Talk:WikiProject Photography/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Copyright Question

OK, I'll ask the first question. If you take a photograph and alter it significantly, let's say I use filters in Adobe Photoshop to make the photo look like a drawing, who does the image then belong to?

I have several old photos of which the ownership is unclear. I could use them for illustration if I were allowed to manipulate them.

DWR 05:00, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How much of the image is altered? If it is radically different that you barely can tell what the original is, then it is copyright under you, technically. Fair use of the other person's work. But I think you'll need to still give credit to the other person for the original image. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:27, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

By law if the original artist can prove that it was their work that the new work was derived from...you would loose a copy right infringment case. There is no fair use of work in that manner.--Amadscientist 00:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Lets set some standards

I think photos are very important, so this project should be important! Anyway, we need to set some standards such as (please add more):

What is the preferred copyright for peoples' uploaded photos?

I (and most others I would guess) want to upload my own pictures with the most wiki friendly copyright, which is it? Bluemoose 10:59, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

{{GFDL}}, {{cc-by-sa}}, {{cc-by-sa-2.0}} -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:46, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I just use {{PD-self}}. --jmeeter 21:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Naming conventions

I think we should standardise our file naming, maybe: country_place_whatitis_date.jpg e.g. UK_London_BigBen_April2005.jpg Bluemoose 10:59, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I see several problems with this proposal.

Collisions: same subject, date, & time. Collisions are very likely for event-related articles. Ex: USA_Chicago_St_Patrick’s_Day_Parade_March_17_2005.jpg.
Portfolio: the naming convention probably won’t match a photographer’s portfolio. This would leave him or her to track two different references for a photo – his/hers, and the wiki-name. With over 100,000 images in my portfolio, I really don’t want another name to track. I’ve uploaded over 60 photos since joining Wikipedia a couple of weeks ago (gallery), and I anticipate uploading a few hundred more before summer.
Administrative hassle. Do we really want to follow behind people and fix their work or bug them to fix their work? Photos are easily searchable with simple text searches, so I see little benefit to adding this data to the file name.

Granted uploaders should include as much image metadata as possible with each image (date, place, event/subject), but they really don’t need to do that in the file name.

Sample file name: A01 6025 640x427.jpg. It’s ugly, but I know exactly where in my portfolio I can find this image, what images I took during the same shoot, and the image size. So long as the uploader adds meta data to the image's summery information, I don't really care what someone calls it. Rklawton 05:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Photo sizes

What is the best size for photos, after all an 8MP camera is probably going to produce files a bit to big, I suggest about 2MP (approximately 1600x1200) is optimal file size/picture quality trade off. Bluemoose 10:59, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't think size limits should be restricted. Uploading high resolution photos is a good thing. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:46, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The guidelines say that as long as the file size is under 2mb, to upload the highest resolution image possible. I agree, and in my opinion the file size restriction should be relaxed, too. Don't forget that we should be able to use Wikipedia to create print versions (which has much higher requirements for resolution) of the encyclopedia, or in general to re-use its contents in any way. Brighterorange 15:33, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Generally speaking, the best photo is a photo that was taken at the camera's full megapixel rating, and then downsampled by half. For example, 2560x1920 becomes 1280x960. Downsampling increases sharpness and reduces noise significantly. This is because you're using several pixels to create a single pixel in the downsampled image. As a general rule, I don't think anything larger than 1600x1200 should be uploaded, because even today, most people don't run their monitors higher than 1024x768, and because of that they have to either A: Use their browser's auto resize, or B: Scroll the image around to see the whole thing. Clearly, we do not want this. And unless you plan on printing out 8x10s, 1600x1200 should be fine. Perhaps an outside link to the unedited file should be included for those who need a bigger version. Anyway, just a suggestion.PiccoloNamek 05:15, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

I think it's best for Wikipedia to have the highest resolution images possible. (I disagree with the above about downsampling; depends a lot on the camera). According to the image use policy images must be less than 16 megabytes. For comparison the JPEGs that come out of my 8 megapixel Canon 350D are about 3 megabytes and compress down to 1 meg with a reasonable quality JPEG (photoshop 8 or Gimp 80). Don't scale the image down! -- Nelson 17:17, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I support the idea of using 2MP. Its relatively small but if anyone needs a 4R print, it has just enough pixels ( 4" x 6" x 300ppi x 300ppi = 2.16MP) to handle the job. Besides, I'd rather cut down file sizes (hence loading time) but cutting down the size of the photo, than using more compression. btw, I'm using a hi-res LCD monitor, and even that only has 1.73MP. --218.111.245.241 21:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Old photographs?

Since there isn't a Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Photos) page, I would like to ask this question of some of the photo experts here. What should one do with old photographs that you are planning to upload to the Wikipedia? I've uploaded a few old photos from the Library of Congress. Unfortunately, like many of the pre-1923 public domain photos at the LOC, they were darkened and yellowed. Most of the photos I uploaded I have used "as is". For one of the photos, however, I cropped the image, and then converted the image to greyscale and lightened up the image, which I think gave a much better picture. I am wondering if there should be any sort of Wikipedia guidlines for this type of photo manipulation. BlankVerse ∅ 13:06, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Photo Editing

Perhaps a list containing photos that need to be edited or enhanced should be created? It would make it much easier to have them all in one spot, and many more of them would be fixed in a smaller amount of time. I propose that there should be a section on the main page (or maybe even a link to a sub-section) for Photographs that need attention.

Edit: Here's a perfect example right here. [1] Compare the new and old versions of the same file. See how much better the new one looks? We should have a group of people to deal with this kind of thing, I say! PiccoloNamek 04:32, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

All right, check this out: Wikipedia:WikiProject Photography/Photos that need attention. I've only just created it, so there are probably a lot of things that could be fixed, but it's a start, ne?

Commons

Is this WikiProject still active? If so, should it include some discussion of Commons?

There is a brief intro to commons for WPians at Wikipedia:Commons that may be of interest. pfctdayelise 12:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Let me ask in a stronger way - is there any reason why this project shouldn't be turned into a giant redir to commons? Stan 23:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Seconded. There's precious little useful content, and the broken templates at the bottom of the page make it look very unmaintained. Algae 09:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Commons is not quite ready. I think Eloquence once suggested we have commons:Portal:Photographers but I don't think commons has the portal namespace. So we could just have commons:Commons:Photographers. or commons:Commons:WikiProject Photography, although I would also think it would include animators and illustrators. It has been on my commons "to do" list for a while, but so have a few other things, so if anyone wants to jump in and set one of those up, it would be cool. Once we get it reasonably established, people here would have less reason to complain about what they'd be losing.

Also, I read that they're aiming to implement single login across all projects by March or so. that will make life easier too. pfctdayelise 10:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

This project isn't so much about managing the existing library of images (there are other projects for that), but about the contribution process. On the other hand, it's not clear that this project actually plays any useful role anyway; no recommendations, no policy, no process, no standards. (I think it could have such things, but nobody seems motivated.) Stan 19:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Copyright question

Can you claim copyright on alterations made to a public domain image? Ex: Image:Wpdms nasa topo wind river range.jpg --Hetar 04:24, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you can. Rklawton 04:29, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually if you alter a public domain image and then claim it as your own, you only have a limited amount of copy right as the original image can still be used in the same manner. If you attempt to claim your image as the basis of the other work (used from the public domain) your would be wrong. Therefore legally you may not win any copy right infringement based on the original public domain image.--Amadscientist 01:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Template:Notphoto

There's a discussion about the category associated with this recent (3 July 06) template for tagging images which are claimed to be photographs but "obviously" not. It's been used twice. I think that this project and Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration should be given some input as to what happens. Discussion here. --Dhartung | Talk 04:03, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now moved the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 13:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

portal:photography and wikiproject photography

Hello everyone at this wikiproject! If this project is active and anyone is around, please tell me so that I will know whether or not to place this wikiproject prominently. Also, if there is no still involved with this project, I was wondering if I could give it an overhaul? Thanks, -G photo 19:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm actively photographing and adding images to articles. The wikiphotoproject is a great idea, but it's poorly organized. For example, is there a "Needs Photo" tag that can somehow also relate to geographic region editors can insert into their articles? If we can provide a link in this project to an automated summary of those links by geography, then we'll have a quick-hit list active photographers can reference. Those who are active in that area or plan to visit will find a quick-hit list of stuff that needs shooting. For example, if I know I'm visiting Waco, Texas, next month, it would be great to have a list of articles in that area that need illustrating I can print out an bring with me. As it stands, I'm working from the National Register of Historic Places list because it lists articles by state, county, and city. Unfortunately, most of the places on these lists lack articles. At least they'll have images once someone rights an article (... yeah, I know, and I've created a stub or two here and there). I also realize that not everything is geographyically bound, but it would make a great start. If such lists already exist, please point me to them! Rklawton 03:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Good work! Yeah, this project is very poorly organized, and a geographical system would be nice. I will try and see what I can do. Thanks, -G photo 12:00, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Help needed

I don't know if this is the place, but I'll try. I was looking for a photo of Robert F. Engle (Nobel Prize in economics, 2001) and I found this photo [2] which, since it's been made by the White House, is free for all purposes/not covered by copyright. The thing is, I would need to crop Engle out of that picture (he's the 3rd from left, white hair, next to Bush) to produce a portrait as good as possible. But I don't really know how to do that. Can someone help? AdamSmithee 13:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

You actually want to put this over at Requested Pictures. As for the photo you're talking about ... it's a little too small for me to do much with. Hopefully, someone else will be able to help you. Nathan Wert 12:48PM Monday 10/30/2006

Technically the wrong place to post a request, but I'll see what I can do! —

Pumpkin Editor, at Large! 20:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the feed-back! I looked around, but didn't notice Requested Pictures. I know that it is low res, but... they say a low quality free photo is better than a high quality copyrighted/fair use photo. Pumpkin Editor, I'd really appreciate any help! AdamSmithee 09:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Commons Picture of the Year competition

Voting is now open at Commons to choose the finalists for Picture of the Year 2006. The voting page is at Commons:Picture of the Year/2006. All editors having at least 100 edits either here or on any Wikimedia Wiki are welcome to participate. --MichaelMaggs 07:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar discussion

Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/New Proposals is considering a new Barnstar to be given to people who make great combined contributions to Wikipedia articles and the Commons free-use image collection. Please come by and state your views. Thanks, Johntex\^talk 16:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm

no wonder there is only one film guy if he puts Kodak gold in his camera!, whats the point of that anyway, plenty of people like me use both, why separate them.

Camera clubs?

There's several articles about specific ones, but no parent article for them - but one might be useful to have. Шизомби 14:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Added my first photo

Hello everyone, I am quite happy to announce that I added my first photo today, which can be seen in the J-B Weld article. It was taken with my Nikon D80. What do you think of the photo, is it appropriate? Should I have uploaded it at a higher resolution? --jmeeter 21:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I think you set about it right – lighting, etc – but finishing could be improved.. it's abit small and there's too mauch space around the tubes. In general for this kind of pic, crop the image fairly close to the subject and then resize it; anything over 1200 pixels along its longest edge is fine. The wiki markup automatically resizes your pic for the image page and article, while leaving the higher res file there, should anyone need it. A purist might add something about shooting pristine new tubes, but I like the way these ones have come staight out of the workshop, much more enc :) mikaul^talk 17:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for gallery on Chopper (motorcycle) page

Hey, I was considering creating a gallery for the Chopper page, consisting of some new, hi-res pictures of old, classic choppers. Sure, there are good examples in the article already but 2/3 of them are poor quality. What do you guys say? --jmeeter 21:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

RAW versus raw

If you have an opinion about whether "raw" should be all caps or not, please check out Talk:Raw image format‎ and leave a comment. Dicklyon 03:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Categories: Talk archives

Talk:WikiProject Photography/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

Copyright Question

Lets set some standards

What is the preferred copyright for peoples' uploaded photos?

Naming conventions

Photo sizes

Old photographs?

Photo Editing

Commons

Copyright question

Template:Notphoto

Project Directory

portal:photography and wikiproject photography

Help needed

Wikipedia Day Awards

Commons Picture of the Year competition

Barnstar discussion

Hmm

Camera clubs?

Added my first photo

Proposal for gallery on Chopper (motorcycle) page

RAW versus raw

Wikipedia Day Awards

Views

Navigation

Interaction

Search