User talk:Parsa
Our first steps help file and our FAQ 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. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing. |
| |
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?) |
Not sure how an SVG which consists largely of embedded raster data is really better than a PNG... AnonMoos (talk) 08:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- It isn't better.... I deleted all raster layers before converting to the SVG file. I also ran the file through Scour. It does have a lot of paths, no doubt. I looked at the SVG code as a text file, and perhaps you're seeing something I'm not. If this were a map with text labels or something, it would be more important to upload the SVG, but I only did it due to Commons' policy of transitioning to SVG. In my opinion, the PNG file created by Adobe Illustrator is superior to the SVG, at least after the rendering that the Commons software does. The colors on my Illustrator and SVG files on my computer are a rich bronze color, but after uploading to Commons, the SVG file has become a golden washed out color. Also, the SVG file of a complex image like this requires too many paths, and creates a very large file. For small simple graphics, SVG images are very small in file size, but for images like this they get pretty big. Parsa (talk) 03:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)