User talk:Tuxyso/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 9

Invitation to take part in the categorization of QI

Dear Tuxyso! Your images were reviewed and have been promoted to Quality Image status. Congratulations! I invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. All new images with this status automatically placed to the page Commons:Quality_images/Recently_promoted. They have to be manually tagged with relevant categories using the QI categorization tool (see link at the top of the page, the author of this tool is User:Dschwen). Very few users do this job now, so a large number of uncategorizated photos time to time accumulates on this page... --Bff (talk) 10:59, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Death Valley Mesquite Flats Sand Dunes 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Death Valley Mesquite Flats Sand Dunes 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/JKadavoor Jee 05:26, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skulptur Joseph Enseling Trauer Essen Südwestfriedhof 2013.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 Good quality. --XRay 15:59, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Halbachhammer Essen 2013.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  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 15:29, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Südwestfriedhof Essen Ehrenmal 2013.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 Good quality. --JLPC 17:41, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View from Moro Rock 01 2013.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 Pretty, but bottom right is blurry. I'd also make it significantly bluer. Maybe promotable once colour balance fixed. Mattbuck 21:38, 24 October 2013 (UTC)  Done Thanks for the hint. The WB was really off. I also modified the crop. Please take another look. --Tuxyso 06:52, 25 October 2013 (UTC)) I think you've made the low end too blue, but otherwise much better. Mattbuck 18:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the review. I've set WB on the rocks at the right. These were completely in the sun thus WB should be OK now. --Tuxyso 06:51, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
South fassade of San Diego Museum of Art - Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:57, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:14, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Durga,_Burdwan,_2011.JPG/2

Hello Tuxyso. I really appriciate you query. I will try to answer as clearly as possible. This is a structure made by using clay. Then the idols were painted. The size of the structure is almost 10 to 12 feet. It is kept in temple where it has been worshiped for hundreds of years. It is kept in temple the same way as the Alter in a Church. Many sculptures of goddess Durga were made by stones. If you have any other queries you can ask me. Thank you. -- Your friendly, Joydeep _Talk 09:59, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the background information. Very interesting. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:52, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Die Auflösung meiner Bilder

Also ich will die QI Seite nicht als Diskussionsforum missbrauchen, aber ich muss ehrlich sagen, dass ich mich ein bisserl angefressen fühle. Ich habe mich entschieden, meine photographische Dokumentararbeit über Malaysia und Sabah frei zugänglich zu machen. Ich verdiene mit meinem Job als Ingenieur genug und habe Null Interesse daran, mit meinen Fotos Geld zu verdienen. Mittlerweile habe ich über 8000 Bilder von mir hochgeladen und weitere 10.000 warten. Mir vorzuwerfen, dass mein Tun der Idee freier Inhalte zuwiderläuft, finde ich mehr als absurd. Es diskreditiert auch den Großteil der Bildspender, die ebenfalls ihre Bilder in einer speicherschonenden kleineren Version uploaden. Wenn Du mir sagen willst: "Wenn das Bild 3 MP gross gerendert wird, dann würde ich es als QI supporten", dann will ich mich dem nicht verschliessen, aber so wie es im Moment rüberkommt, bin ich nicht wirklich glücklich. Gruß, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:16, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Ich habe befürchtet, dass mein Kommentar missverständlich rüberkommt. Aber lies zunächst noch mal genau, was ich geschrieben habe: Künstliches runterskalieren (ohne für mich ersichtlichen Grund) widerspricht meiner persönlichen Idee von freien Inhalten - ich verfolge dabei das strikte Prinzip: ganz oder gar nicht. Ich weiß, dass viele Commoner das anders sehen, was ja überhaupt nicht schlimm ist. Selbstverständnlich sind deine Fotos im Sinne von CC frei und enorm wertvoll für Commons bzw. Nachnutzer. Mir liegt es fern deine Arbeit zu diskreditieren, im Gegenteil. Ich wollte dich lediglich ermuntern deine Bilder in voller Auflösung bereitzustellen, gerade wenn du mit den Fotos kein Geld verdienst - der Speicherplatz von Commons ist ja kein knappes Gut. Zudem habe ich dir nirgendwo unterstellt, dass du runterskalierst, um mit den Fotos außerhalb der WP Geld zu verdienen. Ich würde das Bild unterstützen, wenn es aus einer nativen 3 MP - Kamera kommen würde, genau so habe ich das gemeint. In der Nicht-Muttersprache kommen manche Formulierungen vielleicht falsch rüber, gerade weil man sich kurz fassen möchte. Wenn noch etwas unklar ist, frage bitte (hier) nach - ich möchte dich keinesfalls verärgern. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Danke für Deine ausführliche Antwort. Es gibt noch einen Grund, ein Photo zumindest einen Tick kleiner zu machen: Der Beweis, dass man der Autor ist, gelingt wesentlich leichter, wenn man eine höhere Auflösung vorlegen kann, als diejenige, die eventuell im Netz oder sonstwo unter dem Namen eines Plagiators kursiert.

Vorschlag zur Güte: Ich werde Bilder, die ich für QI nominieren möchte und die bisher noch nicht auf Commons hochgeladen sind, zukünftig in einer deutlich höheren Auflösung vorlegen, sofern vorhanden (manchmal ist ja durch das Beschneiden der Bilder keine höhere Auflösung vorhanden). Für die übrigen Bilder werde ich bei einer vernünftigen Auflösung von 2000 bis 2300 px Kantenlänge bleiben, damit die Uploadzeiten sich noch im vernünftigen Rahmen bewegen. Für die beiden Bilder von Teluk Abai werde ich heute abend eine höhere Auflösung rendern und hochladen.

Nebenbei bemerkt halte ich das 2-MB-Kriterium für einen ausgemachten Schwachsinn, da wegen jpg als Kompressionsformat damit Schwarzweiss-Bilder bzw. Bilder mit vielen ähnlichen Farben nurt schwerlich die 2 MB Grenze überschreiten.

Gruß aus Köln, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Na wunderbar, freut mich, dass du die Fotos in voller Auflösung bereitstellen möchtest. Ich wollte dir mit meinem Kommentar wirklich nicht in den Karren fahren. Mich begeistert eben die Idee freier Inhalte und in dem Fall fand' ich es schade, dass ein Foto einer Vollformatkamera auf magere 2,x Megapixel runterskaliert ist.
Ich glaube aber, dass du einem Missverständnis bzgl. der QI-Kriterien unterliegt: Es ist nirgendwo gefordert, dass ein Bild mindestens 2 Megabyte haben muss, es geht stets um 2 Megapixel. Zwei Megapixel finde ich als Mindestanforderung schon sehr vernünftig. Runterskalieren ist ja nicht per se schlecht. Bei der Erstellung hochauflösender Stitchings finde ich eine leichte Runterskalierung bei gleichzeitiger Schärfung sogar eine gute Möglichkeit um Bilder mit einem hohen Detailgrad zu erstellen. Wenn man sich dein File:Ambong_Sabah_Footbridge-03.jpg anschaut wird der sehr hohe Detailgrad ja auch sofort deutlich. Grüße zurück, --Tuxyso (talk) 11:07, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Orchis mascula (early purple orchid).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment : could you, please, link your scope to one of the two categories in which your file is  ? --JLPC (talk) 14:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I've forgotten. Hope it is OK now? --Tuxyso (talk) 17:57, 25 October 2013 (UTCs})

 Support --JLPC (talk) 17:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Your work is amazing, please keep up the great work. Blurred Lines 14:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you so much for the barnstar. To get positive feedback is quite motivating and keeps me contributing photos to Commons. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Tuxyso

Hope you accept this request? JKadavoor Jee 15:12, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, I am very surprised of it. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:52, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Can this be considered as acceptance; the nomination need to be accepted by you (there or here). I appreciate if you are willing to join the admin team. JKadavoor Jee 16:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Give me 1-2 days to think about it. Also thanks to you for the trust placed in me. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:29, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

OK; you can say "yes" if you have enough free time. Otherwise it will affect your photography. Take time, think, and come back. Best wishes. JKadavoor Jee 16:32, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bryce Canyon from Sunrise Point 2013.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  Support I like it. --Hockei 22:06, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anaheim Convention Center Back view 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anaheim Convention Center Front view 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bryce Canyon from Sunrise Point 02 2013.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 Very good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stauteich Kesselbach am Halbachhammer Herbst 2013.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 Good quality. --Alberto-g-rovi 06:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Earth road to Antelope Canyon 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Off-road vehicles in front of Antelope Canyon 2013.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 Good quality. --Alberto-g-rovi 06:120, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hotel Paris with triumphal arch in Las Vegas 2013.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 Good quality. --JDP90 18:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

w:Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Müga Wasserspiele sw 2013

This page requires further information from you. JKadavoor Jee 06:25, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Death Valley exit SR190 view Panamint Butt flash flood 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Death Valley exit SR190 view Panamint Butt flash flood 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/JKadavoor Jee 07:06, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 17-Mile Drive Bird Rock 01 2013.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 Good quality. --JDP90 18:02, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 17-Mile Drive Bird Rock 02 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:22, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 17-Mile Drive Bird Rock 03 2013.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  Support good --A.Savin 17:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

"Happy Diwali!"

While Diwali is popularly known as the "festival of lights", the most significant spiritual meaning behind it is "the awareness of the inner light". It is the belief that there is something beyond the physical body and mind which is pure, infinite, and eternal, called the Atman. The celebration of Diwali as the "victory of good over evil” refers to the light of higher knowledge dispelling all ignorance, the ignorance that masks one's true nature, not as the body, but as the unchanging, infinite, immanent and transcendent reality. With this awakening come compassion and the awareness of the oneness of all things (higher knowledge). This brings Satcitananda (joy or peace). Just as we celebrate the birth of our physical being, Diwali is the celebration of this Inner Light. While the story behind Diwali and the manner of celebration varies from region to, the essence is the same – to rejoice in the Inner Light! And this year Diwali and All Souls' Day come together to fully defeat the Evil! "Happy Diwali!" – JKadavoor Jee 06:01, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy Diwali

I also wish you a very very happy and prosperous diwali. --Joydeep _Talk 06:25, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 17-Mile Drive Dead Crypress 02 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 11:16, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View from Highway 1 to Point Sur 2013.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  Support --A.Savin 11:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lifesaver Duisburg 2013.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 Good quality. --JDP90 17:49, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Theater Duisburg 2013.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 good quality --P e z i 22:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Königsgalerie Duisburg 2013.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 QI imho, --P e z i 20:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

FP

It feels like you interpret my comment as a questioning of your review. I always try to avoid it at FPC. I just gave my personal views on the level of detail and my view on the EV. The composition was imo related, because it affects the choice of focal length and level of detail (I never implied for instance that you claimed that EV was low, I just gave my opinion that it was high). In other words. I just gave my personal opinion on the issues you raised. Best regards, --ArildV (talk) 14:35, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I had absolutely no problem with your comments - I've just answered to you in the way I've understood you. I understood your sentence I dont know how much more detail you would expect from this type of aerial photographs as a rhetorical question that one cannot expect a higher level of detail with such a aerial photographs. I answered that I am not sure about it because we have less comparable photograph and therefore I voted with neutral. I understood your second comment the composition gives the picture a very high EV imo as a reply to my suggestion to add EV by using the note tool. My interpretation of your comment: The EV of the photo is high enough and does not need additional EV to become FP. I just pointed out that I did not question the EV of the photo but just made a suggestion what can be improved. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:45, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Grand Canyon Hopi Point Evening Light 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grand Canyon Hopi Point Evening Light 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:04, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Joshua Tree National Park 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Joshua Tree National Park 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! San Diego by Night 02 2013.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 Good quality.--ArildV 23:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Nikon flash!

I confirm you that these small flash are extremely useful, I gave up all my Sony equipment to go with Nikon for that. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. A friend of mine owns the SB- r1c1 kit. First I was unsure about the quality because it is not real macro ring flash but more a holder for small sb flashes. I will give them a try :) Have I understood you correctly that you used focus trap for your macro shot? --Tuxyso (talk) 11:02, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick auf Kettwig mit Uferpalais im Herbst 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grugaturm Essen 2013.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 Good quality. --Cccefalon 10:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Margarethensee Grugapark Essen 2013.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  Support OK --A.Savin 15:24, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skulptur Meteorit Gruga Park Essen 2013.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 Good quality. --Cccefalon 10:36, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schneeeule Bubo scandiacus Grugapark 2013.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 Good quality. --Halicki 10:31, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gradierwerk Grugapark 2013.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 Good quality. --NorbertNagel 13:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Sun rays at Hopi Point Grand Canyon 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sun rays at Hopi Point Grand Canyon 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:03, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yosemite from Swinging Bridge with People 2013.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 Good. --Selbymay 08:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:San_Diego_by_Night_02_2013.jpg

Take it easy; BTW, I think Vamps is a good, but tight reviewer. That picture is very good; but not every one pass. Moreover, I think Commons/WP has a known hate to night and B/W photographs. JKadavoor Jee 06:28, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your friendly words. My comment was not against Vamps (he or she is surely a competent reviewer), it was just pity that this last review changed the result from featured to not featured. Vamps positively reviewed another FPC of mine - so no problem at all. I think your observations with night shots and especially B/W shots is correct. Nonetheless I got two successfull B/W FPs in the last months. If form and structure of a motive is most important b/w is no bad choice. So I will try b/w again for appropriate motives. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:43, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

D600

Hi Tuxyso, I have two lenses : AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II and AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED, I'm rather happy of the both and of the camera. I think the sharpness is better with the 70-200mm but the wild angle is also very good and it's one of the best or maybe the best wild angle and in more the 70-200mm can be easily replace by better prime lenses, while the 14-24 no. The next lenses which I shall buy will be certainly prime lenses because prime lenses have generaly a better quality. If I could do it again, I shall take certainly directly a D800 (a little more expensive (about 500 euros) but sharpness, colors and general quality are IMO better). You can take a look at this site for interesting informations : [[1]]. See you soon. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:31, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Death Valley view from Zabriskie Point 2013 03.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:54, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Death Valley view from Zabriskie Point 2013 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Death Valley view from Zabriskie Point 2013 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:01, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salton Sea Beach Blackboard 2013.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 Good quality. --Cccefalon 18:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salton Sea Beach Info Sign 2013.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 Good quality --EpsilonEridani 22:03, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salton Sea Beach Housings at Coachella Avenue 2013.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 Good quality.--ArildV 11:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SR 190 Panamint Springs Resort End Death Valley 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:34, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! San Francisco Panorama from Twin Peaks 2013.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 Yes, indeed. Incredible, those details ... Definetly QI --Cccefalon 21:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Siegessäule bei QI

Hallo Tuxyso,

ich habe ein neues Bild der Siegessäule hochgeladen, in dem ich u.a. nachgeschärft habe. Für QI sollte das m.E. reichen, bitte prüf nach, ob Du deine Stimme streichen oder in pro umwandeln magst. Danke und Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Wladyslaw! Ich hatte doch bereits auf die neue Version reagiert: Hochgeladen hast du sie am 21:06, 18. Nov. 2013, mein Kommentar ist vom 19. Ich hatte ja ursprüglich 07:32, 18 November 2013 nur ein Kommentar hinterlassen und habe eine Nachschärfung vorgeschlagen. Nachdem du diese dann durchgeführt hast, sind mir weitere QI relevante Aspekte aufgefallen, die dann schließlich zum Decline der neuen Version geführt haben. Ich verstehe ja, dass du an dem Bild hängst (es ist ja auch sehr gut) und einen großen Stitching-Aufwand betrieben hast. Insgesamt fällt es für mich aber wegen der recht heftig ausbrannten Flügel und wegen des unscharfen Bereichs am Gitter (s. Markierung) für mich bei QI durch. Das Bild befindet sich ja im CR-Prozess, zur Zeit 1:1, also ist ja nach wie vor alles offen. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Ein Bild, was Du als sehr gut bezeichnest aber nicht QI sein soll ist ein nicht nachvollziehbarer Widerspruch. Die Flügel als heftig ausgebrannt zu bezeichnen finde ich inhaltlich nicht haltbar. Eine derart reflektierende Oberfläche ist bei derart sonnigem Wetter nie anders einzufangen wenn man realistische Lichtverhältnisse wiedergeben will. Und was daran stören oder contra QI spricht ist mehr als fragwürdig. In Ordnung, ich habe nur nachgefragt. --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Hoho, "inhaltlich nicht haltbar" ist starker Tobak. Im Gegensatz zu vielen anderen auf QIC/FPC begründe ich insbesondere negative Stimmen sehr ausführlich. Die Flügel sind nun mal heftig ausgebrannt, ein Blick auf's Histogramm und die Highlight-Warnung in Lightroom würde dir schnell zeigen, dass meine Aussage inhaltlich durchaus haltbar ist. Ob sich dieser Kritikpunkt nun auf QI / Nicht-QI auswirkt ja aktuell Gegenstand von CR. Wenn ich mich jedes Mal ausregen würde, wenn ich eine Contra-Stimme auf QIC bekomme, hätte ich viel zu tun. Wenn ich meine der Reviewer liegt daneben, ab damit zu CR. Wenn man so einen großen Aufwand betreibt um die Siegessäule zu fotografieren ist eben die Frage, ob man den Aufnahmezeitpunkt nicht sorgfältiger hätte wählen können. Wenn ich mir die Sonnenposition anschaue scheint die Sonne direkt auf den ausgebrannten Flügelpart, alle anderen Teile sind im Schatten. Immerhin ging es dir mit der hochauflösenden Aufnahme ja darum, die vielen Details des Motivs herauszuarbeiten. Die Flügel sind ein wichtiger Bestandteil des Motivs, daher QI relevant für mich.
Sehr gutes Bild und kein QI widerspricht sich keinesfalls. Ein Bild kann technisch-kompositorisch toll umgesetzt sein (vielleicht sogar FP werden) und dennoch den recht formalen QI-Kriterien nicht genügen. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

HDRI (LVM Münster)

Hallo Tuxyso! Irgendwie ist mir ein Fehler beim Upload unterlaufen. Ich habe gerade das richtige Bild hochgeladen und auch noch einmal nachgesehen. Sorry.--XRay ^talk 18:24, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Skyscraper Los Angeles Downtown 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Skyscraper Los Angeles Downtown 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank You!

I have witnessed spectacular progress with your own photos. Good luck in the future! --Ivar (talk) 09:01, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Ivar, thanks for your friendly words. I do my best with my photos. Unfortunately my spare time (after the US journey) is currently very limited but I hope I will make some interesting contributions in the next spring/summer. I think you really earn such a barnstar for your very high quality contributions. Have a nice day/week! --Tuxyso (talk) 09:16, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Grand Canyon Hopi Point with rainbow 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grand Canyon Hopi Point with rainbow 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:02, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Lake Powell with Marina 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lake Powell with Marina 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Israel-2013(2)-Tel Aviv-Hassan Bek Mosque 01.jpg

Hi Tuxyso-

I have added an ALT image (a different one) to my FP nomination which addresses some of the concerns you had brought up. When you have a moment, please have another look. Thanks in advance.-Godot13 (talk) 20:34, 4 December 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:Hochhaus-Boerentouren-Antwerpen-2012.jpg

Yours sincerely, BrightRaven (talk) 10:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Blick auf Kettwig mit Uferpalais im Herbst 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Blick auf Kettwig mit Uferpalais im Herbst 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/JKadavoor Jee 08:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Tuxyso

I have a little question:

How you did for put a link for example this from your Userpage?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tuxyso/Galerie

Please, i need to know that. Thanks.--Wreckwolf800 (talk) 06:01, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Wreckwolf800, I am not sure if I have understood your question correctly. You can look into the sourcecode of every page by clicking on "Edit". In the case of my user main page you can just open the URL https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tuxyso&action=edit and take a look into the source code. If you like to learn more about Mediawiki syntax I can suggest

• https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Formatting
• https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Links (especially for links which was your question)

OK, or do you have further questions? --Tuxyso (talk) 09:28, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

No, Thanks so much.--Wreckwolf800 (talk) 23:15, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:San Francisco Panorama from Twin Peaks 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:San Francisco Panorama from Twin Peaks 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:01, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick auf Kettwig mit Uferpalais im Herbst 2013 v2.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 Good quality. --Alberto-g-rovi 13:00, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

File:SR 190 Panamint Springs Resort End Death Valley 2013.jpg

Hello Tuxyso, anyway it's a good picture like that and I voted for. But I think it will be improved by clarity and darkened shadows in the background to put more the mountains at equally with the foreground, see you later. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:45, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Good morning Christian! Thanks for your positive vote and your suggestions for improvement. I tried different setting in LR and also with NIK filters. But for me the photo did not improve. Thus at at the moment I would like to keep the landscape shot as it is. Have you tried to refresh your browser? During the FPC process I've uploaded a new version with more contrast. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:33, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy if you like, but I've just seen my version is 3880 × 2425, is it a problem? --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Not for me, but probably for some others on Commons. If you like I send you previously a TIF of my version? --Tuxyso (talk) 13:03, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

OK, send me your TIF --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:06, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

You will receive an email in 10 minutes. My internet connection is not that fast. --13:09, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Email is sent. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neues Rathaus Leipzig Süd-West-Fassade 2013.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  Support --Cccefalon 12:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bundesverwaltungsgericht Leipzig Eingang 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:19, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Amargosa Opera House 01 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Amargosa Opera House 01 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

USA-Bilder

Hallo! Ich hatte schon einige Male deine USA-Bilder gesehen und verwundert festgestellt, dass wir doch einige Motive gleich gesehen haben. Irgendwie ähneln sich auch die Touren ... Vermutlich wirst du dieses Déjà-vu noch das eine oder andere Mal haben. (Die Ränder mögen bedingt durch das zu der Zeit noch deutlich verstellte Objektiv leider wirklich ein wenig zu unscharf sein. Ärgerlich, aber kaum zu beheben.)--XRay ^talk 17:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Ich bin gespannt auf deine Bilder. Wie lange warst du unterwegs? Wie lang ging deine Tour? Ich war drei Wochen mit dem Auto on Tour (Kalifornien, Arizona, Utah, Nevada). Im Prinzip wie [diese Tour]. Eine unvergessliche Zeit :) --Tuxyso (talk) 17:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Deine Begeisterung für die USA kann ich nachvollziehen. Unsere Tour begann in San Francisco, dann Yosemite NP, Pismo Beach, Los Angeles, San Diego, Joshua Tree NP, Grand Canyon, Las Vegas, New York. Bis auf New York alles mit dem Auto - in gut drei Wochen. Fantastisch! An manchen Stellen fehlte leider immer mal die Zeit für Fotos oder das Wetter reichte nicht. Die Golden Gate Bridge haben wir - typisch für den Juli - nur im Nebel gesehen. Einen Teil der Bilder werde ich bei Wikimedia Commons nach und nach hochladen, aber erst einmal sind vor allem die Bilder aus der Zeit vor der DSLR (Mitte 2011) dran. (Zugegeben, die alten Bilder haben technisch aus heutiger Sicht so manche Probleme. Mit einer SLR habe ich bis vor mehr als 10 Jahren fotografiert, aber dann etwas pausiert.) Und mit der DSLR gab es nach vielen Bildern mit meinem 10-22-mm-Objektiv immer mehr Probleme. Die USA-Bilder fallen in die Zeit, in der das Objektiv immer stärker dejustiert wurde. Ärgerlich, aber nicht mehr zu ändern. Seit einigen Wochen geht's wieder, da war das Objektiv beim Service. Die Qualität der bei Wikimedia Commons hochgeladenen Bilder sollte allein durch die Auswahl und die besseren Voraussetzungen nach und nach steigen. Man lernt ja auch, was als QI und VI möglich ist und was nicht. Nur bei den FPs rätsele ich noch ein wenig.--XRay ^talk 16:23, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Different "Red Rock"?

Hi. Thank you for uploading really beautiful photographs. I was looking at images categorized under Category:Red Rock Canyon and noticed that this photo of yours might be of a different Red Rock. Category:Red Rock Canyon is used for the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area in Nevada. I personally think that the category name is ambiguous and misleading, as there are at least four Red Rock Canyons in the U.S., not to mention numerous places named Red Rock in the world. Commons does not seem to have a category specific to Arizona's Red Rock so you might consider using Category:Rock formations in Arizona for now. I could've changed it myself, but I usually refrain from switching categories of photos uploaded by other users, as there are things only the photographer knows and I don't wish to end up miscategorizing someone else's work. Thanks for your time and I will be looking forward to more uploads from you. --Nandaro (talk) 16:25, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you VERY much for your cicumstantial comment and your friendly words. After uploading this image I was very unsure with the appropriate category. I asked several users and on the German USA portal but got no answer. The rock formation is near Bell Rock in Sedonda but the photo shows not Bell Rock and as you've stated also not Red Rock Canyon. Thus I am very greatful for your useful hint - I've updated the image description the the category of the photo.

You're very welcome and thank YOU for the revision. Have a wonderful holiday season. --Nandaro (talk) 18:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

File:Neues Augusteum Innen 02 2013.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neues Augusteum Innen 02 2013.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  Support Good photo quality. But there should be a permission statement of the University of Leipzig. --XRay 10:20, 20 December 2013 (UTC) I sent an email to the press department of the university. Probably they will reply after Christmas. --Tuxyso 16:39, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Neues Augusteum Innen 03 2013.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neues Augusteum Innen 03 2013.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  Support Good photo quality. But there should be a permission statement of the University of Leipzig. --XRay 10:20, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thomaskirche Leipzig Westseite 2013.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 Good quality. --Florstein 08:56, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Villa Nauhardt Leipzig 2013.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 Good quality. --Florstein 08:56, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

File:De Maria kerk in Wierum 3 edited.jpg

Hello Tuxyso, I also edited this file, but I did not want to create a third version then I uploaded it on yours, if you see the slightest problem there, please revert. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:37, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Christian, I also like your version. The difference is that I only made local edits on the church. You performed some global adjustments to improve the light. It's a matter of taste which one is better (mine or yours) but both are definitely better than the original nomination. Thus I would suggest to keep your version as alternative. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:17, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Giant sequoias in Sequoia National Park 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Giant sequoias in Sequoia National Park 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

2014 !

	* * * 2014! * * *
	Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Happy holidays! -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:26, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks, George I wish you the same! --Tuxyso (talk) 06:39, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:SR 190 Panamint Springs Resort End Death Valley 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:SR 190 Panamint Springs Resort End Death Valley 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Neues Augusteum Innen 01 2013.jpg

File:Neues Augusteum Innen 01 2013.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!

-mattbuck (Talk) 00:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New year

I wish you and your family a very happy Christmas and a wonderful new year. --Joydeep _Talk 11:05, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Joydeep for your wishes! --Tuxyso (talk) 12:59, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Misuse of images zazzle.com

Hi Tuxyso! See what Richard Bartz sent me: http://www.zazzle.de/scharlachrot_macawara_macao_amerikaner_papageien_h%C3%BClle-179787744701487132 I have started a topic here to see what we can do. Grüsse, --Kadellar (talk) 11:38, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

• @Kadellar and Richard: I answered on village pump. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:57, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Torkilstöten December 2013 03.jpg

Thank you for your review. To avoid more noise (without cable release, I was limited to 30 second exposure), I used a large aperture and focusing sat on infinity. Unfortunately, this leads to a bit of the foreground is OUF. Do you think it would be better to crop the image more? I kept a bit of the foreground to get what I thought was a better composition. I was thinking of nominating it for FP, since I really like the landscape and the sky. But it is perhaps too many issues?

I wish you and your family a merry Christmas and a happy new year. Thanks for all the photos you uploaded in the year, and your careful reviews on QI and FP.

Regards --ArildV (talk) 13:16, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Arild also for you and your family Merry Christmas and thanks for your compliment regarding my photos and reviews - the same applys to you. To the photo: I don't think that cropping is a good idea, because the light at the front left and right is interesting. FPC, mmmh... My honest opinion: I would not oppose the image, but also not vote with support. The brown stick is also a bit disturbing for me. I guess an FPC would be dangerous because some reviewers react somehow allergic to blurr :) For an FP the photo is possibly not eye-catching enough. But why not, have a try! --Tuxyso (talk) 13:25, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Manuela Schwesig.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Agree, this one is better. Halavar (talk) 01:53, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Better of the two. Lymantria (talk) 14:11, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Manuela Schwesig 2.jpg: +2
2. Manuela Schwesig.jpg: -1 (current VI within same scope) <--
=>
File:Manuela Schwesig 2.jpg: Promoted.
File:Manuela Schwesig.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--

--Halavar (talk) 23:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brücke Neues Rathaus Stadthaus Leipzig 2013.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 Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 12:51, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Landgericht Leipzig 2013 cropped.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 Good quality --Shansov.net 11:31, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Landgericht Leipzig 2013.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 Good quality.--ArildV 10:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bahnhof Leipzig von Panorama Tower 2013.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 Good quality, impressive station.--ArildV 08:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nikolaikirche Leipzig 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:03, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neues Rathaus Leipzig von Panorama Tower 2013.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 Top crop not convincing, but QI anyhow --Poco a poco 09:35, 22 December 2013 (UTC)  Done, Poco. Better? --Tuxyso 09:58, 22 December 2013 (UTC) Indeed, now it can breathe Poco a poco 13:42, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panorama Leipzig Richtung Westen von Tower 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:40, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innenstadt Leipzig mit Thomaskirche von Panorama Tower 2013.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 OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 16:12, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Dear Tuxyso, I wish and you and your family a Merry Christmas and lots of health and, of course, nice pictures for the coming year! Your Poco² 14:11, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your friendly wishes - I wish you the same! I look forward to nice photos in the new year. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:13, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Joschua Tree National Park Rock formation near Barker Dam 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Joschua Tree National Park Rock formation near Barker Dam 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:04, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Frage

Hallo! Ich rätsele ob deines Kommentars "Probably slightly CW tilted, but I am not sure" zum Bild File:Dülmen,_Umland,_Sonnenaufgang_--_2012_--_9.jpg. Abgesehen davon, dass ich die Abkürzung "CW" nicht kenne, verstehe ich deine Anmerkung. In natura sieht es an der genannten Stelle tatsächlich so aus. Die Bäume sind nicht gerade - logisch - und die Straße ist leicht geneigt. Das ist echt schwer zu beziffern, ob im Bild ein Fehler vorliegt oder nicht. Leider fehlt mir die Wasserwaage an der Kamera, die mir hätte helfen können. Ich weiß nicht, sollte man das Bild verändern? Drehen allein erscheint mir nicht sinnvoll. Irgendwie neige ich dazu, das Bild so zu lassen, wie es ist. Hättest du einen Tipp? (Und die Bedeutung der Abkürzung "CW"?) Danke!--XRay ^talk 13:32, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• XRay, als ich das erste Mal diese Abkürzung gesehen habe war ich auch irritiert :) CW tilted = clock-wise tilted, im Uhrzeigersinn gedreht. Um einen CW-Tilt zu korrigieren musst du das Bild logischerweise nach links drehen. Der Gegenpart kürzt sich noch komischer ab, nämlich CCW tilt, also counter-clockwise tilt. Bei einem CCW tilt muss du das Foto um es korrekt auszurichten nach rechts drehen. Zu deinem Foto: Ich war bei tatsächlich nicht sicher, ob es vielleicht ein wenig nach links gedreht werden muss (Korrektur eines CW tilt). Wenn du meinst Nein, dann ignoriere meinen Kommentar einfach. Du wirst die Stelle dort sicher besser kennen als ich :) Für mich sah die Straße nur etwas verdreht aus. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:46, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Danke! Die Wirtschaftswege in unserer Region sind sicherlich nicht letzter Stand der Technik. Sie sind tatsächlich rund in der Mitte oder zu einer Seite abfallend oder uneben. So ist das nun einmal. Wenn ich das Bild nach links drehen würde, hätten die Bäume nur eine noch stärkere Linksneigung. Aber wie schon gesagt, ich lasse es so. Danke noch einmal für deine Erläuterung von "CW". --XRay ^talk 14:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Girl Posing at Glacier Point Yosemite 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Girl Posing at Glacier Point Yosemite 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Best wishes for 2014

) Feliz año nuevo --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Wilfredo. I look fortward to interesting photos from you :) The best for you and your family in 2014! --Tuxyso (talk) 22:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Mesquite Flat Sand Dunes Panorama Morning 2013.jpg

Hello and best wishes, I've make a try of edition on this file and sent it to you by mail, if you like it I can tell you what I have done or(and) I can directly to upload it on wikimedia --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:48, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Christian. Best wishes also for you. Thanks for your email. I have carefully taken a look at your version. You observations regarding brightness and WB were right. IMHO the brightness of the sky was overdone in your version. I've created a new version from the RAW and considered your suggestions as good as I could. What do you think? --Tuxyso (talk) 22:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Girl posing at Glacier Point

You're welcome. I'd like to think my comment was what tipped the balance in favor of it being closed as a promotion. I've got some uploading to do now, but I will add to the description at some point soon. Happy New Year! Daniel Case (talk) 16:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Daniel, the best for 2014 also for you! I guess you are right with the positive effect of your comment regarding the promotion of the image. Nonetheless your comment had been valuable for me (and others) if the Girl posing at Glacier Point had not been promoted. Keep on commenting in such a circumstantial way. I look forward to your addition to the image description. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:02, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tuxyso,

Glückwunsch zu diesem FP, das mir ausgesprochen gut gefallen hat! Ist das "Girl" eine Bekannte von Dir? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Danke. Nein es ist keine Bekannte von mir. Als ich an dem Aussichtspunkt Fotos gemacht habe, fiel sie mir durch die Körperhaltung, das rote Shirt (komplementär zur grünen Umgebung) und die tolle Passung mit der Umgebung ins Auge. Freundinnen von ihr hatten gerade ein Foto von ihr gemacht. Als ich dann fragte, ob ich auch ein Foto von ihr machen dürfe, stimmte sie netterweise zu. Ein paar Minuten später habe ich mich auch auf diesen Felsen gesetzt und "posiert". Das sah allerdings so unelegant aus, dass ich im Freundes- und Bekanntenkreis nur das hier nominierte Foto gezeigt habe :) Wenn man auf das Abstimmungsergebnis schaut war es ja ganz schön knapp für das Foto. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:53, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hochofen 5 Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord Abend 2013.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 QI for me. --VT98Fan 13:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Simsonplatz Leipzig 2013.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 Good quality.--ArildV 15:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Leinpfad 1 Mülheim Baudenkmal 2013.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 Good quality. --Alberto-g-rovi 07:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Leinpfad in Mülheim Restaurant Tomate 2013.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 Good quality. --NorbertNagel 20:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wasserbahnhof Mülheim am Abend 2013.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 Good quality. --Cayambe 15:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Visalia Bus Transit Center 2013.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 Ok in spite of top crop --Poco a poco 08:53, 29 December 2013 (UTC) No space left, sorry. --Tuxyso 08:59, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Visalia Fox Theatre 2013.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  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 10:11, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Elevation Sea Level Sign Death Valley 2013.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 Good quality. --Berthold Werner 14:08, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mesquite Flat Sand Dunes Panorama Morning 2013.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 Good quality. --NorbertNagel 15:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Landscape near Mesquite Flat Sand Dunes Morning 2013.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thyssen Krupp Quartier Luftaufnahme 2014.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 Ok for QI --Martin Kraft 01:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gustav-Heinemann-Brücke Werden Luftaufnahme 2014.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:09, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhr-Universität Bochum Luftaufnahme 2014.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  Support A little bit noisy, but IMO it's QI. --XRay 09:47, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruhr-Universität Bochum Audimax Mensa Luftaufnahme 2014.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  Support A little bit noisy, but IMO it's QI. --XRay 09:47, 5 January 2014 (UTC) High ISO was required due to relative poor light. Exposure time of 1/500sec / 1/320 is minium in an oscillating propeller-driven aircraft to get photos without blurr. --Tuxyso 09:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedrich Wilhelms Hütte Luftaufnahme 2014.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 Good, still some more contrast would be better --Poco a poco 12:21, 5 January 2014 (UTC)  Done Better? --Tuxyso 14:47, 5 January 2014 (UTC) Indeed Poco a poco 11:43, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Dead Cypress at 17-Mile Drive 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dead Cypress at 17-Mile Drive 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alu Hütte Essen Trimet Luftaufnahme 2014.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  Support Good quality. --XRay 17:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gustav-Heinemann-Brücke Werden Luftaufnahme 2014 SW.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  Support Good quality. --XRay 17:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Mesquite Flat Sand Dunes Panorama Morning 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mesquite Flat Sand Dunes Panorama Morning 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/Jee 06:32, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neue Mitte Haarzopf Luftaufnahme 2014.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 Nice. --Mattbuck 23:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zeche Zollverein Schacht 12 Luftaufnahme 2014.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  Support ok --A.Savin 17:02, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thyssen Krupp Quartier Luftaufnahme Nordost 2014.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Centro mit Sea Life Abenteuer Park Luftaufnahme 2014.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 OK. --Mattbuck 22:30, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Have a nice vacation!

Expect to be back, soon. Jee 13:28, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Upper Antelope Canyon 03 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Upper Antelope Canyon 03 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:01, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

HDR

Hallo Tuxyso, ich habe hier ein Kommentar von dir gelesen, dass eigentlich nicht mehr stimmt. Ich habe in letzter Zeit ein paar HDRs gemacht und hochgeladen, Beispiele davon sind hier: die Methode dennoch um die Bilder zusammenzulegen ist nicht die übliche HDR sondern Blending. All meine HDRs sind immer am Namen zu erkennen. Viele Grüsse, Poco² 20:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC) PS: Hier ein paar Beispiele: 1, 2, 3, 4

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Limbecker Platz Luftaufnahme Blickrichtung Ost 2014.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Limbecker Platz Luftaufnahme Blickrichtung Nord 2014.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 Good quality. --Sputniktilt 12:46, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Heilige-Familiekerk Venlo 2014.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 A bit tilted on left --Christian Ferrer 18:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)  Done Please take another look. --Tuxyso 21:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 06:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Wunderschöne Bilder ...

Du konntest als Autor den Frozen Status (JoHshua) umgehen? Danke fürs Feedback!

Didaktische Anregung: Tiegelstahlproduktion-Bild - die mouseover-generierbaren Texte sollten den beschriebenen Bildinhalt nicht abdecken. Besser also, viell sogar kleinere Textfelder an den unteren Bildrand legen. Detto San Francisco: Text Golden-Gate-Bridge besser darüber in den Himmel.

Deine Galerie: Oberausen-Dümpten Wehrplatz -> ...hausen ... daneben fehlen 3 Bildunterschriften

Rathaus Mülheim an der Ruhr, fotografiert vom Rathausmarkt ... gesehen ... oder: Blick ... damit denkt man sich mehr in den Betrachter hinein

Forum City Mülheim Einkaufszentrum mit Hochhäuser im Hintergrund mit Hochhäusern oder platzsparend: , Hochhäuser dahinter

Begehbare Taufstelle Beschreibung würde mir als Taufbecken besser gefallen in der kleinen Ansicht dachte ich es wäre eine Stelle, also ein Platz in der Kirche im Bild selbst irritiert mich der Schatten auf der hinteren Treppe, die fast wie eine Person mit 2 Beinen aussieht, bewegungsunscharf dürfte der Sonnen-Schatten einer Hängeleuchte sein fehlt mir auch etwas als Grössenvergleich ideal wäre natürlich ein Mensch im Wasser stehend dann wäre die Funktion klar und würde man den Wasserstand gut erkennen

Heißen Kirche verrückt: am Schild gut lesbar, heisst tatsächlich so im englischen Text das ß mit ss umschreiben In welcher Stadt fehlt mir Koordinaten sind angegeben, doch habe ich meinen Uralt-Browser im Verdacht, dass er darüber abstürzen könnte

[[2]] Die Markierungstexte dürfte ich editieren - bin ganz erstaunt ... Am Haus Böcklerplatz 5 ist links des aktiven gelben rechtecks noch ein weiteres, noch etwas kleineres inaktives gelbes rechteck - das verstört Ist es ein Gebäudeteil am oberen Ende des Stiegenhauses erwartet man Parallelogramm-Form ... rätselhaft (später bei - versehentlich - grosser Auflösung die Tafel "swb" auf 45° schrägem Stiegenhausabschluss erkannt) Seltener als Rechtecke kommen in Stadtbildern Kreise vor, vielleicht wäre günstig statt gelber Rechtecke Kreise zu nehmen, die ziehen Blicke besser auf sich, interferieren weniger mit den abgebildeten Strukturen (den "vielen Schachteln" in der Stadt, vgl. das Buch "Der Papalangi") Das gelbe Logo der Post viell nicht mit dem gelben Rechteck überlagern, besser auf den Dachschotter links daneben, wie auf den Hochhäusern

Ein - technisches - Bauwerk das mich fasziniert hat ist der Alte Kranen in Würzburg. Drinnen Tretrad-Antrieb durch Menschen. Aussen ein Lastarm aus Holz+Kupferblech und ein Arm für die Gegenladung oder ein Gegengewicht. Genial.

Und noch eine Anregung: http://wien.orf.at/news/stories/2622675/ Abriss der GEBE-Fabrik gestartet ... unten der link zu den Bildern der 78er im Innenraum ...

jetzt bin ich wohl ein wenig ausgeufert, deine bilder hatten mich verführt ; ) lg --Helium4 (talk) 10:17, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Ui, da hast du ja eine ganze Latte an Verbesserungsvorschlägen angeführt, für die ich natürlich sehr dankbar bin. Auf der anderen Seite würde ich mich natürlich freuen, wenn du diese direkt umsetzt (Wikiprinzip). Bis ich die ganze Liste abgearbeitet habe, könnten noch viele schöne Fotos entstehen :) Aktuell experimentiere ich mit meinem neuen Nodalpunktdapter und bin gerade ganz beigestert. Es werden in den nächsten Wochen sicher einige Fotos folgen. Ändere doch einfach die Markierungen bei dem Tiegelgussdenkmal, dann kann ich sehen, wie genau du dir die Markierungen vorstellst und diesen Vorschlag bei den nächsten Uploads berücksichtigen. Schade finde ich übrigens, dass man die Markierungen nicht auch im Wiki-Artikel anzeigen kann - didaktisch wäre das sehr wertvoll. Oder gibt es da Möglichkeiten? --Tuxyso (talk) 10:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)