User talk:Diliff/Archive3

Ahoy!

Just letting you know that I'm incredibly impressed by all of your photography. Everything is so full of life. I myself am an amateur photographer, but I still have a lot to learn. Your photography is a huge inspiration and the fact that you contribute it to wikipedia is just that much more admirable. I was wondering if I could ask you how you had the opportunity to travel so much, seems like an incredible journey!

-- Ph33rspace 04:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image Gallery Template

No problem. I was struggling trying to come up with a pleasing layout, when Ravedave suggested I check out the sample "problem" images on Wikipedia:What_is_a_featured_picture?. I modified that layout slightly and that's what I use now. BTW, nice images in your gallery. I've seen many of them before, of course, but they make more of an impression grouped together and nicely formatted. -- Moondigger 23:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulation!

your pictures are spectacular! Which use material? --Luc Viatour 11:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Munich - Kaufingerstraße street art - August 2006.jpg

Hi Diliff,
Impressive lighting/dynamic range - exposure bracket? Or some kind of flash unit? --Fir0002 22:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My wiki picture contributions

Wow. I'm even more in awe now. They are simply amazing. Super kudos. :)

Yes, I had a bit of a fit of pique yesterday and made them all 'minimalist' in, you know, futile protest. :) There are archive links on my talk page on the top right hand corner - above the heading line.

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 02:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not like the process for Solar_eclips_1999

afflicted for my English

The image of origin was on Common for all and now it is not any more that for “EN”

The licence of origin maintaining more than “CC”

Information was multiple on the catch of sight and the work of the image left” 1. Technique used in Photoshop to increase ....

And another thing to which that I would have appreciated: An email to Luc Viatour would be appreciated too.

Does your filter photoshops justify the loss of all that? --Luc Viatour 05:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eclipse 1999 (original common)
you version (en.wikipedia)

answer:

Please, replace new image in common for all user (not only English)

replace all licence for new image

replace technical information for new image

It is more comprehensible? --Luc Viatour 10:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

answer:

It is ok for description, thank you

How to move it on common the new image? --Luc Viatour 11:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

answer:

It is perfect! Thank you and sorry for the disturbance and my English! --Luc Viatour 12:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow.

I'd like to congratulate you on your excellent work in photography. A user on IRC pointed me to your userpage, and I was blown away. Keep up the awesome work (and associated travel :-)). — Werdna talk criticism 11:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FPC nomination

I've nominated your image, Image:Georgia Aquarium Tropical Tank.jpg for FPC, at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Georgia Aquarium Tropical Tank. And as everyone has already said, good work on the photography. Excellent images. --Tewy 04:01, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Salzburg panorama.jpg

Diliff,

Is there any chance that you'd be willing to license your images under the CC-by-SA 1.0 license? I mainly contribute to Wikitravel and came across the aforementioned image which I think would be perfect for our Salzburg guide. Also, if you'd be willing to relicense images we could make great use of them and I'd be extremely thankful. -- Sapphire 02:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. It seems to me that you've traveled quite extensively and I'd like to personally encourage you to check out Wikitravel and see if contributing there would intrest you. -- Sapphire 02:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that mate

Its not really a bot its just a few buttons I press when editing pages to clear up formating, thansk for pointing out the problem. -- JiMoTh Y^TALK 11:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adventure cats

I reverted your addtions of the 'point and click adventure games' category. The reason is that you put that in 'series titles' that included even non-point and click games. This cat should go to individual game articles (eg. Space Quest 6: The Spinal Frontier instead of Space Quest. Pictureuploader 07:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POTD

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Versailles Chapel - July 2006 edit.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on September 30, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howch e ng {chat} 17:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Panorama template

Pengo came up with a panorama template which you can see in use e.g. in Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego. I also found a similar, but simpler template in the German Wikipedia, which I localized as Template:Wide image and put into usage in this revision of the Frankfurt article. I think this kind of presentation might do a lot to improve both the visibility and the usability of panorama pictures -- what do you think?--Eloquence * 04:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talented

Your a very talented photographer. Nice work. 194.46.249.183 20:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very Nice

I respect you for your extrodinary talent for taking photographs and panoramics. There is no one else like you on the English Wikipedia, and I think I speak for all Wikipedians when I say, Dont stop taking photographs.

P.S. Check my gallery out and tell me your opinion on my photography.

Koolgiy 02:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture promotion!

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Clock Tower - Palace of Westminster, London - September 2006.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! howch e ng {chat} 18:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Clock Tower - Palace of Westminster, London - September 2006.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on January 3, 2007, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howch e ng {chat} 17:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Central Terminal

Hi. I reverted your removals, since the caption is correct. The flag was hung after 9/11, in honor. I saw it (& see it every day, it hangs right in the middle of the Main concourse). If you feel strongly that the flag picture should not be there, bring it up on the discussion page. It IS a currently-defining statement, & is by no means isolated. Keo 08:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your camera

Please tell me your camera model, the focus is just amazing. I'm going to have to change camera, I'm not happy with the focus of non-DSLRs (I assume yours is a DSLR) Are you happy with it? (daft question!)- Adrian Pingstone 16:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I too would be interested to know what camera you use - Schrandit 19:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! - Schrandit 20:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Panorama & Panorama simple

G'day Diliff,

OK, I've put in some html code, so it shouldn't sit on top of existing images now. (let me know if it's still having trouble, cause it looked fine before too for me)

As for IE, i'm not sure why IE doesn't work and haven't had a chance to fiddle with it yet. In the meantime you can use the {{Panorama simple}} template instead, which works across browsers but doesn't look as pretty (i.e. like the Wide image template), but uses the same syntax as the Panorama template so it'll be easier to change back when/if that one gets fixed. (I've changed Royal Crescent to use it now). I've also put a notice up on {{panorama}} to warn of its lack of workingness on IE too. Hopefully i'll get a chance to get it working sometime (or maybe someone else will). —Pengo ^{talk · contribs} 23:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another nomination

I've nominated your image, Image:Jersey City Skyline Jan 2006.jpg for FPC at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Jersey City Skyline. You know the drill. --Tewy 01:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Over the past few months, while writing the Wikipedia Signpost Features & Admins column, I have noticed absolutely fantastic featured pictures. Little did I know that you are responsible for a great deal of them! The Clock Tower was especially great. Now, I don't think one barnstar is enough, so I'm going to give you two! Have these two Photographer's Barnstars!

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		I, Ian Manka, award you this barnstar for having fantastic, high-resolution featured pictures. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 03:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		I, Ian Manka, award you this barnstar for your fantastic featured pictures, because (for you) one barnstar isn't enough for the great work you have done! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 03:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have a great day! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 03:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Circles

Hey there! Would you mind revisiting Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Villarceau circles to see if you support the newer version of the image? Thanks for your comments! --HappyCamper 14:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright questions

Hi there. I've been an admirer of your pics for a while. Although they are nothing like your own, i wanted to upload my own to wikipedia but was not sure on the copyright type i should chose. I took the photos and would preferably only want them to be used here on wikipedia. What are my choice of copyright on the upload page. and what does this offer me. Hope you have the time to help. Many thanks --Merbabu 13:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you do..?

Hey, I was looking through your impressive collection of featured pictures and it struck me that you travel a hell of a lot. You're 27 and you've been all these amazing places! What do you do for a living? drumguy8800 C T 07:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sells photos maybe? he he --Merbabu 23:39, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stitching

Hello, User:Howcheng suggested that I contact you about a question I have: What programs should I use for stitching? I've used Photoshop...tough for skies especially. I tried Autopano-Hugin-Enblend with limited success. I would just like to know how to improve my image:

. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated:)Buphoff 06:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you So much for your recommendation of PTGui. The program is great. I am shocked at how well the stitching is already on my first pass.

Featured picture promotion

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:US Capitol Building at night Jan 2006.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! KFP (talk | contribs) 07:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:US Capitol Building at night Jan 2006.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on December 10, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howch e ng {chat} 17:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Spitfire pic

Hi,

In case you're interested in doing a bit of re-editing, I've uploaded the original RAW file for the Spitfire pic here [1]. It'd be kinda nice if the featured pic (which I hope will be your edit) is properly processed from the RAW rather than an already compressed JPEG. I am slightly disappointed with the amount of noise in the original. I tend to default to ISO 200 since the amount of noise usually seems equal to that at ISO 100, with the added benefit of faster shutter speeds in lower light situations, but maybe I should have used ISO 100 since there was plenty of light that day. Thanks also for your comments on the Spitfire talk page [2] -- I'm 22 and started taking photos on a 35mm camera maybe 15 years ago, though I am a pretty amateur photographer really, going to the airshow and taking the Spitfire pics was about the first time I used the camera in about six months! That said I enjoy studying technical manuals, and am a professional computer geek, so generally good at technical things, which possibly helps ;) Thanks a lot.

Sorry you're right. I took a lot of photos that day! The correct one should be [3]. Unfortunately there's a small amount of sensor dust, but even I managed to Photoshop that out, so hopefully it won't be too much of an issue. Thanks. chowells 12:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FPC Promotion

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Washington Monument Dusk Jan 2006.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! Fir0002 00:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another one for you collection! --Fir0002 00:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Washington Monument Dusk Jan 2006.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on December 24, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howch e ng {chat} 17:14, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Baths

Hi Diliff,
Just wondering if you read my comment, re:field of view. What focal length were the individual shots taken at? --Fir0002 11:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't want to rush you or anything, but do you reckon I can get an answer? --Fir0002 07:34, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please? --Fir0002 22:36, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doh

Well, I've had a bad case of photograph's block this year. I've taken only one good picture all year long. And not only that, but my camera is old and very close to failing. The reason I used to have so many FPs is that I had a huge back log of older pictures that I could use, but now I've used all of the good ones up. (Well, a couple of them were freshly taken, but a lot of them are old.) And not only that, but a severe lack of new locations is also harming my output. I've taken a picture of everything around here! :( PiccoloNamek 14:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I live just outside of Atlanta, GA. ;) PiccoloNamek 17:18, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture promotion!

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Roman Baths in Bath Spa, England - July 2006 edit3.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. howch e ng {chat} 18:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Roman Baths in Bath Spa, England - July 2006 edit3.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on January 7, 2007, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howch e ng {chat} 17:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Milford Sound

Hi, unfortunately I do not have the original pictures any more (there is a small chance that they will be on some backup medium, but right now I do not have time to search...). Therefore I cannot re-stitch them or sent it to you for reprocessing. It was one of my first pictures that I stitched and this is probably one of the reasons why the stitch is far from perfect (BTW: your pictures are awesome). --Maros 20:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jaguar images

I appreciate the — once-upon-a-time — support but my pictures are absolutely not of a stuffed jaguar. Cburnett 13:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radcliffe Camera, Oxford

I think I can identify the main reasons of my aesthetical reserves concerning your picture. Buldings are normally conceived to be seen from below (or, at least, not very far from the ground), not from above. And when this happens they often seem strange, weird. That's why your interpretation of Radcliffe Camera looks wrong to me. The effect is obviously more pronounced when the object is looked from a short distance, which is the case. But there is a solution: if you take a series of pictures from different positions, you can reconstruct an orthogonal view of the building using photogrametric techniques. This is a joke, of course. But you are a perfectionist and Oxford is not that far from London... Greetings, Alvesgaspar 09:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Picture

You voted against The Barred Owl on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/BarredOwl because of its small size, but a larger picture has now been uploaded. Thanks Dark jedi requiem 17:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Occan's Razor

What do you mean by "assuming good faith for now"? That I may have manipulated the image by pasting some translucent silhouette in a photo of the tunnel? With what purpose? Well, Diliff, believe it or not I took this photo when I was 20 and I can still remember how I did it. The man was an absolute stranger and I pointed the camera by instinct, towards the southern entrance of the tunnel (but I can't remeber in what direction he was moving). That tunnel still exists in the small village of S. Martinho do Porto, in the west coast of Portugal. This was not the only "contre-jour" I took at the occasion. I still have another one of a friend, but not as interesting as this one. Did you ever heard about Occan's Razor? -- Alvesgaspar 22:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC) PS. I was thinking of looking again for the old negative in order to try getting a better resolution. I'm not so sure now that I should do that.[reply]

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...

You should see this :-). --Tewy 23:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture promotion!

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Amsterdam Canals - July 2006.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! howch e ng {chat} 18:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Amsterdam Canals - July 2006.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on January 25, 2007, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howch e ng {chat} 00:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture promotion!

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Radcliffe Camera, Oxford - Oct 2006.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thanks! --KFP (talk | contribs) 20:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello yet again,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Radcliffe Camera, Oxford - Oct 2006.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 27, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-01-27. howcheng {chat} 20:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Diliff,

You nominated my picture of a hummingbird hawk-moth for FPC. First of all, thanks a lot, that was my first featured picture, so it's very encouraging.

I would like your advice for another picture I took : Image:IC Polistes gallicus.JPG. Do you think this picture should be nominated as a featured picture? It's one of my favourites, but I don't have as much experience in photography as most people at WP:FPC seem to. Also, I don't have any fancy softwares to enhance it. Could you give me your opinion?

Thanks a lot, and congratulations for all those excellent featured pictures! IronC hris | (talk) 18:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the most wonderful pictures. You are an amazing photographer. 24.5.197.74 20:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Natural History Museum London Jan 2006.jpg

Hi Diliff, firstly I've never congratulated you on all your fantastic architectural (and other photographs) that now grace wikipedia. I was so taken with Image:Natural History Museum London Jan 2006.jpg that I nominated it for WP:FPC. I hope you don't mind (although I'd understand that receiving yet another FP might be a bore......) cheers. --Mcginnly | Natter 18:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Caprock Canyons State Park

I've uploaded a better edit attempting to address concerns. I'd appreciate a review of the edited version! Thanks. drumguy8800 C T 18:04, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Windsor Castle Upper Ward Quadrangle Corrected 2- Nov 2006.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! NauticaShad e s 16:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POTD

Hi Diliff,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Windsor Castle Upper Ward Quadrangle Corrected 2- Nov 2006.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 5, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-03-05. howcheng {chat} 17:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Diliff! Thanks for your interest and comments. Six months ago both Wikipedia and my film scanner were new to me; and I was a bit overwhelmed at the time. I recall looking at a few Wikipedia photos by others and seeing "personal photograph by..." in the summary, and I thought that that was the normal procedure. Putting more detail in the filename (instead of the summary) was the result of someone vandalizing the summary section of my Bora Bora shot, and of my realizing that filenames are more difficult to alter. But, I agree, there could be more description in the summary section. Best regards

Congrats

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:30 St Mary Axe - The Gherkin from Leadenhall St - Nov 2006.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! NauticaShad e s 11:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again (I hope you aren't getting sick of these),

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:30 St Mary Axe - The Gherkin from Leadenhall St - Nov 2006.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 11, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-03-11. howcheng {chat} 17:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture promotion!

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Black-headed Gull - St James's Park, London - Nov 2006.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thanks! KFP (talk | contribs) 22:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Black-headed Gull - St James's Park, London - Nov 2006.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 18, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-03-18. howcheng {chat} 17:23, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your photo of the British Museum Reading Room

I just wanted to say how much I love your photo of the Reading Room :D. I think it's really peaceful and pretty and everytime I see it, it makes me smile! Farosdaughter 23:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another FP

An image you edited, Image:Fredmeyer edit 1.jpg, has just become a Featured Picture. Well done once more. Raven4x4x 04:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

Hi Diliff,
You'd probably be interested in this --Fir0002 09:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Notre-Dame de Montréal Basilica Jan 2006.jpg

Hello Diliff,

I just wanted to say that I have taken the message you sent to the people of the Basilica in Montréal and translated it into French. However you may want to run the message through some other Francophones. I would advise the French Wikipedia Embassy which can be found by clicking here.

The original message was (to compare with French):

To whom it may concern

I am an amateur photographer who visited the Basillica in January 2006. I asked to take photos with a tripod and was requested to sign a document that 

I believe prohibited me from commercial use of the resulting photos. I had and have no intentions of selling the photo, however, I was very pleased 

with the result of the photo and uploaded it to Wikipedia, a free online encyclopedia. I uploaded it under a licence that states it is my own personal 

work but it, or derivatives of it, can be used for any purpose. Therefore, it has been pointed out that I may have broken the terms of the document 

that I signed. 

Could you please confirm exactly what restrictions there are on my photograph and whether you believe it should be removed from Wikipedia?

For the record, the article on the Basillica is here: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notre-Dame_de_Montr%C3%A9al_Basilica

The photograph in question is here: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Notre-Dame_de_Montr%C3%A9al_Basilica_Jan_2006.jpg

Wikipedia is commited to ensuring that no laws and will be forced to remove the image if  it is determined that its use is in breach of the document I 

signed. That would be a shame, but I understand your need to control commercial photography inside the Basillica.

Regards,

David

This translates to:


Cher monsieur ou madame,

Je suis un photographe amateur qui a visité la Basilique en janvier de 2006. J’ai fait la demande de prendre des photos avec un trépied et on m’a 

demandé de signer un document qui – je crois – m’interdisait a utiliser ces photos afin de gagner de l’argent par des mesures commerciaux. Je n’avais 

et je n’ai pas l’intention de vendre la photo, mais, comme j’étais très content avec le résultat, je l’ai importé sur Wikipédia, l’encyclopédie libre 

de sur Internet. Je l’ai importé avec un licence d’image disant que l’image est mon œuvre, mais que tout autre version(s) modifiée(s) peuvent être 

utilisés pour quoi que ce soit. Donc, on m’a informé qu’il est possible que j’aurai agi contre les termes du document que j’ai signé. Pourriez-vous 

confirmez quelles restrictions se trouvent-ils sur mon image, et si vous penser si l’image devrait être enlevé de Wikipédia ?

Pour votre information, l’article sur la Basilique se trouve ici :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notre-Dame_de_Montr%C3%A9al_Basilica (en Anglais)

Et ici, en français : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilique_Notre-Dame_de_Montr%C3%A9al 

L’image concernée se trouve ici :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Notre-Dame_de_Montr%C3%A9al_Basilica_Jan_2006.jpg

Wikipédia est très active à être sur que nul image soit contre la loi de quelconque pays et elle [Wikipédia] sera obligée de enlever l’image du site si 

elle [l’image] va contre ce qui disait le document. Ça serait dommage de l’enlever, mais je comprends que vous devez contrôler la photographie 

commerciale dans la basilique.


Je vous remercie de votre compréhension, madame, monsieur, et acceptez mes salutations distinguées,

David

Please run this message through to the Embassy and have it checked with at least two other users.

Hope this has helped,

Booksworm Talk to me! 21:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Again, I just have two things to say:

I have (finally) fixed that stupid message above and now it is ready for sending to the people of the Basilica
I had a look at some of your pictures and MY GOD they are good! Therfore, I give you:

The Photographer's Barnstar for amazing photographic works Booksworm

Booksworm Talk to me! 15:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I'm curious why the flag in Image:US Capitol Building at night Jan 2006.jpg appears extremely blurred and pale. Is it because of strong wind? --Brand спойт 02:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Capitol Picture

Do you use photoshop for your pictures? They are really good! B e a rly 541 08:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not a photographer. B e a rly 541 23:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Pictures

I enjoy some of your photographs. Keep them coming. Ryannus 22:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last change

Thanks for adding the 100/2.8 Macro to the Canon Portrait Lenses page; it's used as one pretty often, and the redlink will encourage someone two create an article.

By the way, you're photos are amazing. Very nice work! Congratulations, you should be proud. ( I would. )

ForrestCroce 03:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tower Bridge

Firstly I'd like to compliment and thank you for your photography - I'm invariably very impressed. My question is more about procedure: you changed the lead picture on the Tower Bridge article from the current FP to your new nomination. I happen to prefer the existing FP to your candidate. Presumably I can just revert your change to the Tower Bridge article? I don't want to start an edit war, but what does one do where two people simply disagree about which photo should lead an article? My suggestion is that an existing FP of a subject should take precedence. I'd appreciate your thoughts. Thanks, Pstuart84 Talk 17:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think this picture is featured picture worthy?

Found it, thought it looked really great, better than a lot of other featured pictures.Made of people 19:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to nominate but the process confuses me. I was hoping you could since you've done it before it'd be a lot easier. Made of people 22:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

B&W photo of giraffe

I see you removed my black and white giraffe photo. I suppose you're correct to do so, there are other better pics. But as a compromise I added the pic to the gallery. Fits in nicely there, I think. Veracious Rey ◦ talk to V Rey ◦ 03:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays Diliff! | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 01:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May you and your family have a Merry Christmas, as well as any other Holiday you may celebrate. I hope that warmth, good cheer, and love surround you during these special days. May God bless you during the Holidays. | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 01:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Julekort.jpg

.

Featured pictures

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Eastern Grey Squirrel in St James's Park, London - Nov 2006 edit.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! MER-C 04:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Eastern Grey Squirrel in St James's Park, London - Nov 2006 edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 13, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-04-13. howcheng {chat} 16:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Tower bridge London Twilight - November 2006.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! MER-C 04:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POTD

Diliff,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Tower bridge London Twilight - November 2006.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 17, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-04-17. howcheng {chat} 16:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Notre dame basillica delist

Just letting you know that I've removed Image:Notre-Dame de Montréal Basilica Jan 2006.jpg from all articles here, and I've asked Fir0002, who's a commons admin, to delete it. I'm very sorry this has to happen; out of all the things I've done on Wikipedia this makes me feel the worst. This image is unbelievable, but I guess copyright doesn't depend on image quality... Sorry again for having to do this. Raven4x4x 11:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australian National Merit Barnstar

The Barnstar of National Merit for making some of the most beautiful pictures of Australia available to Wikipedia. Wikipeterproject 03:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent photography. They are some of the best Aussie pictures I've seen. Well done!

Panoramas

Diliff: I posted the following comment on Fir0002's page, who recommended me to you (your panoramas are quite nice as well!):

Hey Fir. I am in awe of your panoramas and am wondering what your trick is to patching the images together. Do you use a program to do it (which one)? Are there any specific methods you use to actually take them? I don't have an SLR-type camera like yours, so I am unable to lock an exposure, etc. I figured I'd ask you your techniques because your pictures come out so well! Thanks. → JARED ^(t)

→ JARED ^(t) 23:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't you expect this eventually?

For your incredible pictures, which are the best in the Britan, and some of the best in Europe! - AndonicO

What's your secret?

The sheer amount of detail in each of your pictures is astonishing. While it's clear you are the one of the most talented photographers on WP, is there anything else which helps you get such unreal amounts of detail? Noclip 14:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to FP

Hey, great images so far. I've proposed another one of your pictures to FP candidates, I liked it pretty much. Image:Eastern Grey Squirrel in St James's Park, London - Nov 2006.jpg . Best regards. --Atomafr 17:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guess what?

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Hemispheric - Valencia, Spain - Jan 2007.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Raven4x4x 07:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This image is indeed spectacular. Congratulations again. Raven4x4x 07:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POTD

Hi Diliff,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Hemispheric - Valencia, Spain - Jan 2007.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 11, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-05-11. howcheng {chat} 23:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Union Station image

File:Union Station No Hedge.jpg

This is what a picture taken from in front of the hedge looks like. I had to be far enough back to have minimal perspective distortion in the nominated shot. Noclip 19:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And for the record, the reason that image is so small is that I need to take 9 5-megapixel shots at full zoom and downsample them to 1/8th the size just to get the same result as most people would by pointing and shooting 1 photo. Call me a bad photographer, but a camera that gives 5MP images that look like they were upscaled from 2MP and has highly visible grain at 100 ISO should share some of the credit. Noclip 00:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:30 St Mary Axe - The Gherkin from Leadenhall St - Nov 2006.jpg

Hello Diliff, I removed some rubbish in front of the Gherkin digitally. You can see the result here. If you allow me to do so, I would upload it to commons by overwriting yours. -- FelixReimann 02:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note from my talk page...

I don't know if you want to respond to this, but the following note was left on my talk page, and I figured you'd be the best one to decide on what to do about it. The message was left by an anonymous user.

Trying to get a hold of user - Diliff please contact me at [email protected] I need to talk to you about one of your photo's and $$$$$$$$$ please contact me A.S.A.P. sinncerr Danny —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.110.224.114 (talk) 16:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

It most likely is spam, because of the misspelled words. Cheers! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 18:11, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck in any case! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 21:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your photo of Lord Mayor John Stuttard

Dear Diliff - hello! We have corresponded before, about one of your Buckingham Palace images. I have recently done some editing (ongoing) on Lord Mayor's Show and have used yuor magnificent pic in the intro. Well done! Were you there? I'm a City of London Guide in training and alas, I wasn't there although I did attend the "silent ceremony" the day before...

Forgive me for pointing out that your caption, "Lord Mayor's Parade" should read "Lord Mayor's Show", its usual title. Could you, when changing it, please use double square brackets to cross-refer people to the article?

Gratefully yours. (pls reply to my talk pg) -- FClef (talk) 23:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture promotion!

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Montserrat Mountains, Catalonia, Spain - Jan 2007.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thanks! KFP (talk | contribs) 13:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POTD

Hi Diliff,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Montserrat Mountains, Catalonia, Spain - Jan 2007.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 23, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-05-23. howcheng {chat} 18:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incredible photographs

I realize it's already been said numerous times, but your photos are incredible! I have honestly never seen cleaner, sharper, brighter, or more artistic shots than yours. It is world-class, very proffessional work. Cheers, Theonlyedge 01:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats man. Your picture's been nominated again. You have excellent hand in photography. Keep the good working :) NAHID 07:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sunflower

Thanks for your suggestions. Eagle Owl 21:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Eagle Owl[reply]

Featured Pic

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Toledo Skyline Panorama, Spain - Dec 2006.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Trebor 23:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trebor 23:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

POTD

Hi David,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Toledo Skyline Panorama, Spain - Dec 2006.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 25, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-05-25. howcheng {chat} 18:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I had a question. Although it's non of my business. But I'm really interested to know where do you find all the time and money to go all around the world and take these pictures? Thanks --Arad 00:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UFO

What time was that picture taken? [4] ;) A couple of objects passed by that location at high enough alt to be that object.. although all should have been too dim. It's possible that you got a shiny bit of one of them. :) --Gmaxwell 03:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to my fudged timestamp (wasn't set for local time and is 7 minutes fast now - I just checked), it was taken at 12:42pm local time. It was taken looking approximately NE or NNE and taken from (I guestimate from looking at Google Earth) about 150-200m away. Therefore just above the top of the building should be in the region of 40 degrees give or take quite a lot. :) Does that identify anything? The URL you gave me doesn't show anything that early but presumably because it wouldn't reflect at the right angle reliably until the sun was low in the sky.. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 08:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tower Bridge photo credit

Dear David, I wanted to let you know that we've used your amazing image of the West side of Tower Bridge to create a derivative work.

We're doing some temporary lighting for a festival in the Pool of London, lighting Tower Bridge and your image was by far the best one that I've found. The derivative work has been released to the London papers (for publication hopefully on Monday 5th February 2007) and I wanted to make sure you heard about it. I have asked that you be credited "David Iliff" as the creator of the orignal photograph. Thank you for being so generous as to release it for use in this way.

If you would like to get in contact with us, possibly with a view to taking some photographs of our actual lighting installation or of some of our other work, please get in touch via [5]www.jasonbruges.com. You can see the festival website at [6]www.switchedonlondon.co.uk.

Kind regards, Jon

JBlondie

Wow, awesome news Diliff! Congratulations! --YFB ¿ 13:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grats, it was this one right? Image:Tower_bridge_London_Twilight_-_November_2006.jpg -Ravedave ^{(Adopt a State)} 04:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image licensing

Hey Diliff, how's things? I've just come across your latest FP nomination, and while I respect your position I must say I think it'll be a blow to Wikipedia to lose your super-high-res images. On the other hand, I'm glad to see you've set your limit at a relatively high upload resolution, even though it's only a fraction of the original image size.

Although my photography doesn't hold a candle to yours, I share your reservations about Wikipedia's licensing restrictions. I would be perfectly willing to release my images fully for use on Wikimedia projects, and I wouldn't have any problem providing one-off licenses to allow future "commercial" use of my work with the aim of distributing Wikipedia on DVD etc., but I resent the idea that any random character could sell prints or calendars or whatever containing my photos for a profit, without either myself or Wikipedia seeing any benefit whatsoever.

I know this has been discussed before, but people seem to raise the same concerns time and time again and I wonder if it wouldn't be worth trying to bring it up for wider discussion to see if there's a change in opinions. It's obvious that these licensing conditions are directly discouraging people from contributing to the project (witness you, Fir & Moondigger, three of our most prolific and valued contributors) and, having heard the arguments against allowing non-commercial licenses, I'm not convinced they're all that solid. If there's a number of us thinking the same things, perhaps we could try to present a coherent argument from the point of view of the FPC regulars? I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. All the best, --YFB ¿ 02:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree with the above, currently licensing requirements are ridiculous and completely unnecessary for an encyclopedia. I'd got into this a heck of a lot more, but I'm pretty busy with Yr 12 now. Make sure you let me know if you start a formal discussion on this YFB --Fir0002 05:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hrant Dink's funeral

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Dinkfuneral3.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! KFP (talk | contribs) 22:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Torre Agbar

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Torre Agbar - Barcelona, Spain - Jan 2007.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thanks! KFP (talk | contribs) 22:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Iliff,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Torre Agbar - Barcelona, Spain - Jan 2007.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 10, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-06-10. howcheng {chat} 16:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dink's funeral panorama is now a fp!

Well, what can I say... It wouldn't have been without your touch. Thanks :)Ombudsee 23:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I also think that you deserve at least as much credit as I get from the panorama. I was just in the right place at the right time. And actually I was there to take pictures with no licensing because I thought that words would not be able to tell what that picture did and with no licensing more people could see it. (Supposing that you're unfamiliar with the subject, this was a we-are-sorry-walk by the Turks for both Dink's assassination, and the 1915 massacres)

Anyway, now I updated the summary section in the image. I checked your FPs to see what kind of a layout you used, copied it, changed the data and put both of our names in it. (But although it works on Commons, it doesn't seem to work on image page in the wikipedia. Though the codes seem fine) I hope now it's OK for you. if not, feel free to change it as you wish. It's status now, already went over my expectations :).

On getting money for the picture; I certainly don't (and can't due the licensing :) ) have problems with it. Printing the picture is a service as well, which one deserves earning money for. But yes, 80 inches are a bit though :) I don't think the resolution is that good anyways. But I think you can send him the original stitch with best quality, and he can get it printed in where he is :)

Thanks for your help once more, I appriciate it Ombudsee 10:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've never used wikipedia

I've never done much to wikipedia other than browsing so I don't know if this is wrong to ask. I was wondering if there's some way I could pay you for that beautiful panorama of hrant dink's funeral. I'd like it to be about 80 - 100 inches long. Maybe we could work something out where you email me a high-res. Please write me at [email protected]

Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.80.83.63 (talk) 01:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Zabriskie Point Photo

I've uploaded a new version of the photo for FP consideration. I had not noticed that I uploaded the photo with a copyright notice. No offense intended. Please take a new look and reconsider. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Zabriskie_Point#.5B.5BWikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates.2FZabriskie_Point.7CZabriskie_Point.2C_Death_Valley.2C_Late_Morning.5D.5D Thanks! Jlkramer 23:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two featured pictures

Your Featured picture candidates have been promoted Your nominations for featured picture status, Image:Palace of Westminster, London - Feb 2007.jpg and Image:Library of Congress Great Hall - Jan 2006.jpg, gained a consensus of support and have been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Raven4x4x 02:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations again. You get my custom double-congratulations template Raven4x4x 02:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POTD

Hi David,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Palace of Westminster, London - Feb 2007.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 12, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-06-12. howcheng {chat} 17:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zabriskie Point Photo

I have to apologize for uploading the photo with the copyright bug. My error, which I've corrected with a replacement. I hope you'll reconsider the photo on its merits now that it is without the copyright notice. Thanks! Jonathan Kramer (JLKRAMER) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Zabriskie_Point

metadata

Would you mind if I went through your submissions on commons and updated their metadata to align with commons norms? For example see Image:Montreal_City_Hall_Jan_2006.jpg. I would also geocode the images which I could do so accurately with confidence. If you don't want me to, I won't... Or if you have any other suggestions for me while I'm going through, please let me know.--Gmaxwell 15:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly have no qualms about you doing this as it only adds to the usefulness of the image. The example looks good. How are you finding the exact locations? When I get a chance I may go back and work through my previous submissions and do the same. I wasn't aware it was Commons norms. Perhaps it should be an optional component of the upload image template? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 15:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Google maps, some luck and some practice. I used to carry a GPS for my own images, but I've found that it's easier to just use google maps. If it is used on a geocoded article that will quickly give you a good starting point although I try to get as close to where the picture was taken as possible. After clicking on the spot you want, click 'link to this page'. The lat/long in decimal degrees will be in the url ready for your use. It would be nice to get it onto the upload page, but we have a hard enough time getting license tags. Although geocoding is a best practice there is no huge drive to get image tagged on commons yet because we don't have any cool location aware tools yet... of course, since most images are not geocoded, there isn't a drive to create cool tools to use the location data. I don't mind going through and doing some of yours, and I'll gladly make a list for you of ones that I couldn't figure out. My view is these improvements are made to our more prominent photographers, more people will do similar work on their own uploads. --Gmaxwell 19:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another question. I see that many (most?) of your images are dual licensed (GFDL+CC-By-Sa-2.5), but some (e.g.) are CC-By-Sa-2.5 only. Is there a method to your madness or is this a simple oversight? If it's a simply oversight I'll correct it for you when I run into it. If it's intentional, perhaps I could encourage you to change your mind. :) --Gmaxwell 02:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo request

Hi Diliff, would you be able to help us out on at Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Today's Featured Picture? Basically, we've narrowed down our candidates of funny subjects. One of them, the Headington Shark, is in Oxford and although we have a picture of it, it's not the best. I was wondering if you had some time to get to Oxford and take some photos of it and maybe we can get it through the FPC process. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion on Commons

Barnstar!

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		I hereby award you this Photographer's Barnstar for your excellent photographic contributions. Thank you and keep up the good work! KFP (talk \| contribs) 23:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stitching errors

Hi, and congrats for those incredible panos of yours. I wonder if you have noticed some very minors stitching errors on a few of your featured pictures.

the US Capitol has some, look closely at the columns under the right part of the dome.

the Sydney panorama has also one, under the left side of the brige, right to the pilars (the riverside). (sorry I'm french, not very good at describing in english).

Me again (forgot to sign before) Actually there are a lot of them, all at the level of the river. Blieusong 16:02, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have yet to find other ones, if there are... also, how do you stitch the parts of the US capitol pic which are only sky ??? do you "randomly" set the control points ?

Praise

Can I say how impressed I am looking at your photos. I've never seen such a collection of fantastic pictures, ever. And you're doing it and then putting them for use for free. It's amazing!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richard n (talk • contribs) 19:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Question

Hi Diliff, you seem to have more featured pictures than almost anyone here, so I thought I'd ask my questions of you. Firstly, if you've got a photo that you think should replace one that's already there, do you just go ahead? I've got some nice pics of Hagia Sophia that I was hoping to add. Also, why do the previews look brighter than the actual uploaded photos, and is there any way to rectify this? Have a look at my userpage to see for yourself. I've got several photos from my recent trip to Istanbul here http://homepage.mac.com/bad_germ/Istanbul, a few more of which I'd like to upload, any input you could gve me would be much appreciated. Cheers, Matt 21:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks Diliff, I'm going to get cracking putting some more photos up. Hopefully I'll manage a featured picture or two one day! Matt 19:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Barnstar

Well, having just plundered your collection of featured pictures for Portal:United Kingdom (plus a few wallpapers for my desktop along the way) I felt compelled to give you a barnstar. Seeing as you (deservedly) have a ton of photographer's barnstars already I thought I'd be a little different. the wub "?!" 23:57, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tone mapping image

I'm looking at the appropriateness of the images on the Tone mapping page (see Talk). Am right in saying that the tone mapping on Image:Grand_Canyon_HDR_imaging.jpg is not gradient based? I'm trying to add captions to make the gallery on that page appropriate to the text, and think that your image well illustrates the "simple example of tone mapping filter $L=Y/(Y+1)$ ". Would I be right in saying this? Cheers, Chrisjohnson 18:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris. Yes, it was a fairly simple example. I don't completely understand the math involved but I just combined them in photoshop with the HDR import function and adjusted the curve until it was realistic looking. I added it to the page when the article had far fewer examples so it is relatively simplistic. I have to admit though, it is still one of the few that looks realistic, actually requires more than one exposure to capture the DR of the scene (the lead image could have been produced with far fewer contributing images IMO) while avoiding the contrast edge gradients that plagues a lot of heavy work on HDR tone mapping. Good to see you're trying to clean the article up a bit. I've thought it needed some work for a while but haven't had the knowledge of the intricacies of tone mapping to clean it up. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 07:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Palace of Westminster

Have you noticed that your FP has disappeared from the Palace of Westminster page? It looks like the result of two or three unrelated actions without any good reasoning behind it. -- Solipsist 12:19, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chromatic aberration on S3 IS

In response to this, I was not using any adapters or filters at all, I am not sure why those pictures turned out so badly. I normally only get purple fringing when I have a dark object in front of something overexposed. The smoke in the air make have played some effect, and the smoke in my lungs may have lead to any motion blur.

I am generally very happy with my S3 IS, only the occasional purple fringing, and inability to shoot RAW give me cause to complain. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stone Mountain photo

David, I'd like to use your image of Stone Mountain in a book about American monuments. Can you contact me and confirm that I am free to use this image, inside of the book? Thanks, Judith —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Judithdupre (talk • contribs) 12:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Image:Royal College of Music - April 2007.jpg

This image is great. It inspired me to read up on how modern panorama software works. I went out and took a series of images and stitched together this: Image:British Columbia Parliament Buildings - Pano - HDR.jpg.

I am very satisfied with how it turned out, there are a few flaws, but I think I know how to do it better next time. I had no problem straightening the vertical walls, and also had no problem flattening the horizon. The problem I am having is that the roof of the building is bulging upwards in the picture and this is not realistic.

My understanding is that since it is being projected onto a cylinder that only one horizontal plane can be forced level with the optimizer(of course I could be confused about that). How did you get the horizontals level throughout your Royal College of Music mosaic? ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 06:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ryan. I'm on holiday right now so I'll give you a brief explanation but we can discuss it properly when I get back (Wednesday). Basically it looks like the reason why you're having problems with bulging is that you used cylindrical projection due to the angle of view of your frame. As you said, this results in projecting the image onto a cylinder and then flattened for viewing. In my image, the angle of view wasn't quite so wide so I was able to use rectilinear projection, meaning I can keep both horizontal and vertical lines straight and parallel, but this does not work for all images (if the angle of view is too wide then it will keep the lines straight but warp the edges so much in order to do so that the image looks terrible!). You can sometimes try spherical projection which results in both horizontal and verical being projected onto a cylinder (in a sense). This usually doesn't work well for architectural shots though but you can try it and see what you think, anyway. The bottom line is that rectilinear is the most realistic looking as long as you can keep the angle of view reasonably low (usually by moving further back). Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 07:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The picture is used on the front page of: www.kompact.co.uk, the credit is in the top left hand corner. many thanks Josh 19:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was afraid of something like that, I cannot move further back because I have a statue to my back. I guess the software cannot perform miracles. Ideally I would just hover 20 feet in the air above the statue[7].

The warping is not too bad, but I want to retake it a little closer to avoid those bushes in front. From the statue the building is 90 degrees(by design I think), from the bushes it is about 96 degrees. I don't think that will make too much of a difference. Thanks for the tips, enjoy your holiday, and I will check back on Wednesday. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask how many degrees across that image was from the camera's POV? ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you Ryan, I completely forgot you were waiting on me to get back! ;-) I would guess it was about 30 degrees AOV, give or take 5 degrees. You can usually just get away with 90 degrees with rectilinear projection and by about 140 degrees the edges are so distorted that the image is unusable (unless you crop the edges out, reducing AOV!). Did you try stitching with rectilinear? If you want you could email the source images and I could have a go. I've never really used Hugin much as I use PTGui but from what I've seen it should be reasonably simple to change the projection used. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 19:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took your advice about the rectilinear projection and it worked out much better: Image:British Columbia Parliament Buildings - Pano - HDR.jpg. I tried that before, and it was very distorted, I think because I had optimized for cylindrical. I need to go back through the help files and tutorials. I can only do so much for that image as the source images lack sharpness. I have a proper panoramic tripod head on the way so soon I will retake the images.

Am I correct in thinking that if I put the camera in the same spot and zoom in x times and take more pictures to cover the same area, that the field of view will be the same, and so will the level of distortion? I hope that last question made sense. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:44, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're correct in thinking that. The distortion will remain the same in terms of how the image is 'stretched' to fit the projection BUT the more segments you use to fill the same field of view, the more detail is available and therefore when the image is stretched to fit that projection, you will minimise the detail distorted in the panorama. It is difficult to explain without showing you an example though, but I'll try. Imagine a low res image and a high res image. If you project them onto a sphere and view the sphere up close, the detail visible in the centre of the sphere of the low res image will be poor quality because a finite number of pixels have been stretched extensively to fill a specific area on the sphere. The same thing will happen with the high res image projected onto the sphere but with more pixels available to begin with, the loss of detail will be less obvious. Basically the same thing applies to panoramas. The actual image would look the same no matter how many or few segments it is comprised of, but the more source images you use (ie the more you zoom in for the segments), the better quality the outputted panorama is. Sorry if that doesn't explain things or you knew what I meant and didn't need an example. ;-). Hope it helps. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 22:10, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand completely, very informative. I have noticed images turn out much nicer if you tell it to render the pano about 10% smaller than the maximum size. Just wait a week or so, and I will take an amazing picture of the buildings. Thanks for the gory details, it was exactly what I wanted to find out. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plain language

If you're going to attack other people's valid contributions to FPC just to protect Fir's ego, you are going to be very directly contributing to FPC becoming a farce. I felt someone should point this out to you. Try to remain objective. Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 18:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For all of your excellent quality featured pictures you´ve taken; they are incredible, of perfect quality, and in very large numbers (you´ve got tons of them!) ♠Tom @s Bat 20:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Justice Prevails

:-) - thanks! --Fir0002 10:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Colosseum in Rome, Italy - April 2007.jpg

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Colosseum in Rome, Italy - April 2007.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for nominating it! KFP (talk | contribs) 10:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]