User talk:MagentaGreen/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im Reich.svg

I'm neither author of this file nor do I have edited it.

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im Reich.svg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Zulu55 (talk) 09:47, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im III. Reich.jpg

Deleted: This background image was more clearly visible ... because it was edited by me

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im III. Reich.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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Zulu55 (talk) 09:48, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im III. Reich PNG.png

Deleted: This background image was more clearly visible ... because it was edited by me

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im III. Reich PNG.png 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Zulu55 (talk) 09:48, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Kept: per OTRS permission

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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Stockburger 001 (Retusche).jpg

Yours sincerely, Ju Ta 19:15, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Slussen Stan May 2015.jpg

Thank you for great work! I noted one thing, its strong colour banding in the sky now. Is it possible to fix? Best regards --ArildV (talk) 13:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi @ArildV, sorry for the inconvenience, the color banding results probably from repeated saving. I have re-edit it. Regards, MagentaGreen (talk) 15:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch - Literaturpreis der Stadt Zürich - Com L07-0140-0027.jpg

Kept: CC license of the ETH Zurich is available

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Max Frisch - Literaturpreis der Stadt Zürich - Com L07-0140-0027.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 21:02, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ju: Is it asked too much to be more precise - What have I done wrong or what you do not understand? Please specify what is not especially unsourced or improperly licensed. Thank you in advance, MagentaGreen (talk) 22:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch mit Oskar Wälterlin - Com M07-0074-0001.jpg

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Max Frisch mit Oskar Wälterlin - Com M07-0074-0001.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 21:05, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ju: Is it asked too much to be more precise - What have I done wrong or what you do not understand? Please specify what is not especially unsourced or improperly licensed. Thank you in advance, MagentaGreen (talk) 22:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch bei Proben zu Andorra im Schauspielhaus Zürich - Com L10-0309-0107.jpg

Kept: CC license of the ETH Zurich is available

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Max Frisch bei Proben zu Andorra im Schauspielhaus Zürich - Com L10-0309-0107.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 21:05, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ju: Is it asked too much to be more precise - What have I done wrong or what you do not understand? Please specify what is not especially unsourced or improperly licensed. Thank you in advance, MagentaGreen (talk) 22:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch und Friedrich Dürrenmatt - Com L12-0059-8021.jpg

Kept: CC license of the ETH Zurich is available

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Max Frisch und Friedrich Dürrenmatt - Com L12-0059-8021.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 21:33, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ju: Is it asked too much to be more precise - What have I done wrong or what you do not understand? Please specify what is not especially unsourced or improperly licensed. Thank you in advance, MagentaGreen (talk) 22:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch (Portrait).jpg

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Max Frisch (Portrait).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 21:40, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ju: Is it asked too much to be more precise - What have I done wrong or what you do not understand? Please specify what is not especially unsourced or improperly licensed. Thank you in advance, MagentaGreen (talk) 22:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, every image on commons needs a valid license template, which are missing on these images. Technicly ust replace the cc-by-sa-4.0 with {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}. But I dont see why these images have this license. I.e. this image was created by "Metzger, Jack". Does Mr. Metzger or his heirs agree to that licensing? If yes they should send an email to the commons support team as documented in Commons:OTRS. regards. --Ju Ta 22:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@JuTa: Sorry, if I understand it right, you complain obviously about that there are some clips are not in the right place and you are not able to change that??? Such a fault-intolerant and less helpful attitude, I could hardly understand! MagentaGreen (talk) 23:31, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Ich sehe Du sprichst deutsch. Nein, ich bezweifele auch dass die cc-Lizenz hier ichtig ist. Gruß --Ju Ta 08:04, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

@JuTa: Da muss ich mich fragen, wo sich der falsche Freund versteckt hat. Nochmals, könntest du bitte etwas konkreter sein, deine Antwort macht nichts klarer! Die cc-Lizenz ist genau so auf den Originalseiten der Quellen angegebenen. Es wäre sehr begrüßenswert, wenn du dabei mithelfen könntest, das hier etwas zu verbessern.

Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 09:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Hallo, ich finde die CC Linzenz weder hier noch hier (das waren die von Dir angegeben Quellen). Ein Deeplink zum eigenlichen Bild und zur Lizenz wäre da hilfreich. Zum anderen: Wodurch erhielt das Archiv die Urheberrechte von Hrn. Metzger? Denn nur dann könnte es eine CC Lizenz vergeben. Gruß --Ju Ta 09:52, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

@JuTa: Es war nicht damit zu rechnen, dass der angegebene "DOI-Link" bei direktem Aufruf nicht auf die Quellseite mit gleicher URL führen würde. Ich glaube allerdings, dass meine detaillierten Angaben es durchaus möglich gemacht hätten, diesen Fehler leicht herausfinden zu können. Zu dieser Datei, bzw. deren Quelle führt beispielsweise dieser korrigierte Link und ich hoffe, dass du diesem folgen kannst. Wo ein Wille ist, ist auch ein Weg - sagt neuerdings auch unsere Kanzlerin.

Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 10:21, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Hallo, ich sehe zwa immer noch nicht wirklich warum das Archiv berechtigt ist die CC Lizenzen zu vergeben, lasse es aber nun auf sich beruhen. Das ist keine Garantie dass nicht eman anderes Löschanträge z.B. wegen "copyfraud" stellen könnte. Gruß --Ju Ta 11:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Emil Krupa-Krupinski

Ich wende mich an dich, da du kürzlich die Grafiken von Ferdinand Behrens überarbeitet hast. Der o. g. Maler erschuf 1899 die Loreley. Da ich die Abbildung des Bildes als irreal betrachtete, habe ich das Bild überarbeitet und schoß mit diesem Bilde, image:EKK - Loreley.jpg über das Ziel hinaus. Kannst du bitte auf dem letztgenannten Bilde (EKK...) eine der Wahrscheinlichkeit näher stehende des Gemäldes erschaffen? 1970gemini 09:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Wenn ich schon mal dabei bin... Wäre es auch möglich, gleich jens Bild zu entrastern? 1970gemini 09:19, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@1970gemini

Betr. Loreley: Du warst mit deinem Ansatz schon ziemlich nah dran (ist jedoch etwas zu stark gesättigt). Ich habe zusätzlich die Vignette und die Artefakte verringert. Nun möchte ich mit dem Original-Uploader keinen Edit-War beginnen und habe daher eine neue Version erstellt.

Betr. Monte Tomba: Scan- und Druckauflösung scheinen nicht zusammenzupassen, wodurch das Moiré-Muster (kein Raster) hervorgerufen wird. Es ist fast unmöglich, diese Art des Effekts digital zu entfernen und das Ergebnis ist in der Regel - wie auch hier - nicht so toll. Im Netz gibt es verschiedene Anleitungen, wie man das mit geeigneten Einstellungen des Scan-Programms verhindern kann.

Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 17:42, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Danke. 1970gemini 22:13, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Asche auf mein Haupt, dass ich dich schon wieder belästige. Mit Referenz auf die Behrens-Bilder sah ich heute, als ich hier ein Bild hinzufügte, jenes und bin mir sicher, dass man eine Nachbearbeitung durch Dich gerne sehen würde. Solltest du Zeit dafür erübrigen können, könnte dies dem Bild mE nur förderlich sein. 1970gemini 15:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @1970gemini. Puh - das war jetzt ziemlich aufwendig aber du brauchst keine Asche, denn belästigt fühle ich mich überhaupt nicht.

Moin, lässtsich vielleicht aus diesem Bilde noch mehr machen? --1970gemini 13:42, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

An @1970gemini:

Im Fall der Lorelei war ich mir vergleichsweise sicher, doch ist es grundsätzlich nicht ohne Weiteres möglich, einen Weißabgleich durchzuführen, wenn Referenzwerte fehlen (Schwarz- und Weißpunkt sowie Neutralgrau). Die Originaldatei ist auf der Seite der Galerie nicht mehr zu finden. Es sieht zwar so aus, dass die Datei fehlfarbig ist, doch einen Beweiß dafür gibt es, selbst im Histogramm, nicht. Ich habe versucht, die Palettenfarben des Künstlers zu berücksichtigen, so wie sie anderen Werken - von denen dieses hie auffallend abweicht - auf der Galerieseite zu entnehmen ist. Ich zögere jedoch damit, das als eigenständige Datei hochzuladen und biete daher einen Rohentwurf im GIF-Format an, der weiter diskutiert werden kann (falls die Datei zwischenzeitlich überschrieben wurde, kann man bestimmt in der Versionsgeschichte fündig werden). Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 21:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Ich hätte hier ein sehr verpixeltes Bild. Könntest du es, sofern du es etwas entpieln kannst, durch die neue Version ersetzen. Danke.--1970gemini 14:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Hallo @1970gemini, viel wird da nicht zu machen sein, doch werde ich mal meinen speziellen Weichspüler zu Einsatz bringen. Zuvor hätte ich allerdings gern deine Meinung zum letzten Fall. Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 12:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Ich bin, wie du schon allein daran erkennst, dass ich mich schon wieder an dich wende, begeistert. Ginge es nach mir, hätte ich sie ersetzt. So habe ich sie jedoch zuerst hier zur allg. Diskussion gestellt. MfG --1970gemini 14:56, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Hallo @1970gemini, vielleicht kannst du was damit anfangen. Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 16:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Moin, wenn ich mir jenes Bild

anschaue, beschleicht mich das Gefühl, dass die Farben aufgrund äußerer Aufnahmeumstände nicht korrekt sind. kannst du, als jemand vom Fach, bitte einen Blick drauf werfen und mich evtl. widerlegen? Danke.--1970gemini 14:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi @1970gemini, das kann vermutlich niemand nur nach dem Bild beurteilen, denn es fehlt jedwede Farbangabe, die als Referenz herangezogen werden könnte. Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 16:28, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Moin, ich habe aus einem anderen Bild dieses herausgeschnitten, bei meinem Grafikprogramm einem die Autobalance aktiviert und die sichtbare Version erhalten. Als ich der Urversion die gleiche Verbesserung angedeihen wollte, weigerte sich das Programm, wahrscheinlich auf Grund der Dateigröße, die Aktion auszuführen. Bist du in der Lage dem Bild dies angedeihen zu lassen? --1970gemini 11:17, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Hallo @1970gemini, ein Problem mit automatischen Korrekturverfahren ergibt sich, wenn der Schwarz- bzw. Weißpunkt nicht genau ermittelt werden kann. Die hellsten Stellen sind beispielsweise in Staubkörnern und Kratzern zu finden. Außerdem wird ein korrektes Ergebnis dadurch erschwert, weil das Bild einen Fehler aufweist, der entweder auf mangelhafte Entwicklung oder Unterbelichtung zurückzuführen ist. Das Ergebnis ist, dass Details verloren gehen und die Tiefen zuschmieren. Ich habe daher versucht die schlimmsten Kratzer auszustempeln und eine gewisse Spreizung der Tonwerte zu erreichen, indem ich den besonders flauen Bildteilen mehr Kontrast gegeben habe, als den ohnehin schon übersättigten Bereichen. Den Bildausschnitt habe ich zudem noch etwas weitergehend retuschiert, indem ich den Hintergrund leicht aufgehellt habe. Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 10:24, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

p.s. bitte fang' beim nächsten Mal einen neuen Abschnitt an, dann kann ich einfach nach ganz unten scrollen. Danke.

Copyright status: File:Saalforste.jpg

Kept: CC license is available

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Saalforste.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 21:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear @JuTa,
as source of the map OpenStreetMap was specified. As you surely know as a long time Admin OpenStreetMap data and maps are all available under Creative Commons "CC-BY-SA 2.0" license. Therefore it is hardly to understand if no simple assistance is given.
Sincerely MagentaGreen (talk) 07:18, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Then please add the corresponding license template to the image description page, which should be {{Cc-by-sa-2.0}} here. regards. --Ju Ta 07:23, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Otto Schönfeldt. SC107-34 Ruhr Museum 304px.jpg

Deleted: Misunderstanding with file donator about Commons licences

File:Otto Schönfeldt. SC107-34 Ruhr Museum 304px.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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Quarz (talk) 18:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Request

Hello. Can you please look at this request whenever you have some time. Thank youباسم (talk) 11:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

User talk:MagentaGreen/Archive 3

Contents

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im Reich.svg

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im III. Reich.jpg

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im III. Reich PNG.png

Notification about possible deletion

Slussen Stan May 2015.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch - Literaturpreis der Stadt Zürich - Com L07-0140-0027.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch mit Oskar Wälterlin - Com M07-0074-0001.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch bei Proben zu Andorra im Schauspielhaus Zürich - Com L10-0309-0107.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch und Friedrich Dürrenmatt - Com L12-0059-8021.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch (Portrait).jpg

Emil Krupa-Krupinski

Copyright status: File:Saalforste.jpg

File:Otto Schönfeldt. SC107-34 Ruhr Museum 304px.jpg

Request

Navigation menu

User talk:MagentaGreen/Archive 3

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im Reich.svg

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im III. Reich.jpg

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im III. Reich PNG.png

Notification about possible deletion

Slussen Stan May 2015.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch - Literaturpreis der Stadt Zürich - Com L07-0140-0027.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch mit Oskar Wälterlin - Com M07-0074-0001.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch bei Proben zu Andorra im Schauspielhaus Zürich - Com L10-0309-0107.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch und Friedrich Dürrenmatt - Com L12-0059-8021.jpg

Copyright status: File:Max Frisch (Portrait).jpg

Emil Krupa-Krupinski

Copyright status: File:Saalforste.jpg

File:Otto Schönfeldt. SC107-34 Ruhr Museum 304px.jpg

Request

Navigation menu

Search