User talk:Freedom to share

I'm happy you love Evening sky from a plane.jpg :) I'm sorry, my english isn't very good, and I'm not an infographist (I don't know if this word exists... means something about worker of pictures), so I don't know what you think you can try for my photo to improve it (I don't use The Gimp and stuff like that, as I said it's not my hobby nor my work). But, well, you can try if you like, and tell me when yu've finished, I'm impatient :) Mutatis mutandis 11:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Your new version : I think it's too much. The clouds on the right seem to be false, the orange part (in the middle) is a little too lightened (even it's good to lighten it), we've lost contrats in the grey sky (at the top), the very dark part at the top is a bit darker than in the original version... I really think it's a good idea wanting to improve it, and I congratulate you for your work and efforts, but it's a little too much. Mutatis mutandis 07:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

An invitation

I noticed that you have reviewed FP pictures and are asking if you could assist in the developement of Commons:Quality Images. and associated pages Commons:Quality images candidates  ; Commons:Quality images guidelines thankyou Gnangarra 14:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Ferrofluid in magnetic field.jpg

Howdy, per your response to the FPC candidacy for the above image, I'd just like to check exactly what your objections are on the image. This isn't intended to be confrontational, I'm just looking for how you'd like to see the image improved in order to get your support. Feel free to respond here, or on either my Commons or en.wiki talk pages. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 02:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Commons Picture of the Year 2006 Competition

Interested in honouring the best of the best? Vote now in the Commons Picture of the Year competition 2006 Voting to select the finalists is open until 14th February. Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 日本語 | Nederlands | português | svenska | 中文（简体） | 中文（繁體） | +/−

The arrangements for the Commons Picture of the Year 2006 competition are now complete, and voting will start tomorrow, Feb 1st. All Featured Pictures promoted last year are automatically nominated. As a past contributor to Featured Pictures, we invite you to participate in the competition (but please wait until tomorrow to vote). --MichaelMaggs 22:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

FP

Hi, you forgot to sign here Lycaon 20:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

A new version is available

Dear Freedom to share, Iam very disapointed about the polling-progress on this Image. So i uploaded a new improved version and would ask if you can drop an eye on it, that would be very kind. Regards Richie --Richard Bartz 20:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Taking panos ?

I'm continuing the discussion here.

We use Hugin, a free software. For landscape, I found out the 18-55 kit was fairly enough to produce very high quality image (my first panos were done with it) because pictures are sharp enough at f/8 or around. We found out that a remote control helps a lot because it allows you to take your panoramas much faster. I think you'll find this useful when having clouds moving between shots, or people, or when you do not want to bother people behind you :). As for some advices... well our two biggest problems in pano shooting are that sometimes, details you would have loved included in the final pano have to be cropped out because it's stitched in a way you have to remove them if you don't want to see a black background (hope you see what I mean) so always take some margin on the borders. The second one is parallax errors : a panoramic head which rotates around the called "nodal" point will help you get rid of them. If you don't have one, always take subjects which are far away from you. Hope this helps :) We discover other few tricks when using Hugin, but this would take a whole page to describe (maybe we should start a "howto make a pano" page or something over here. Benh 21:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Tiled roof in Dubrovnik.jpg

Thanks for your kind vote! Best wishes --Beyond silence 16:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Tiled roof in Dubrovnik.jpg

Can you see new edit of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Tiled roof in Dubrovnik.jpg? Thank you very much --Beyond silence 08:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Vue en montant à Vallonpierre.jpg nomination for FP

Hi,

you voted for this picture on FPC and the author uploaded an edit. Maybe you'd like to have a look.

thanks ! Benh 20:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Lviv FP

Hello! You voted on my pictures of Lviv on FPC [1]. Now, somebody, who don't like this image (and maybe me) want to delist it month after featuring and nominating to POTD. What do You thik about it? Maybe You vote to keep FP for my photo! See here: [2] Thanks!!! --Lestat 09:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, I think it's safe. It needs a 2/3 majority for delisting. Lycaon 09:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

You forgot...

... to sign here Lycaon 21:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/candidate_list#Image:Shell_Explosion_Cathedral_at_Rheims.jpg

Hi, would you be willing to look at the (slightly) new and improved image? I went into Photoshop to clean up artifacts and tweak the histogram. Best regards, Durova 07:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Object met

Your objection here: Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Bald_Eagle,_Kodiak,_Alaska.jpg#Image:Bald_Eagle.2C_Kodiak.2C_Alaska.jpg has been met, can you reconsider? — Rlevse • Talk • 18:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Whold you help me here? Noy 18:19, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

National voting

Niestety jest z tym wiele racji. gdy wystawiałem herb trzaski, który wybrałem spośród wielu herbów Bastianov i także dlatego, że był FP na polskiej Wikiepdii, więc przeszedł powiedzmy jakiś tam wstępny etap eliminacji, zrobiono larum, że herb nie przejdzie, jak nie będzie głosów za. Podobnie jest w przypadku głosowań na adminów itp. Ale jest tez drugie dno, ludzie z pl wiki nie specjalnie się włączają w jakiekolwiek inicjatywy na Commons (poza kasowaniem plików), co widać w ilości tłumaczeń. Ja akurat wystawiam od czasu do czasu grafiki, które na pl wiki dostały medal i robię to raczej dość nieśmiało, ale widzę że wrzucono mnie do worka, w którym siedzi główny krzykacz WarX, którego bardzo lubię, ale niestety jego nawoływania do pospolitego ruszenia często mają odwrotne skutki do zamierzonych, przez co właśnie to national voting ma miejsce. Z tego polskiego głosowania już parę zabawnych teksŧów o Polakach zostało napisanych. Niestety. Głupia sprawa, bo co jakiś czas chciałbym mimo wszystko jakąś grafikę z pl wiki wystawić. Część użytkowników wystawia grafiki swojego autorstwa i z tym nie ma problemów - ja wystawiam te, które często oglądam i które zwróciły jakoś moją uwagę nie tylko przydatnością, ale wykonaniem i czymś, co powoduje, że wyróżniają sie w swojej klasie.

Z drugiej strony na Commons jest sporo bardzo dobrych grafik, które jednak są mało przydatne w projektach Wikimedia - nie wiadomo, co ilustrują. Jest też duży nacisk na kompozycję, który IMHO jest opacznie rozumiany, bo w encyklopedii lepsze jest zdjęcie samego motyla niż motyla na ładnym kwiatku. Sam kwiatek jest po prostu elementem zbędnym do ilustracji hasła o motylu (no, chyba, że między danym gatunkiem motyla i rośliny zachodzi jakiś ekologiczny związek). Powoli się zastanawiam, czy nie powołać jakiegoś osobnego konkursu w stylu Ilustracja (a nie grafika) na medal. I im dłużej ilustruję hasła w Wikipedii FP z Commons, tym bardziej jest skłonny, by coś takiego powołać. Pozdrówka. Przykuta 19:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

European images

Hi, I'd like to explain why so many of my nominations have been American. A lot of good U.S. material is available because just about everything from 1922 or before is public domain in the States and the federal government releases all of its publications to the public domain. The Library of Congress provides large quantities of images on very high quality files. I wish I knew a similarly productive source of feature-worthy material for other countries. Someone showed me an Australian website the other day, but none of the images I found there were large enough for FPC (although probably very useful for other purposes).

Much of the material for non-U.S. locations that I do upload comes from Library of Congress files. Two obstacles intervene: the copyright laws of other countries are often more restrictive, which prevents some material from qualifying for Commons, and this site's licensing page has many gaps. I have gone to the extreme of attempting to translate Cuban and Panamanian copyright law in order to overcome this barrier, and my Spanish isn't the best. If you or other editors can help, I'd be very appreciative. I really do want to counter systemic bias. Thank you. Durova 20:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Winning Pic

Hi, you seem fairly critical of most of the pics on the POTY 2007 competition, and I completely understand what you are saying about the 2nd place pic. Just wondered what, specifically, you thought wrong with the winning pic?--84.92.117.116 01:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Butterflies from Germanistan

Yes, they was taken in a well temperatured conservatory in munich --21:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

color temperature

Is it safe then to assume that in the photography world, blue is cool and red is hot? I learned about half of what I know about photography from astronomers and with them, the physics tends to come first and this was also before there was a lot of access to imaging software. GIMP is another similar example, where some of the terminology used in the transformation tools came from an art or photography background and the meaning seemed opposite for me and a few others who were just then learning it.

If the Canon software uses color temperature that way, I think it is safe to assume that photographers have always used it that way. Languages within languages -- I can usually keep them straight as long as I know how 'this group is using that idea'. I was surprised when I read the textbook on computer color management. The maths for that are similar to the maths I used to make natal birth charts with -- the chapter is skipped usually in differential equations.

So, unless you tell me differently, I have ticked the little box in my brain that makes the language of photography one of the languages of the masses. -- carol 23:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Featured pics

How many featured pictures do you have?

• None at the moment, but I hope to take some in the summer. I did supply and nominate a few images (including one of my own) for FPC once. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. Freedom to share 10:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Innsbruck_Flusspromenade.jpg

Hallo Freedom to share. Es freut mich, dass dich mein Bild zu einem Kommentar angeregt hat. Leider ist er schlicht falsch. Überbelichtung ist eines der wenigen Dinge, die man messen kann, wie ein anderer Benutzer auch schon festgestellt hat, ist der Schnee nicht überbelichtet. Wie man Überbelichtung und insbesondere Clipping erkennt, kannst du in verschiedeenen Tutorials nachlesen: [3] Ein Polfilter (ein solches habe ich höchstwahrscheinlich benutzt) wird den Schnee nicht dunkler machen, sondern den Himmel. Dadurch wirkt der Schnee noch heller, was durchaus erwünscht ist. Lieber Gruss --Ikiwaner 04:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

• Hallo Ikiwaner. Leider stimme ich mit dir gar nicht ein. (Entschuldige mich bitte, dass mein Deutsch nicht zu gut ist. Ich kann Deutsch gut reden, aber selten diskutiere ich in dieser Sprache die Fotografie) Ein großes Problem mit dem Schnee ist dass es das Licht sehr leicht reflektiert. In den Bergen, zum beispiel, muss man oft im winter Sonnenbrillen tragen, nicht darum, weil die Sonne sehr stark scheint, aber darum, dass der Schnee sie so gut reflektiert. Die en:Schneeblindheit, obwohl man sie nicht in Innsbruck sehen wurde, ist ein beispiel davon, dass der Schnee das Licht so gut reflektiert. Ich habe viele Fotos in Österreich im Winter gemacht und ich sah, das die besten Schneefotos immer später Abends oder früher Vormittags gemacht worden sind, weil das reflektierte Licht vom Schnee nicht so stark war. Schau bitte auf dieses Foto, . Hier ist der Schnee viel heller als der Rest des Fotos, weil es viel mehr Licht reflektiert. Im Foto ist der Schnee nicht überlichtet, nur darum weil der Schnee das einzige auf dem Foto ist und das Foto darum unterlichtet werden konnte, ohne dass man irgendwelche Details davon verlierte. In diesem Foto wurde der Schnee OK verlichtet, aber das ganze Foto ist ein bisschen unterlichtet. Und zuletzt, . In diesem Foto ist der Schnee nicht überlichtet, weil es schon später am Abend war und das Licht sich nicht so stark vom Schnee reflektierte. Das Problem mit deinem Foto ist nicht, dass es generell überlichtet war. Das Problem war, dass sich das Licht vom Schnee reflektierte und so der Schnee heller als der Rest des Fotos war. Es ist ein gutes Foto, es gefällt mir sehr, aber ich glaube dass es viel besser wäre, wenn es später, im Sommer, gemacht wäre. So würde der Schnee nicht mehr dort sein, es gäbe keine Regionen des Fotos, die viel heller wären, und deshalb konnte sich das Auge besser an den Gebäuden, die das wichtigste Teil des Fotos sind, konzentrieren. Danke für deine Aufmerksamkeit und schreib mir bitte (auf meiner Diskussionsseite) falls du mit mir nicht einstimmst. --Freedom to share 15:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Jetzt verstehe ich, was du meinst. Dein Deutsch ist doch gut! Natürlich reflektiert Schnee das Licht sehr gut, was dazu führt, dass der Schnee im Vergleich zu den Häusern heller ist. Allerdings bedeutet deine Aussage, das Bild sei überbelichtet, dass ich es falsch, sprich zu lange belichtet hätte. Im Digitalen Zeitalter meint man damit normalerweise en:Clipping (photography). Eine andere Belichtungszeit als die gewählte hätte aber im vorliegenden Bild zwar zu dunklerem Schnee geführt, aber die Häuser und das Wasser wären zu dunkel geworden. Was du wohl sagen wolltest, ist, dass du ein Bild mit weniger Dynamikumfang besser finden würdest. Das kann ich durchaus akzeptieren. Meine Meinung dazu ist jedoch, dass im Sommer Blätter an den Bäumen die Sicht auf die schönen Häuser behindern würden. Zudem wirken Bergspitzen im Sommer ohne Schnee recht grau und kahl. Übrigens ist das Bild im März entstanden, weil ich gerade dann zufälligerweise in Innsbruck war. Auf jeden Fall danke für die angeregte und sachliche Diskussion! Lieber Gruss --Ikiwaner 17:59, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

What do you think ...

about this ? --Richard Bartz 19:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time .. i moved your comment to the temporary discussion page --Richard Bartz 20:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ischgl

Hallo, ich habe mal von Deinem Bild noch eine weitere Version hergestellt, wo die Perspektive noch stärker korrigiert ist. Dadurch mussten zwar noch etwas mehr Bildteile abgeschnitten werden, aber die Gesamtwirkung ist natürlicher. Grüße --wau > 13:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the nomination

Sorry, if it was a trouble. I saw the criteria, but just thought it might get through on strong mitigating reasons. It really is a wonderful picture but the author does not wish to release it in a bigger resolution.--Laveol 10:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

• It's ok. Thanks for showing me this image, it really is amazing. Strong mitigating reasons mean something else. They do not mean that a very good, but modern image should be small. They mean that if the image cannot be repeated (one of the first digital photos, rare historical shot of lesser quality), it is all right. Otherwise, the limit is required. Freedom to share 11:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Benedictus XVI

Hi, I don't know if i have understand your messagge... can I send you the original version of [4] so you can manage it? --Dongio 07:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gamsleitenspitze-edit.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Was good for FP (wow), but has also the qualities of a QI (technical). Lycaon 21:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Banana flower image

Hey, Thanks for giving your opinion about my image at FPC. A user has suggested some techniques to reduce the effect of the distracting background. Can you please have a look? Muhammad 13:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Picture of the Year/2008/Preparation

We are starting the discussion on POTY 2008. Would you like to join? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

WUFF

Tschäschtsch Freedom, danke dass dir das Malamute Bild gefallen hatte ... ich weiß es ehrlich gesagt nicht mehr welche Brennweite ich benutzt hatte. Ich nehme an es war zwischen 28 und 35. Leider hat es die EXIFS verschluckt. Liebe Grüße . Richie

Fun

The double image on your userpage confused me for a while: I thought it was a lake with a forest in the distance! 76.117.247.55 02:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Close, well at least hope you enjoyed it ;) Freedom to share (talk) 18:02, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit

Hi:

The image Commons:Featured_picture_candidates#File:Catopsilia_pomona_by_kadavoor.JPG is updated by an edit by Paolo Costa to reduce the jpeg artifacts and overexposure. So I request you to update your opinion too.

Regards, Jee -- Jkadavoor (talk) 05:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Russian copyright

It seems that the photographer died in 1938 but Russia has a new copyright law. Read the fine print in note [1] of Template:PD-Russia-2008. I think I will bring it up on the copyright page of village pump.--Canoe1967 (talk) 15:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

We are discussing that here. It seems there is no verifiable source about him being rehabilitated in 1958. Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Viktor Bulla--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Categories and subcategories

Hello, you added back the Category:Canadair CL-415 on the File:Canadair (28).JPG after I had removed it. I just want to point out that since the aircraft has been identified (it is within Category:I-DPCV (aircraft) which is in Category:Canadair CL-415 of the Protezione Civile) it should not remain in a parent category.

While this may make it less easy to view all photos within a given category, the benefits are that it minimizes the number of category relations (there is no need to categorize each photo of this aircraft as twin-engine aircraft and Italian-registration aircraft for example), and, especially, that it reduces clutter (COM:OVERCAT).

I hope this will not sound as nitpicking and that you will not take offense that I undo your categorizing on this file. Thanks for your participation ! Ariadacapo (talk) 06:42, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

• • No worries, my mistake as I forgot to check the history! Thanks for pointing it out! Freedom to share (talk) 15:21, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 09:24, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Appropriately Licensed

You participated at the earlier discussion on licence choice for Featured Pictures. A number of users felt that such restrictions should be made at policy level. Please comment at Commons:Requests for comment/AppropriatelyLicensed. This is a proposal to amend this licence policy to disallow future uploads where the sole licence is inappropriate for the media (e.g., GFDL for images). In earlier discussions there were a number of comments that, while reasonable opinions, did not align with Wikimedia's mission for free content. Please read the FAQ before commenting. Thanks -- Colin (talk) 23:02, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

• File:Fts.png

—LX (talk, contribs) 18:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)