User talk:W.carter/Archive 1

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, W.carter!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 17:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Brakteater i guld, Fole, Gotland, Sweden, bild 29230.jpg

File:Brakteater i guld, Fole, Gotland, Sweden, bild 29230.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

—LX (talk, contribs) 16:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Hej LX! Since we are on the English section I assume it is best to use English, although we are both from Sweden. If I made a mistake in uploading these pictures I can assure you it was an honest mistake. The Historiska museets site where I found them has a very clear creative commons sign attached to the pictures like this. Is this not enough to upload them on Wiki Commons and use them on Wikipedia? I followed all the requirements stated. - W.carter (talk) 21:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Hej! Wikimedia Commons är ett flerspråkigt projekt, så det går bra med svenska också. Commons tar bara emot filer som får bearbetas och användas fritt i alla syften, inklusive kommersiella syften. Licensen du angav när du laddade upp filerna var {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}}, vilket är en fri licens. Tyvärr är det inte den licensen som Historiska museet använder sig av. Filerna på Historiska museet är märkta med {{Cc-by-nc-sa-2.5}} (som förbjuder kommersiell användning) eller {{Cc-by-nc-nd-2.5}} (som dessutom förbjuder bearbetning). De är alltså inte fria licenser. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Tack snälla LX för att du förklarade det hela. Det är så himla snårigt med de här små bokstavskombinationerna som betyder så mycket. Jag vet att man ibland kan åberopa något som kallas "fair use" på Wikipedia men det är ju nåot som inte ska användas i onödan. Vet du ifall det finns något annat sätt som man kan använda för att kunna tillgå dessa bilder till artiklar på Wikipedia? Jag håller på att reda ut en massa artiklar om Gotland på Engelska Wiki. Mycket tacksam för goda råd. :) - W.carter (talk) 21:42, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Fair use används som du säger enbart på Wikipedia, och då bara för lokal uppladdning på vissa språkversioner av Wikipedia (däribland engelska men inte svenska) och under väldigt specifika omständigheter. Här på Commons kan det inte användas alls, eftersom fair use är beroende av sammanhanget som bilderna används i, och i och med att Wikimedia Commons är en generell mediadatabas finns det inget sådant sammanhang. Enda möjligheterna att använda de här bilderna som jag kan se är att få upphovsrättsinnehavaren att gå med på att ändra licensen. Annars kanske man kan fotografera av föremålen själv om de är utställda och museet tillåter fotografering. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:16, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Lalji Singh.JPG

File:Lalji Singh.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!

FDMS 4 15:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, you have to see this yellow note!! I have replied on the nomination page. If needed, I will contact Lalji Singh or PPP Cell BHU and request them to send an email to WP. His email address is on his profile pages at BHU website.

File:Grace Foods soup-mixes display de-logod.jpg

File:Grace Foods soup-mixes display de-logod.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!

Josve05a (talk) 12:49, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I have commented at the file's entry. w.carter-Talk 13:53, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Svitzer Hymer (tugboat, 2009) 2.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. --Hubertl 20:46, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 16 March 2016 (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:
Drill holes in red granite quarrying.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Nice image, but the scope is too broad. Charles (talk) 09:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Ok... this is my first try at this. I thought the scope had to correspond with a category and I could not find any suitable sub-category in the one I listed. Any suggestions are appreciated. I have added a bit to the scope, not sure it's ok though. w.carter-Talk 10:23, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
I would try to indicate the purpose of the drilling e.g. granite quarrying or whatever, then it is real VI

On the other hand a drill holes in a rock is not very specific. Whether to make a scope for each rock, here will do much image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:20, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. let's try this instead. (New scope added) w.carter-Talk 11:15, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

 Support Good. Charles (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abandoned part with heat sink Rixö.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 09:45, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Röda och blå flottörer.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. --Hubertl 06:02, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blå tank Rixö 2.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. --Hubertl 06:02, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Geofoam 2.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 me --Hubertl 07:49, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Smögens varv 9.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. --Hubertl 21:00, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Roof tiles packed in crate 1.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. --Hubertl 21:00, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Smögens varv 7.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, a bit CAs though. --Laitche 19:13, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Smörblommor.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 me, location would be useful --A.Savin 19:06, 23 June 2016 (UTC) Location in words + links provided, camera location has been there all the time. W.carter 21:03, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 26 June 2016 (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:
John Bauer's grave.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:59, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Roof tiles packed in crate 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Roof tiles packed in crate 1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:05, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Smögen harbor 1.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. --Ralf Roletschek 16:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Smögens varv 13.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. --Ralf Roletschek 16:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bryggan Sjöräddningssällskapet Smögen.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 Maybe some overexposed parts, but good composition.--Jebulon 15:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bockkran Smögens varv 3.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  SupportNoisy sky, but good enough.--Jebulon 15:44, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Master vid Smögens varv.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  SupportYes. And I like the composition--Jebulon 15:46, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nässlor vid ekstam.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 Yes. Some very small overexposed parts on the trunk, otherwise very nice.--Jebulon 15:48, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tomma färgburkar Smögens varv.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  Comment Interesting and unusual. Not a QI technically wise, for now. Correctibe. At least one red burnt pixel, borderline regarding the overxposition, some chromatic aberrations, and maybe a need of a perspective correction (at left). All improvable.--Jebulon 15:43, 28 June 2016 (UTC) New version with most of the issues fixed. Hopefully.--W.carter 19:35, 28 June 2016 (UTC)I think it is good now. I like your style, and the kind of unusual subjects or scenes you chose.--Jebulon 09:06, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Through empty drinking glass 2.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 now. Interesting idea -- George Chernilevsky 13:36, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Smögens varv 10.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. --Ermell 21:34, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Boardwalk south harbour Lysekil.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 --Christian Ferrer 04:50, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yellow hose.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. --A.Savin 01:57, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! South harbor Lysekil with four blue buoys.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. --Jacek Halicki 11:03, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dock fingers Lysekil.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 14:16, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Car tires as fenders.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. --Ermell 13:32, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dalskogen cemetery.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. --Ermell 13:34, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red Yamaha Midnight Star.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, contrast and brightness are also good. --Krishna Chaitanya Velaga 03:55, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fuseboxes in workshop.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. --Jacek Halicki 22:00, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anderssons kaj Lysekil.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. --Jacek Halicki 08:53, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red sailing boat south harbor Lysekil.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 now --Poco a poco 17:48, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skipper taking a break.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. --C messier 12:05, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Eight windows

You are welcome, dear Howard euh... W.carter.--Jebulon (talk) 21:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

You may call me Sam. Sorry if the spelling is wrong, I speak French rather well, but my spelling and writing is not something I'm proud of... w.carter-Talk 21:54, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eight windows wrapped in plastic.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. --Mummelgrummel 03:50, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Balustrade at the Laurinska villa, Lysekil.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  Comment Tilted to the left. --C messier 12:03, 13 July 2016 (UTC) Woops! I was so concentrated on the fish face I didn't see that. Thanks! Fixed. W.carter 19:33, 13 July 2016 (UTC)  Support OK. --C messier 14:42, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Reflection cross Marmor kirke Copenhagen Denmark.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Reflection cross Marmor kirke Copenhagen Denmark.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:09, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Moved to File:Light through a stained glass window, cross, wall of the Marmor (Frederiks) Kirke Copenhagen Denmark.jpg, hoping the redirects and all will be fixed soon. w.carter-Talk 13:13, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Ashton !--Jebulon (talk) 20:37, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jebulon: It was a pleasure, such a beautiful picture! :) w.carter-Talk 20:40, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Quay and piers.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 {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Tomb Anna Regilla

I am still reading the gimp manual. In the meantime a friend altered the image of the Tomb of Anna Regilla for me. I have uploaded this new version-the crop and perspective are altered but he cannot see the C A. What do you think of the new version? Many thanks again for spending time on this Robert aka Notafly (talk) 16:37, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

@Notafly: Most of the CA seems to have vanished with the light correction, there is still a very tiny purple fringe up left tip of the roof, but that is so little it does not matter to me. The pic is now ok for me, I have marked it as good and if no one objects it will be promoted. All photo processing programs takes a while to get to know well, I hope this will help you in the future. :) w.carter-Talk 18:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Very many thanks Notafly (talk) 18:41, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oats in a field.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 16:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Green oat field.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. Filename could be improved. --XRay 16:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC) Ok, will do as soon as it's off this list. Moves always mess up links. Thanks! W.carter 18:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Gravestone, Christchurch, Lisburn

Hello again. Thanks for this and other reviews.My photos other than film (analogue) are taken with Leica compact cameras hence the perspective distortions. When this is corrected other problems show (too technical for me-jpeg artefacts). So I will instead try and find photos where perspective is not an issue.Very many thanks for your help and best regards Notafly (talk) 19:24, 24 July 2016 (UTC) I nominated a photo of a Maidenhair fern as a trial. Would you be patient and take a look at that too.

@Notafly: Take a look again, I've already promoted it. :) A very nice pic indeed. I think I would like to have it as a background on my computer. We all take the picture that our equipment is best suited for. Best, w.carter-Talk 19:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

@Notafly: Oh, and I also forgot: If you think you can't do anything with a photo, please change the "Nomination" to "Withdrawn" and write "Thanks, I withdraw my nomination." and sign. That is considered good manners since it save time for other editors. :) w.carter-Talk 19:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Within seconds.I am delighted and encouraged.Notafly (talk) 19:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

You are getting the hang of it! Keep up the good work! Let's hope nobody protests. :) w.carter-Talk 19:40, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Top branches of ash.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. --Jkadavoor 02:39, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Water surface under a fountain.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.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:39, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barn at Holma Seat Farm.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. --Uoaei1 13:17, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:11, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much

for the help by the pictures. You make very good pictures of agricultur. Do you live in a little town or is your work? --Verum (talk) 18:17, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

You are most welcome! :) Thank you, I live outside a very small town (de:Lysekil) where I work. I always bring my camera on my daily walks and most of the time I find something to photograph. It's a very rural area with lots of farms, not many castles or fantastic cathedrals though. ;) w.carter-Talk 18:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Farrier

Many thanks Notafly (talk) 20:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rows of grass in a field at Gåseberga.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. --Hubertl 21:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tension weight on pole for overhead lines.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.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pole with tension weight for overhead lines.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 now. Well done, Nightfyer! --Hubertl 01:57, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Eight windows wrapped in plastic.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eight windows wrapped in plastic.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Farmer gathering grass for silage.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. A better timing may be possible when his face was not obscured. --Jkadavoor 03:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC) Thanks Jkadavoor, this is one of a sequence of about ten continuous pics, I actually chose one of the few where his face was hidden for privacy reasons, so it was intentional. W.carter 06:59, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rosa rugosa at Stångehuvud.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 Borders have a clear drop of sharpness but ok overall --Poco a poco 18:58, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cliffs and boulders at Stångehuvud.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. --Johann Jaritz 03:18, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cliffs and driftwood at Stångehuvud - b.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 --Llez 17:44, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red granite cliffs at Stångehuvud.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 18:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

16-03-30-Jerusalem Mishkenot Sha’ananim-RalfR-DSCF7601.jpg

Good time of the day,

In your QI promotion comment on 16-03-30-Jerusalem Mishkenot Sha’ananim-RalfR-DSCF7601.jpg you wrote:

“because of the vertigo angle it actually works.”

I would appreciate if you could elaborate on that or point me to an explanation of vertigo angle. To me the picture does not seem tilted; it obviously has no perspective correction – but perspective correction has its limits at extreme angles. I know that Hitchcock's movie Vertigo introduced a technique termed “dolly zoom” but it only works for moving pictures so you cannot mean that.

I'd be interested to learn more, I frequently hesitate whether to apply perspective correction, or to which extent. If you want to reply, please do it here with {{Reply to|Renardo la vulpo}}.

-- Renardo la vulpo (talk) 19:41, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@Renardo la vulpo: Hello! Nice of you to drop by. What I call "vertigo angle" may not be a widely accepted technical term, but it is close to what you call extreme angle. This is what I would call a vertigo angle of the skyscrapers in Manhattan, it's the kind of angle you almost get vertigo from watching. The photo I was reviewing would have looked silly if you tried to apply some perspective adjustment to it, but then again I suspect the photo was never intended to be straight, instead the pillers were portrayed in a manner of two skyscrapers as seen from above, which made the image look cool. Hope that explains it more. Best, w.carter-Talk 20:10, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I see, thanks for the prompt reply. Do you have any idea from what angle it is useless to apply perspective correction, or from what angle it might be considered doubtful?

For an example, a week ago I uploaded a picture where the lateral steepletops (had to look this up, hope you understand – another sample of my global English non-understanding) look strange/distorted because I "corrected" perspective due to short distance.

I am asking just out of curiosity; I use a pocket camera, so I think my pictures would hardly find grace in the eyes of the (semi-)pros. (Yes, I nominated a picture last week but it was a vector picture, and so far the only vector picture I've seen in the last time. :-)

-- Renardo la vulpo (talk) 22:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@Renardo la vulpo: There is no exact "breaking point" angle about when to correct perspective and not. It varies from image to image. You have to see if the angle adds something to the picture, if it makes it more interesting, if not it should be corrected. Like this photo, it would look really silly if you were to use perspective adjustment on it, it looks much better with the angle kept. It was also promoted to Featured.

I agree that your example photo looks a bit weird after the correction. That is a very difficult building! I think the only way to deal with this would be to copy the spherical tops from the original angled photo, where I assume they were round, adjust them in size and paste them onto the corrected photo. Or simply exaggerate the angle and leave it like that.

I took a look at your photos and the camera you use. You take very good photos and have a really good eye for angles and what to photograph! And the camera you have is not bad at all, I just don't think you use it to its full extent. Today's compact cameras are very good and powerful. It is very similar to the camera I use for most of my pictures, many of which have been promoted to Quality Images, including the ones you can see here on my talk page. As you can see, I even managed to get one Featured image with it. Mine is a Sony DSC-RX100. The two most important things in a pocket camera are the sensor and the lens. Your lens, a Leica (the best there is), is even better than mine and your sensor at 18 Mp is just a tiny bit smaller than my 20Mp. I see that most of your pictures are about 2000x3000 px, so I guess that you have not set your camera to its highest resolution. If you do that, I guess that you could get pics of about 5200x3400 and with that you get them sharp enough for QI. You would also have to learn how to remove the CA and some other things they always complain about at QI, but since you seems to be quite good at graphic programs I don't think that would be a problem for you. You have already done some digital post-processing on your photos. :) w.carter-Talk 10:02, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your kind hints, and even more for your kind words about my pictures. The resolution of my TZ-61 ends at 4896×3672, and Panasonic does not seem to be happy with that because in the TZ-71 they went back to a maximum of 4000×3000 (one of the reasons why I took the TZ-61, the other being the GPS module). It frequently produces unsharpness on far off-center parts of the picture, so I try to provide some padding and crop it afterwards.

Yes, I do some post-processing on nearly every picture I upload; mostly cropping and perspective if needed, sometimes contrast. I will try to learn more about CA.

Hope you have a fine day! -- Renardo la vulpo (talk) 12:48, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

@Renardo la vulpo: You too! CA correction is really just about substituting the green or purple fringes you sometimes get with a more appropriate color from the nearby pixels. The process is a bit tedious but the result is worth it. Through trial and error (most often the latter) I have found out that very good quality pictures here are more about post-processing than having a really good camera. Also, some off-center unsharpness is perfectly accepable most of the time. You are always welcome on my talk page. w.carter-Talk 13:03, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Just an aside: On your user page you write you have “no idea how many” pictures you have uploaded. I happen to know: 910. And I am deeply impressed that your glass half full has over 4,000 uses on the Maratha wikipedia, seemingly on all empty user pages. – Do not bother to reply. -- Renardo la vulpo (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Ailanthus altissima and Farrier

Thankyou (especially for the work on the Farrier).That was very kind. I am going to submit some more photos but no more with the same faults as the others I hope.Best regards Notafly (talk) 13:09, 29 July 2016 (UTC) In Ireland the problem is usually too little light.In Italy there is too much.

@Notafly: Tnx! ...and here in Sweden it rains too much. I think you are doing fine, submitting and getting comments on pictures is the best way to learn, sometimes you learn best from the 'Decline', at least it worked that way for me. But that is no problem as long as you take this with good humor and don't get mad (as some users do) when a picture is not accepted. It's a hobby and you get on to the next, just like you do. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 13:15, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chariot at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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. --Hubertl 18:55, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dragon Ship and Sandal at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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. --Johann Jaritz 03:17, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Footprints at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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 19:28, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Man in Trees at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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 19:28, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Man with boats at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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. --Basotxerri 18:43, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ships and Animals at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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 09:54, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Six Men in a Boat at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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. --Johann Jaritz 09:07, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! The Sled at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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. --Johann Jaritz 09:07, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Three Hunters at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.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 09:02, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! The Cobbler at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad overhead view.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 09:02, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Goethe

Many thanks.I am failing less than I did and in a better position to submit images of a higher standard thanks to all. I put the quality images here (with a few others).Each day now I look at the declined photos which as you say are the most instructive.Thanks again and best regards Robert aka Notafly (talk) 14:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

You are doing very well! I think we can all see how your pictures are improving. It is also great that you are polite, humble and eager to learn, those qualities will get you very far. If you want to learn more about what make pictures good you could just take a look at how the images at Featured picture candidates are judged. The comments about those pictures can give you a lot of clues about what to do and not. :) w.carter-Talk 14:48, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	For your great contributions! Ali Zifan 01:27, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! That was really kind of you. w.carter-Talk 06:49, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Samsung laser toner cartridge front view.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. --Johann Jaritz 12:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Four Samsung laser toner cartridges front view.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. --Johann Jaritz 12:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 4 August 2016 (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:
"Skomakaren" at Skomakarhällen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 07:56, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:30, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Weatherworn plywood table

For me a lovely photo R aka Notafly (talk) 20:13, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

@Notafly: Thanks! I'm very partial to such textures myself. I love hanging around workshops and industries where you can find old discarded things. Guess I can relate... ;) w.carter-Talk 20:22, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rusty scraps of iron.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. --Jacek Halicki 22:26, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:2016-07-28 15-00-15 magasin-sect-bosmont.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016-07-28 15-00-15 magasin-sect-bosmont.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sillen Norra hamnen Lysekil 1.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.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Alvor

I am flattered. Hubert said I should get a tripod but when I am in beautiful Alvor I have my heavy bird watching binoculars to carry. Maybe a light one though.A friend fixed the angel.Is she ok? Early morning and the light was odd.Warm regards Robert aka Notafly (talk) 20:59, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

@Notafly: You are so worth it. :) The angle was almost perfect, just about 1/4 of a degree off so no big deal. A trick I have to check the angle is to open the picture in a separate window on the computer, but not at full screen, then I use the mouse to draw that window to the bottom or one side of the screen. Doing that you get to compare if lines are straight with the frame of the screen. Very easy and simple, no programs needed.

You could get a light tripod, but there are other tricks as well. You always inadvertently jerk the camera when you press the shutter. I always use the 2 sek timer, that way there is no motion blur from the button-push. You press and hold still. Another one is one I learned on the shooting range (sport pistol). You always take the picture while exhaling, that way your body relaxes and your hands get steady. I always carry my camera in my bag and snap pics on my walks, very few are planned so I don't carry around any tripod or help, I travel light. Sometimes I use a rock, tree, car or something else as a temporary "tripod". Using the 2 sek timer that is very easy.

So I have my routine when I take a picture: take a deep breath, press the shutter and release your breath slowly until the 2 sek-click. All my pics are taken with this technique. I'm especially pleased with the ones I took of the Spillings Hoard, hand-held in a dark museum, even if the camera I had back then was really just a rather cheap one with poor resolution. Best, w.carter-Talk 21:24, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:The Cobbler at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad overhead view.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Cobbler at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad overhead view.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! North Harbour Lysekil warm and sunny.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 09:57, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! North Harbour Lysekil cold and cloudy.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 --Verum 10:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sunbeds North Harbour Lysekil 2.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 09:57, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sunbeds North Harbour Lysekil 1.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.--Famberhorst 15:42, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sillen Norra hamnen Lysekil 2.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 06:47, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weatherworn plywood table 3.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 Weak  Support Good quality. DoF could be better. --XRay 06:48, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)