User talk:Slaunger/Archives/2015/6

Help, please…

Hello Slaunger. Please, could you fix the metadata problem (EXIF) of the photo File:Webysther 20150509172554 - Estação da Luz.jpg? Thanks! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:21, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

ArionEstar: Sure,  Done. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Here too. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:39, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

ArionEstar:  Done. -- Slaunger (talk) 04:37, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

mountain hut photo

Dear Slaunger, thank you for starring one panorama of mine. I deliberately did not fully align vertically, as in my opinion the building becomes visually top heavy. Easily done, as you can see on the right, and that image also shows what extra image material is available. Feel free to suggest a crop of yours, or whether I should point the virtual camera in a different direction or change projection. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 14:49, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi KlausFoehl, thanks for your message. I understand what you mean with top-heavy. When you have a very wide field of view (unfortunately I can not see from the EXIF what the focal length is, or how large the field of view is), a strict vertical alignment leads to a top-heavy look as you say. I think my main problem is that the entire building appears to the leaning to the right, and I think that maybe a small CCW rotation and a partial perspective correction would be an overall improvement with a reasonable tradeoff between alignment, and keeping realistic proportions.

You have very good light and colours there. I like the red and white in the Swiss flag along with the red-white shutters and the dark clouds in the background. Last summer I tried to do something along those lines as well. As a Dane, I like red and white. -- Slaunger (talk) 15:13, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Slaunger, en:Hugin (software) puts FOV info into the User comments section, but this info is wrong if you crop the image, even within hugin. Please see the uncropped image for which the FOV 123 x 118 info is correct. When I first stitched the photo, I wanted to vertically align the chimney but then decided to put the vertical near the ladder. In any case, as output from hugin it is already corrected in perspective (barrel and such), I just had elected to incline the plane for the chosen rectangular projection. And I was well below the building, even with my arm high up in the air as you can see from the shadow.

I was just staying in that hut for the night, most afternoon the sun was gone, and when the sun happened to come out, I just dashed out to get the view, leaving some supper to get cold. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 08:07, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi KlausFoehl: OK, thanks for explaining these details. I am familiar with Hugin, although nowadays I use PTGui Pro, which is very similar, but has some additional features and is a more stable (commercial) product. -- Slaunger (talk) 04:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. BTW (thread hijacking), that recurring voting patter 86-87-88 is unusual indeed. Most puzzling for me is number 86 which shows a nice scene but the horizon is heavily non-horizontal. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 12:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

How I can?

Hello. How i can to edi Template:Valued image. i want to the valued image criteria link on Persian(Farsi) language to Commons:معیارهای نگاره‌های ارزشمند Qian Nivan  ^Talk 19:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Qian.neewan: Thank you for wanting to help with translations in Farsi. I am sorry, but I have never acquired a detailed understanding of how localization works in the templates. But if you look at the last section in {{Valued image}} (at least in the English version), there are some instructions for how to make a new language version of that template. I propose to follow those instructions. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:17, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

thankyou for your answer Qian Nivan  ^Talk 14:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Avion

Wow, what a POTD ! Congrats again !--Jebulon (talk) 10:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, my dear Jebulon! Were you out at Paris Air Show last week and take some FPs as well? -- Slaunger (talk) 15:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Featured picture critique

Hi, I mean no disrespect and hope I don't come off as such, and I readily agree with all other critique presented against it, but for the Nymphaea odorata image could you tell me exactly how the petals are overexposed? I've asked some people I know and no one is saying it is overexposed. I dont see any blowout on the petals and can still see texture in them. The luminance histogram also does not indicate overexposure. The petals can be naturally a very stark white. I would like to improve so my failing to see overexposure bothers me. Thank you in advance. SanctuaryX (talk) 04:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi SanctuaryX, You are very welcome to ask such questions, and I do not see it as disrespectful at all, on the contrary. The overexposure if a little top-right of the center of the flower. It is in the green channel. I do think there is a loss of texture in that area and also in the centre yellow region of the flower. I have pinged you with an email. If you reply I can send you a screen shot from Lightroom indicating excatly where the overexposure is and how you can also see it in the histogram. With that said I am quite impressed by the picture quality of the smartphone you have used. It is, I think something of the best quality I have seen from such a device. It is very challenging though to reach FP quality with a smart phone (I am not aware it has ever happened, but I could be wrong). Normally, you need at least a decent compact camera or a DSLR to get the kind of baseline technical quality, which is expected at FPC. Photographing white flowers and e.g. snow is challenging, and I doubt that you have enough control options on your smart phone to adequately control the exposure. It is best to shoot such subjects with areas of strong relative luminance in raw format and then develop it to a jpeg with adequate lowering of highlights using adequate software such as LightRoom. I do not know if that is even pssible with your device. -- Slaunger (talk) 11:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Bot in VI

Bot in VI has not worked for several days. I reported the problem to Daniel, but maybe you know how to start the Bot. Thank you for your opinion. Have a good day. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Archaeodontosaurus. I am sorry I do not have access to the bot as such and I have no detailed insights into what may be the problem. I have written a personal email to Daniel asking him to look into it in case he has overlooked the message on his talk page. -- Slaunger (talk) 11:49, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Everything works again. You're still a rare efficiency! If you have five minutes you can look at the problem of the greek debt? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:07, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, Archaeodontosaurus. Dschwen noticed my mail, glad it is up and running again. -- Slaunger (talk) 17:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Freedom of Panorama

Hello Slaunger, In the coming days there will be much media attention for the subject Freedom of Panorama, as it is under discussion in the European Parliament. Freedom of Panorama is one of the keystones Wikipedia is built on: being able to take a picture of a public place and use it freely, like on Wikipedia. Denmark has Freedom of Panorama (for buildings), so we can use pictures of buildings on Wikipedia, but the Danish Wikipedia has no article about it and people can't read in their own language what it is about. So my question is if someone can translate Freedom of Panorama to Danish, the whole article or only the first section. Thank you! Romaine (talk) 10:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Romaine. Thanks for all the efforts you are putting into this deeply concerning proposal regarding the limitation of FoP in the EU countries. I am afraid that I am not a good translator nor do I have the time to translate it. Maybe Villy Fink Isaksen has the time and is willing to do it? -- Slaunger (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

There is a short article, da:Panoramafrihed in danish translated by Palnatoke, this translated from Sweidsh, may be Kaare, Palnatoke or MGA73 can do the translation I am not good at that. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mangrove, Petit-Canal, Grande-Terre, Guadeloupe, 2010-03-28-.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.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 19:06, 30 June 2015 (UTC)