Talk:Pierre Bonnard

Gallery mode

We generally do not use mode packed in galleries of artworks such as these. See discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Paul_Signac#RfC_concerning_use_of_galleries and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Paul_Signac#Modification_of_standard_gallery. Coldcreation (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Respectfully, I think it's an unfortunate change. The images are too small to see the details without enlarging them one by one, and there's lots of wasted space. It looks very early Wikipedia. SiefkinDR (talk) 09:09, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

• I welcome the change; packed galleries don't work well with paintings...The painting image sizes can be adjusted in the regular galleries; each painting has more individual dignity in the regular gallery then in the jammed together packed gallery....Modernist (talk) 12:47, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Why make images smaller?

I respectfully really don't see the point of making images in an article on art smaller, instead of using packed galleries. It's much easier to compare images and to get the full effect of the work of art with a packed gallery. rather than wasting a great deal of space to make the pictues smaller. Where is the logic in this? In what way did it improve the article to make the pictures smaller and harder to see? SiefkinDR (talk) 20:18, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

• The painting images can be adjusted in the galleries, they have more essential dignity in the regular gallery that we use then in the jammed together packed gallery....Modernist (talk) 12:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@SiefkinDR: At 200px I see the images quite large on my screen. I recommend you adjust the pixel ratio on your screen. Go to Preferences in the menu bar (top of page), click on Appearance. Scroll down to File: Image size limit on file description pages: set this at 800x600px. Below that, set Thumbnail size: 220px. Hope that works. I used to have the same problem. These settings worked for me. Now images appear larger on my screen. Coldcreation (talk) 19:08, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Caption: crane, ducks, pheasant, bamboo and ferns?!

"Painted screen with crane, ducks, pheasant, bamboo and ferns (1889)"

If that's a crane, then it's the most exotic subspecies evolution has ever created. And those are frogs, not ducks. I can't tell if those free-floating foliages are of some kind of bamboo, but ferns? And the pheasant must have been left to age for far, far too long. Arminden (talk) 17:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)