User talk:Dschwen/Archive2

Ok, but..

(moved to Talk:History of Turkey)

No tripod?

I saw your comment over at Image talk:Top of Rock Cropped.jpg about taking photographs being perfectly legal as long as no tripod is used... you're kidding, right? ~MDD4696 19:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

No, why would I? You can only bring a tripod for permitted commerial photoshoots. Otherwise a security guy will stop you. But that's not that uncommon. Many places have policies like this. --Dschwen 13:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I can attest to that. I was lucky to be able to use a tripod at the Notre-Dame de Montréal Basilica - I had to sign a waiver saying I wasn't going to use it for any commercial purpose but its rare to be able to get even that much cooperation. A lot of places claim you can't use a tripod for 'health and safety' reasons though, which is probably just an excuse thats easier to justify. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 13:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Uh oh, technically this means you can only license the picture as non-commercial not cc-by-sa or gfdl, doesn't it? --Dschwen 13:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know - does it? ;) My understanding of what I was signing was that I couldn't use to photo to profit commercially, and I'm not. cc-by-ca and gfdl are not commercial... Regardless, they were happy to let people take photos but I suppose they didn't want to lose business on their postcard sales. ;) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 10:47, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I like that interpretation. These license technicalities are a slippery slope which I usually try to avoid. Lets just try not to wake any sleeping dogs :-) --Dschwen 10:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not an attorney, but I think you should consult one if you're going to violate a contract by releasing such images under a license which permits commercial use. I've discussed a similar subject with other wikipedians in the past: "Consider a 100+ yr old painting hanging in a gallery which forbids photography. A dedicated wikipedian sneaks in with a camera and takes a picture. Can this picture be free content?" The overall feeling is that, yes, in such a situation the image can be free content. Your situation is somewhat different because you signed something... and the results depend on what the paper you've signed says. In the future, please don't sign such a paper.  :) We should get together and draft a document to get on Wikimedia Foundation letterhead which we can provide in such a situation. The document would explains the purpose of Wikimedia and that it's a charitable non-profit blah blah... Extol our virtues enough that they won't bother to complain that we permit commercial use. :) --Gmaxwell 02:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

These issues have been discussed on the german Wikipedia with regards to german law (my country of residence). The gist is, publication on Wikipedia is non-commercial, with the license I'm deciding not to put any further restricions on commercial use, and I'm not liable if a third party violates other restrictions. Only the third party will be liable if monetary gain is accumulated. I have no gain, hence I won't have pain. --Dschwen 03:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Subject of Blown-out highlights.jpg

Hi. I noticed your image Image:Blown-out highlights.jpg. I'm interested in the subject. Is the original image used in an aritcle somewhere? Or could you tell me what is going on - they are flattening something?

By the way Image:CH Gotthard Basistunnel Amsteg 1.jpg is awesome, if only more tunnels could have images. Cheers, Commander Keane 12:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Long talk page

Greetings! Your talk page is getting a bit long in the tooth - please consider archiving your talk page (or ask me and I'll archive it for you). Cheers! BD2412 T 23:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

New York Pictures

I just wanted to leave you a message letting you know that I must commend you on your pictures of the New York skyline. They are absolutely breathtaking! Great job! :-) -WikiFiend90 05:44, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

A question about IR filters

I've a Digimax A7 and I am excited about getting an IR filter. Well, the first thing I needed to know that how sensitive my camera was to IR-filters, and I did a remote control test, in which I saw the light very brightly, so I think that IR photography would work fine with the camera. The thing that bothers me is: how do I install it on the camera, in practice (I hate it when there's no info on the internet about that..)? And why are the sizes that I found on an online store only 44mm or so, minimum. I presume it is mounted on the objective, obviously, but my objective is much smaller, 37mm to be precise? Thank you in advance :) --nlitement ^[talk] 23:15, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I don"t know about your camera in particular, but usually you do not screw it on the camera objective if tit is a compact camera. For my Powershot I have an adapter tube that slides all the over the objective like a housing. There should be some for the digimax as well. For some cameras, if there is no adapter tube mount there are magnetic adapter tubes or glue on adapters. Otherwise you could alwasys make one from cardboard. It'll just have to be very lighttight. --Dschwen 04:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

miniatlas

Fantastic job on the wikiminiatlas! thats just amazing how cool it is :) --Astrokey44 02:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, thanks a bunch! My first barnstar I'm actually excited. You should know that the german version is actually even better since they seem to have added more metadata to their geocoordinates (especially population sizes, which are represented by different map symbols on wikiminiatlas). --Dschwen 05:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Ferrofluid_in_magnetic_field

Just in case you're interested, I've shot a number of pictures of ferrofluid. I tried to take the picture you suggested, but it has an annoying and messy habbit of doing nothing until the magnet is close enough to cause the fluid to leap up to it... I'm sure it would be possible, but it is almost three days later and I'm still trying to clean up the mess. In any case, I thought you might enjoy the pictures I did get. --Gmaxwell 03:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Those are some awesome pictures, especially as fas as aesthetics go. Would it be possible to put the magnet on a netral surface (white paper), put a glassplate with FF on top and choose the angle so that you stil see the magnet through the glass, but also a faint reflection of the FF blob? --Dschwen 03:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

NYC Featured Pano

Just thought I'd ask, as it's an absolutely amazing image but looks like it's been severely scaled down, even in the high-res: What's the highest resolution copy of [1] that you have, if indeed you have one above the ~4000x1000 version, and can I get a copy of the file for said high-res version, if it exists? Thanks! 130.132.25.190 15:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

That was me. Oops. Sorry. Suntiger 15:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It is not scaled down that much. Tipods are not allowed on Top of the Rock (except for commercial shoots), so trust me, you are not missing out on anything here :-). But I can look for a raw stitch if you are still interested. --Dschwen 15:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

If you've got one, and you've got time to find it, yes, I'm interested *grins* Suntiger 20:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, do they tell you why no tripods, or do they just say it? Suntiger 20:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Does it work inline?

Hi. I really like the Wikiminiatlas2 extension in {{coor title dm}}, but a lot of articles have coordinates inline using {{coor dm}} instead. Is it possible to add the miniatlas to those too? Thanks. --Scott Davis ^Talk 09:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

That is possible and I was in fact planning on adding this feature within th next week or two. Bear with me, I'm fairly busy right now. --Dschwen 04:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Hummingbird Hawk-moth FPC

Hi! You supported the Hummingbird Hawk-moth FPC (like everyone else who commented), but HighInBC uploaded an edit that absolutely no-one commented on. I can't promote the image without knowing which version to promote, so now I have to ask everyone which version they prefer. Would you mind specifying which image you are supporting? Thanks. Raven4x4x 09:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Bay Area get-together

Well, I think there's been attempts at them before, but they seem to have never really gotten off the ground. I'm certainly interested if one starts up... how long are you in the Bay Area for? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 16:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

SVG

I didn't find it very polite that you invited people to join in a discussion on the pros and cons of SVG, then reverted my contributions. But hey. Stevage 18:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Uhm, this was not intended to be a discussion on the pros and cons, but as the title states an explanation of the SVG format use. Discussion can take place on the discussion page. But I honestly don't get why anyone would so wehemently oppose SVG. An I haven't heard any substantial arguments either. Your rebuttals can all easily be answerd.--Dschwen 01:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't "vehemently oppose it". Recall that the original trigger for all this was people voting no on a FPC because it wasn't in SVG. I'm just saying that at this stage, SVG isn't that great, and that everything that can be done with the SVG format can also be achieved with PNG or others. Stevage 12:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but the whole point for this outcry is: Yes, it is that great, and No, not everything SVG does can be done with PNG. Why can't you see that? I provided rational arguments and answered your rebuttals, still you are claiming your old viewpoint. --Dschwen 15:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I know that you feel strongly about SVG, and I can't deny that it is by far the best format for the job, but I can't help but feeling that by demanding all FPC diagrams be in SVG you might be expecting too much. I have next to no knowledge about image editors, convertors and the like, but you said it yourself; "The PNG->SVG conversion is a non trivial step, involving an insane amount of manual work". If that is the case, objecting to an existing diagram does not sound to me like an actionable objection. What is the creator supposed to do, start again in Inkscape from scratch? I certainly respect and admire your intentions, but until more of the major image editors support SVG, or until there is a way to convert from PNG to SVG, I think you'll have to understand that not all diagrams will come in SVG. Raven4x4x 08:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm realist enough to know that. But I'll keep my oppose on the valley of mexico pic, at full size parts are very blocky, like it was drawn at half the size and then blown up. For Wikipedias finest I expect more. --Dschwen 14:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

As someone who supports SVG you may want to review this FP delisting nomination, an SVG map of India. Actually, the sub-page isn't linked properly, so see the bottom of WP:FPC. I voted keep. Outriggr 05:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Pi Unrolled

You commented on this animated GIF's Featured Picture nomination. I'm considering a redesign to incorporate concerns raised but I need more clarity. Please see User talk:John Reid/Pi/Unrolled#FP?. Thank you. John Reid 08:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments about Horseshoe Bend lighting

I don't know if you saw it, because the nomination got archived... but I replied to your comments about the lighting/colors of my Horseshoe Bend image. You can see it on the archived discussion. -- Moondigger 14:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out. The three pictures which you linked to look perfectly natural. Yet when I compare them with the bend pic it still looks wierd. I didn't nescessarily imply that the picture is completely doctored, but maybe the contrast changes put this one over the edge for me. You wouldnt happen to have a completely unmodified version, just out of curiosity? --Dschwen 14:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Comparing the pics again I think I can specify what makes it look weird. The green plants are to green (compared with the greens in the three other pics) and the yellows are a bit overaccented. --Dschwen 14:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: doctoring. Any manipulation applied to the photo is intended to bring it in line with my memory of how the place actually looked when I was there. In this particular case, I adjusted contrast and sharpened it, ant that was about it. One of the striking things about the river when viewed from above is how green it looks -- the only place in the desert where a steady supply of water exists is along the banks of the river. So plants right next to its banks are lush and green, and the water is tinted green by all the plants that grow under the water. The plants in the other photos I posted aren't nearly as green in the photos or in real life -- because they have no steady supply of water. Whatever falls from the sky during the spring 'rainy' season is basically all they get for the entire year. Consequently, they look a lot less lush.

I will post a completely undoctored version for you to check out when I have a chance, prepared exactly as I prepared the sample photos. -- Moondigger 14:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Plane pic

Hey, that plane picture has been renomininated. Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Giant planes comparison - and this times it's svg! Woop - Jack (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I noticed, and apart from the mentioned fixable glitches I really like it. I opened it in Inkscape and the Objects even have labels, if you drag a plane around Inkscape tells you the model :-) --Dschwen 16:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Timeline of the Roman Empire

What are your plans for this? Is it close to being completed? --The Transhumanist 10:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I like it this way. Of course I'm open to ideas. More work is needed at Timeline of the Roman Kingdom and Timeline of the Roman Republic. --Dschwen 10:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

GMap

I'm trying out your gmap extension, but my version of mediawiki (svn trunk :)) seems to not work with your extension (or the other way around :)) Henna 22:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Fatal error: Cannot access protected property OutputPage::$mParserOptions in /media/hda2/home/fboonen/public_html/ext/gmaps/gmaps.php on line 114

Henna 22:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey Henna, which version of Mediawiki are you using? I suspect the error is indeed due to a version incompatibility. My guess is that I abused the parser functions (so that wiki markup can be used in the bubbles) in a way that doesn't work in new MW versions. Please tell me the version you are using and I'll try to upgrade my own installation and see if the problem is fixambel. --Dschwen 07:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

as I said, the latest from the subversion repository (same as wikimedia projects, which is 1.8alph I think). my guess is similar, but understanding your code&mediawikicode would proably take me far much longer then you :) Henna 10:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed that. I just checked out the latest stable Subversion. Special:Version says MediaWiki: 1.7.1 (r16466) and GMap runs fine. I'll check the bleeding edge next (I actually wanted to check it first, but of course I installed the wrong version...). --Dschwen 13:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Found and fixed the bug. Get the 0.2.1 release from my webpage. Thanks for pointing it out to me! --Dschwen 14:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thx, it looks wonderfull: http://hekla.rave.org/cnt/Germany_2006

What would be great is being able to attach a name to different lines. Henna 07:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it would, but as far as I know the Google Maps API doesn't support this feature (unless they recently added it). --Dschwen 15:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

San Gennaro

I didn't toss it out "for my picture party", I replaced it because it did not provide as clear a view of either the Festival in general or that one type of food stand in particular as the ones I inserted. I intended no offense, and if you insist on keeping it in, fine by me. :-) Nightscream 00:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Spanish disco of Deming

Actually, I am a New Mexico native and have been to Deming several times, although I admit it is probably not very relevant. --Pravit 02:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I went through NM two years ago, Carlsbad Caverns, White Sands, VLA. Great scenery. Anyways, tagging my edit as reverting subtle vandalism was a bit exagerated, especially judging from your list of other contributions. The german version of the Deming article is a cut down translation of the english one and the disco part sounded extremely ridiculous there (something like a well preserved disco, and it was phrased like they were talking about a fossil), so I followed up on it. --Dschwen 07:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Pi-unrolled

I recently cranked out a new and greatly improved version of Pi-unrolled.gif and (why not?) nominated it for FP. Since you commented on the nomination of the previous version of the same graphic, I'd like to invite you to comment on the new nomination. Thank you. John Reid 04:20, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!

I was looking through your huge gallery, and thought that you definitely deserve this:

Oh wow, thanks a bunch! I'm glad you like my pictures. :-) --Dschwen 22:47, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow. Wow. WOW! Really, I must pay my respects to such a great photographer! I was mesmerized by those hallucinating, hypnitizing, freaking awesome high-resolution photos! You, my friend, are a genius! And I must congratulate you on that. IberianWolf 23:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Jaguar images

Excuse me, my pictures are absolutely not of a stuffed jaguar. [sarcasm]Thanks for not assuming good faith on my part[/sarcasm] and possibly sabotaging my nomination. Cburnett 13:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for using sarcasm tags there. [sarcasm]I totally wouldn't have gotten it without them[/sarcasm]. What does this have to do with good faith? It would have been a matter of assume good faith if you had declared the jaguar alive before and I had called you a liar instead of assuming that you just cannot tell a stuffed animal from a live one ;-). Anyway, I'll change my comment now that you [sarcasm again]politely[/sarcasm again] pointed it out. --Dschwen 15:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

So you go to the zoo to see dead, stuffed animals?

Living animals at a zoo is so mind-numbingly obvious that assuming it's stuffed is just as good as calling me a liar because I didn't explicitly declare it alive. The point of WP:FAITH is to prevent negative escalation based on foregone assumptions about another. Since you assumed incompetance (my word for not declaring it alive) on my part and assumed the negative (you did oppose and conclude with "Not by me."), WP:FAITH very much applies. Instead of opting for inquiring, "Wow, that doesn't look real. Is that thing stuffed?" you took the high-and-mighty position of "Oppose ... Not by me."

I really have no interest in lecturing about "what is good faith" but it seems quite clear to me (and from my position) that had you asked before emphatically retoring libelously (if that's even a valid suffix) then I would not have taken offense. And that's what WP:FAITH is intended to prevent.

And thank you for clearing up your vote (I would have said that even if you still opposed it for other reasons). Cburnett 17:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

This was funny an hour ago. Now it is getting really annoying. I didn't see the Zoo remark in the caption, ok? In your answer you do everything which you accuse me of, you lecture me and you assume bad faith on my part. --Dschwen 19:15, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

"top of the rock"

I just wanted to leave you a note saying that I absolutely adore the picture you've contributed, the "top of the rock" panorama of new york. It is my profound hope that photographers such as yourself are actively helping those around you learn to make such marvelous compositions. I fear photography is becoming a lost art.

Again, thank you so much for the beautiful picture. ... aa:talk 17:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! There are a couple of pages which involve discussion and criticism of pictures (not all constructive though). A good place to start would be the new Commons:Photography critiques‎ page. --Dschwen 11:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Gull ca usa.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! NauticaShades 10:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

On a side note, thanks for catching that pic in my FPC section.

Sure thing :-) --Dschwen 16:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Dschwen, thank you for your help yesterday in regards to categories, lists and redirects. Roaming27 22:52, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for contributing and have fun :-) --Dschwen 23:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Featured picture promotion!

This one is an old one:

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Tree example IR.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! howcheng {chat} 16:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

In addition:

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Tree example IR.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on November 27, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations!

Gottingen picture

Dschwen, I have to agree with your nomination of that picture. It's a pretty good panoramic view of Gottingen. There seems to be a fair amount of opposition, but I'm just going to agree with your interpretation. --SunStar Net 11:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The FP Blues

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kwakwaka'wakw big house

I am glad you have nominated your picture for FP. I knew when I saw it that it would meet a mixture of support and opposition. Please don't be discouraged, I have been through the same thing with the only image I have that I thought even had a chance(to the right). It did not do well, but got some support.

Of course, a wonderful image with many great aspects is easily dismissed by a patch of overblown sky, a badly placed shadow or a bit of distortion(in your case unavoidable).

I guess my point is that it is exceedingly difficult to get an image passed there and that you should keep trying. One of my personal wikipedia goals is to take atleast one FP. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words :-). FPC is a constant up and down and I kicked it several times from my watchlist just to come crawling back ;-). --Dschwen 17:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

If you look at my contribution history to FP, you will see I have left and came back a few times myself. I really dig photography, I just have a lame camera with a very limited dynamic range. I am looking into HDR photography, and I am going to try to redo to image:Kwakwaka'wakw big house.jpg image and nominate it again. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

That's definetely an interesting subject. I'd try some shots at different times of the day. The light seems to come too much from the side. Do you have a polarizer? That might help in getting the sky a bit darker. For panos and also HDR check out Hugin (software). --Dschwen 18:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

My camera does not support filters(unless I use tape hehe), it really sucks. The building faces northeast and gets very sharp sunlight from a low angle. I may have to wait for a partially cloudy day when a cloud has passed the sun but a blue sky is in the background. As for different times of day, I think problems with moving shadows be to much of a hassle. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually it does support filters, with the Canon LA-DC52F adapter (should be about 20-30$). I found the similar solution for my camera to be a great investment. --Dschwen 18:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Neat! HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

If you are interested in HDR photography I have been playing around with it and have posted the results on my personal wiki. It lets you get amazing results without any special equipment(other than computer and digitized images). HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:25, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice! Actually I have something similar :-) on my page here and on the front page. --Dschwen 14:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)