). I changed it back to WGA (where I had retrieved the image), until I saw your edit. And now I cant't change it back because the page has been protected. As soon as I can, I will revert my edit. BTW, There is a new image upload of the work that appears, color-wise, inline with what we see in press articles (where people are seen in front of the actual work). That previous image had a few color issues, even though it was of slightly higher resolution. This new image is from Fondation Beyeler. Cheers, and good work. Coldcreation (talk) 06:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the Fondation Beyeler image is the best. I've ordered their exhibition catalogue and might even head out to Switzerland myself to see it. I noticed too how the newspaper images were so much better than that dreadful Yorck image, It's strange how these casual snaps often better the best efforts of professional photographers. I always like to see a donated image in the frame as well. And thank you for your efforts! C1cada (talk) 08:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Professionals, even with color and gray tone grids (chart or scale) next to the painting, often get it all wrong. Though, I'd like to see the original Yorck image. I wonder if whoever uploaded it to Commons didn't push the saturation up. Yorck usually has better images (good color and high rez). I'm glad you like the latest image. It actually comes from the pdf version, downloadable on the Fondation Beyeler website listed as Source for our new image. I do wish it was higher resolution. But I'd much rather have low rez and accurate colors, than the inverse. Coldcreation (talk) 09:23, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I just looked at the image you uploaded (the high resolution version). I think it would be a good idea to keep that one available at Commons. It's really not bad at all. I could revert my newest upload, and upload that Beyeler image to a new filename. That way the three will be visible at Commons. Let me know what you think. I could take care of it right away. Coldcreation (talk) 09:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Done. See The Fondation Beyeler image here. The high rez version you uploaded has been restored, here. I'll let you decide which one to post at the Wiki article, or elsewhere. If you do go see the actual work, let me know which of these images most closely resembles the actual work. Coldcreation (talk) 09:53, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

They're actually both the Kunstmuseum image. I think it's good to have the high resolution version available. As to which is used to illustrate the article, I don't mind. I've never seen the painting, so I don't know which is better. The Beyeler version probably makes a better thumbnail, so I suggest leaving things as they are. Readers can always click through to the Commons page and take their pic from the gallery which they should like to study or download. As for that Yorck image, it's indeed quite possible the original uploader pushed the saturation. C1cada (talk) 10:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I found another dreadful Yorck image of Gauguin's Nevermore at Courtauld's. This one is especially insidious as they've plainly taken Courtauld's image and deliberately warmed it to eroticise it. It's really quite reprehensible. I replaced it with Courtauld's original image. C1cada (talk) 23:04, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Paul Gauguin - Père Paillard - NGA 1963.10.238.jpg

File:Paul Gauguin - Père Paillard - NGA 1963.10.238.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Scoopfinder^(d) 23:24, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I contributed at the debate. I'm sure it's OK, just a question of providing the necessary template. I'll delete this when the matter is resolved. c1cada (talk) 00:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)