User talk:W.carter/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Tugboat Boss discharging ballast water before departure.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tugboat Boss discharging ballast water before departure.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Eriksbergs bockkran.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:26, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Image and Babel info

Hello! I´ve seen your message on my taalk page, the babel info, i´ll move it later, for lack of time,, as for the image, thank you very much I already read the information and will be very useful in the future, thanks  !!!! | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 21:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• Ok, the most important thing right now is for you to upload the larger original photo over the Image:Secondary School in France.jpg, if you want to have a chance at FPC. Sometimes kind users will help you with the categories, but you are the only one who has the larger image. You will find the "Upload a new version of this file" under the "File history", just click on that and follow the instructions. --cart-Talk 21:44, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• Theres a problem because that is the original image, I took ti with a Nikon on France. If you want more info of the countries where I've been please check my Wikipedia-es page. -- | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 21:53, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• I see. In that case you have to tell people this on the nomination page and I hope you will come back with other nominations that are within the guidelines. You take very good photos and we would very much like to see more of your work. --cart-Talk 21:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• How do I tell the people that??, and thanks, of course you will see more of my work, because in a few weeks I am going to ejipto of vacations, and I hope to be able to make photographs of the place; my father teach me how to use a nikon model d3300, since I was a kid, and I have traveled to those countries for work or vacations. Thanks!!! | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 22:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• You can write what you have told me here but do it on the nomination page (click on the link to get to it), after the other comments. People will understand, no need to use special words or templates. :) If it is easier for you can even write it in Spanish, many people here understand that and an explanation in any language is better than none. --cart-Talk 22:23, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• I have already made a brief comment explaining this situation I hope it is well, or do I add something else?. | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 22:30, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• Thank You! That is all you have to do for now. Everything is in order. See you later! :) --cart-Talk 22:33, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks for the dummy help, and Chao ;) | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 22:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Signature

Hi. Please display your actual username in your signature.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jeff, any special reason why you pick on me for this when so many other users also use some sort of nickname version of their username in their signature? Or am I just first in line on a general cleanup of this practice? --cart-Talk 09:33, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Please see this edit.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

So because of that you are imposing a ban on nicknames in signatures? In that case it would be interesting to hear what some of the other "nickname users" have to say about this, such as:

• Jee
• Poco²
• King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠
• Mile (talk)
• KSK (talk)
• Lothar Spurzem (talk)
• LivioAndronico ^(talk)

AFAIK, it is within the rules to use abbreviations or nicknames in a signature but I may be wrong. Commons:Signatures#Rules on customized signatures only has this to say: If nicknames are used, make sure they can be attributed to a specific user. --cart-Talk 10:06, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: I obviously can't tell Kong of Lazers is Kong of Lazers. I didn't go too far in changing my username in my signature and I changed it back to my username. --Talk to Kong of Lasers 23:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Featured Picture

Hello, Recently you have mark not featured this picture here . But this Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2017 at 07:39:04 (UTC) . Please check-শাহাদাত সায়েম (talk) 13:41, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

• Hello শাহাদাত সায়েম! I'm sorry but the image was speedily declined because of quality issues. It was first tagged with {{FPX}} as you can see here and one day after that it was closed. You can read about speedy decline in the rules for FPC. Also please read Commons:Image guidelines#Quality and featured photographic images to see what is required for an FPC, that way you may better understand why your nomination was declined. You can get many tips about how to make photos better by reading this page as well: Commons:Photography terms. If you want some advice or feedback before nominating a photo at FPC, I reccomend that you first nominate it for COM:QIC or ask about it at Commons:Photography critiques. All the best, --cart-Talk 13:56, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Finally

Alright alright. Finally giving it a shot. Two, actually. The first probably breaks some standard rules for FPC, but oh well. Someone said I should throw something out there one of these days. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk |  03:06, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey! About friggin' time! I think it's you Americans who always go in about the "no guts, no glory". Kudos for trying something outside the box at FPC, it's refreshing. We need more high quality photos doing just that. The fog photo is really eerie and has about the same dangerous abandon as this FP. These days, I have about 3000 photos to edit at work so that is putting a bit of a dampener on doing the same thing after work, but I'm around taking the occasional potshot at FPC to relieve the monotony. I also try to gather photos for the upcoming dark months, when sleet and snow will keep me more indoors. --cart-Talk 09:43, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes we do love our guts and glory, pain and gain, spending money and making money, carpeing diems, and whatnot (that last one might be someone else, though). There are a few others I still have open in tabs to consider nominating next, all filed under "ehhhh maybe?" There's the makhtesh and this fella you've seen before, and e.g. this dove (doves are boring, and it's not a good angle for the typically high standards for birds, but the barbed wire and blurry natural background make for a nice scene) and this place. Oh who knows. Not expecting a review, btw -- I appreciate that doing something for work makes it less fun other times. Are the 3000 photos of relatively interesting subjects, at least?

I have not seen and quite like that FP you linked. Disorienting, even.

BTW have you come across Commons:Commons Conference 2018 or the related, and maybe separate or maybe not, Commons:Photographers User Group Meeting 2018? — Rhododendrites ^talk |  23:24, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Rhododendrites, I like your photos. They have an artisitic flair I have trouble getting a hold of myself. Yes "no guts, no glory", history doesn't find the person waiting on the dock for their ship to come in. PumpkinSky talk 00:08, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, PumpkinSky, that's nice of you to say. This undermines your modesty, however. :) The green [fungus? doesn't quite look like a lichen or moss] really makes it, I think. Anyway, it was promoted while I had the tab open to support. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  00:25, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Rhododendrites Why thanks for your intended support! Psst....I have another one waiting for an open FPC slot File:Pinus palustris bark 7 LR.jpg. PumpkinSky talk 00:35, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

• Rhododendrites The photos are for a catalog, so pictures and texts are repetitive and boring but it has to be done. The makhtesh has real potential. You might want to do a selective NR on the sky as well as brightening the whole pic just a tiny bit. This fella is a no-go I think. It's too centered to be an accent to a great landscape or too small to be of consequence in a centered composition. Had he been resting on say that big rock on the right side, things might have been different. The dove on a barbed wire is a scene and not a species-identify photo, so it works. It is sharp enough to see the small spider between the dove's claws and that's enough. A bit of a cliche but who cares. Again, a tiny bit of light wouldn't hurt here either. Finally, the the house has all the qualities we normally see in photos of churches and castles. It's refreshing to see a more normal building shot this way, though I can think of a few users who always want grander buildings to go "wow". The composition is absolutely flawless IMO, even down to the city skyline in the background and the perfectly placed sailboat in front of it. It seems nice that they are thinking about conferences for Commons as well and not just the overall WP-meetings. Nothing for me though since I value my relative anonymity. --cart-Talk 09:49, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
• PumpkinSky It may be wise to wait a while before hitting the general population with another bark photo. It also has some issues with unsharp areas mixed in with the sharp as if each stop covers too much depth. --cart-Talk 09:49, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you for taking time to look at it. I forgot to change the f/stop to 7.1, which as you told me seems to work better when stacking. I left it on 10. Sigh. Not sure if I should reshoot it. I get what you're saying about waiting but I don't totally understand some people's objection to bark. The two photos are of different species of pine and different motifs; the second one focuses on the trench. If someone were to object to "another bark photo", that's like saying "we have an FP of a Saab 9-7x so we don't need a FP of a Saab 9-5".PumpkinSky talk 10:34, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

• Don't try to understand people here, it will only give you a headache. Some of it is called "viewer fatigue", people need to be constantly surprised, but I think the most appropriate analogue lies along the lines of "herding cats". Wrt the car-comparison, we lost an excellent FPC car photographer when voters at the FPC thought he shot the (very different!) cars in the same way (read one discussion), while no one objects to yet another dead moth spread out in exactly the same manner as all the rest. --cart-Talk 11:10, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Well said. PumpkinSky talk 12:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

One of them needs one more support to pass, and the other needs two more opposes to fail! Gahhh the suspense! — Rhododendrites ^talk |  04:50, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

In other news, I was shocked to find out, upon uploading some images from a recent trip, that there are very few pictures (relatively speaking) of the "most photographed mountains in North America", the Maroon Bells. It was truly one of the most spectacular natural scenes I've experienced (e.g.), and I sort of felt like I was taking pictures for a calendar or something while I was there. :) My images don't do reality justice, but something in there will probably be my next nomination. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  04:52, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, playing the FPC roulette beats many world-class casinos when it comes to suspense. Since starting nominating pics there I don't have to buy my weekly scratch tickets any more. . My, my, you have been busy. I've only heard of Aspen in connection to snow and skiing rich snobs, so I've never realized it had such scenery. Looking through the category my eyes immediately got caught on this one. Amazing! Although for an FPC nom, I would crop away some of the bottom, cut it just above the foreground flowers. They don't add to the compo and distracts from the main view, the mountains. And what a treat to get that close to such magnificent birds. Here we mostly have falcons. I hear their high-pitched cries every evening if I have my window open at work, as they hunt for small rodents in the fields nearby. It always reminds me of the movie Kes, although I think you must be to young to have heard of it. No other news here, although these discussion made dive into that huge heap of unedited photos I took on my trip to Denmark. Think I'll make some time to upload some more of them while I'm at it. --cart-Talk 20:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I had never been to Colorado, and didn't know much about Aspen beforehand, other than that it used to have some hippie associations and at some point turned into, yeah, a place for rich snobs to ski. :) I'm more the former than the latter, and don't ski at all, so wasn't sure what to expect except for some vague notion of mountainy prettiness and nice weather (in the summer). The downtown area is very much a resort town (The Hamptons is the New York area that comes to mind.... more concentrated commercial area than La Jolla, I think... or maybe the Swedish Riviera?), with an outdoorspeople element. Not really my thing, but any negative effect it might have on me was dwarfed by the spectacular setting. I'd love to go back and explore more -- we only really got to the touristy places and a few of the hikes close to town.

The eagle was a rescue at a local environmental nonprofit. Unfortunately, I've never seen a golden eagle outside of captivity. The high-pitched cries I hear most are these. I do like falcons. We have some kestrels and merlins. Peregrine falcons are surprisingly numerous in the city (here, and in other cities I've lived in), nesting on rooftops and bridges.

I have not seen Kes, no, though I'm familiar with Ken Loach. Think it would hold up?

You may have a heap more photos to go through, but it doesn't seem like you're pressed for Commons projects. :)

Thanks for the cropping tip. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  01:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: Movies you see when you are a kid tend to have a sort of golden haze around them in your memory but when you see them again years later, you are usually disappointed. It might be the same with this 'Kes'.

I like being outdoors and get down a bit with nature but in a lagom way. :) I prefer if my adventures end at a nice cafe where I can get a decent cup of espresso.

Yes, work being what it is now, I have a more leisurely approach to Commons at the moment. :) I don't think that's a bad thing though, things are many times far too serious here with emotions running high and we need some levity from time to time. It's important to relax when taking pictures. If you do that, you open your mind and see new things and you are more likely to get a good shot. If you try, try, try, to hunt down that perfect shot, it will never work. Just look at the result of your latest noms. I bet you tried to compose that rock photo more carefully (failed) while you just saw the ship in the fog and clicked (succeeded). --cart-Talk 09:33, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Re: movies, oh I am familiar with the sad realization that movies I liked when I was younger are actually pretty terrible. That's what I mean by "holding up". I recently ruined Hook for myself, for example. :)There are some that I will not watch again in order to preserve the nostalgia. Pump Up the Volume seems like a good example of that -- the sort of thing that contributed to my conception of what's "cool". :)

You are correct about the context for taking those two shots. Granted, I was with a bunch of people at the Makhtesh, in the middle of a tour, so couldn't quite take my time, but it was definitely an "oh yeah I'm going to take a picture of this and it'll be great" sort of scenario. Why I didn't swap in my wideangle lens is a mystery, though. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  23:22, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

My image

Hi Cart!!! I've seen that you mark my nominated photo like "not freatured", could you please give me more info?? --187.190.146.55 19:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, the previous message is mine, what happened was that I did not log in. -- | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 19:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

That's ok, Prismo345. The image was speedily declined because it was too small. It was very nice and we really liked it, but FPs have to be rather big files so that they can also be used for printing in high-quality if necessary. The file was just 1,559 x 1,072 pixels, which is below the minimum 2Mpixel limit for FPs, and for such a file we'd like it to be something like 4,000 x 3,000 or as much as the camera will allow. You can have a look at other FPs and see that many of them are considerably larger. You have a Nikon D800 and the maximum resolution for that is 7,360 x 4,912 pixels, had you used all of that it would not have been any trouble. Your photo was first tagged with {{FPX}} as you can see here and one day after that it was closed. You can read about speedy decline in the rules for FPC. Also please read Commons:Image guidelines#Quality and featured photographic images to see what is required for an FPC, that way you may better understand why your nomination was declined. You can get many tips about how to make photos better by reading this page as well: Commons:Photography terms. If you want some advice or feedback before nominating a photo at FPC, I recommend that you first nominate it for COM:QIC or ask about it at Commons:Photography critiques. --cart-Talk 20:00, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Honda VTX 1800 C 2007 - center.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  Support Good quality. :-) --XRay 06:57, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thunder cloud over Gåseberg.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. --Ralf Roletschek 06:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

RE:File:Secondary School in France.jpg

Hi again! The photo of the school I took on my trip to France, for work, as you say, I was part of them at some point, but I resigned for personal reasons, and the one of --- was taken in due course, the I do not know why it is on that website, I think it was when I published it in Bloggler, but I did not put anything of copyright :(, in fact if I am not mistaken the page is written in Thai, I think I will see that subject in a few days, I've been just in time, is more, I have not even seen Facebook in days.

This is a bit depressing, because as you know, he just trembled in Mexico and volunteered.

Regards -- | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 21:33, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Prismo Well, we take copyright issues very serious here for the sake of the photographers, so you will need to sort this out with the OTRS team and grant permissions via mail for the use of your photos here on the site. This is all done so no one can just come up and claim any photo as their own. You can read all about this at Commons:OTRS. We can't do anything about the "Freedom of panorama" though, that is the decision of the governments. Also in the future, please answer on the same page as the question so that the conversation is intact and others can follow it if they need to. --cart-Talk 21:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, what is the OTRS ?? And what I ask them?? -- | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 21:48, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I left you a link above to the page: Commons:OTRS. When I include links in a text, it means that you are supposed to click on them and read the instructions on that page so that I don't have to write it all over again here. :) Most of the things here you have to find out for yourself by reading different Help Pages. We are all volunteers here, just like you. It's getting very late where I live and I have to say Good Night now. --cart-Talk 21:55, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Ok see ya en the moning then!! -- | Prismo (disc. · contr.) 21:58, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, FYI, I nominate all other images for deletions. Some are clearly not OK without further information, and the rest is suspicious. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Small greenhouse with grapevines escaping.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 Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 20:55, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eriksberg shipyard crane.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  Support Wow! Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:14, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Photographer onboard Stena Danica.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 QI imo.--ArildV 04:33, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! French bulldog in life jacket.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. --Livioandronico2013 19:16, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tugboat Boss discharging ballast water before departure.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 in very difficult conditions. Nice! -- George Chernilevsky 20:52, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bow of MS Stena Danica crossing Kattegat.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 -- George Chernilevsky 20:52, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Puzzled...

Hi dear Cart, How are you ? This is now autumn. Do you prepare for hibernation, in your nordic country ?

My concern is, if I understand well, we cannot feature a picture showing somebody walking on railtracks, but we can promote this as QI ?

As far as I know, many more people in the world die due to cigarettes than by train accidents...

What do you think ? --Jebulon (talk) 09:32, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

well, it's a way to renew contact too...

Hi Jebulon, I'm sorry but for various reasons I'm not up to debates right now. I just do some maintenance and "light" voting. The comments regarding the hazards of showing people on track are the results of community debates on previous FPCs, they are not necessarily the views I have most of the time. Sorry if they irked you as I now understand they did. I have learned them since I take many shots myself on the tracks of the closed railway we have here. Since the community is concerned, I have to respect that. --cart-Talk 10:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

OK, later...--Jebulon (talk) 14:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Eriksberg shipyard crane.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eriksberg shipyard crane.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Reply

I removed first time, didnt read instructions. I thought bot might do something, but wont be problem for next time. --Mile (talk) 14:22, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Mile, I'm sure it will be excellent next time. I also learned from my first mistakes. Thank you so much for wanting to help with the "clean-up-jobs"! The bots don't do as much as we would like them to do. --cart-Talk 14:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flagpole at Loddebo.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. --Poco a poco 19:50, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jetty with steps at Loddebo side view.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. --Poco a poco 19:50, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Small huts at Loddebo.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. --Poco a poco 19:50, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thwarts in old wooden sailing skiff.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. --Poco a poco 10:30, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fishing hut by Brofjorden at Loddebo.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  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jetties and lifebuoy at Loddebo.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  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Twig with rose hips.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. --XRay 19:11, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weatherworn planks on top of wooden table.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. --XRay 19:10, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Row of jetties at Loddebo.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. --XRay 19:11, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Steps to jetty.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 focus to main object --Michielverbeek 22:59, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Fun fact about french expressions and horse's rumps

The photo

That's very fun for the "horse's ass" expression ː in french we have "Avoir un cul de jument de brasseur" (difficult to translate something like ː "Have a bottom like a brewer's mare one", because in France and Belgium, breweries had very "large" mares for deliveries in the 1930's (probably unknown in the U. S. because of prohibitionǃ) --Tsaag Valren (talk) 12:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Tsaag Valren: Haha! Yes, I can see where that expression comes from. Thanks for letting me know. It is a very nice photo too and it's good to see pictures of things that people don't think about photographing, like I did this one a while ago. --cart-Talk 12:55, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks again for your vote (oh, you'r from Sweden? Because of the name "Carter" I thinked you were from the U.S.!). I'm not sure we have a word in french for "kitchen sink", perhaps "plan de travail", but it's more general. --Tsaag Valren (talk) 13:03, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Among the branches of a potted jade plant.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Among the branches of a potted jade plant.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Relief version

Hey there!

Since you reviewed File:Relief in New York City Marble Cemetery (40651).jpg at QIC, I thought I'd let you know that I uploaded two new versions of it: original version you reviewed, second version (primarily cropped), third version (add contrast, try to bring out the edges of the relief). I'm inclined towards the second, somewhat, but eh. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  05:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Hey yourself! Thanks for letting me know. All versions are QI-worthy AFAICS and I agree that the impact the final version has is the best. Good job! :) --cart-Talk 08:41, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Skeppsbrokajen Gamla Stan from Skeppsholmen Stockholm 2016 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Skeppsbrokajen Gamla Stan from Skeppsholmen Stockholm 2016 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:03, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weatherworn top of wooden table.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 Simple yet special.--Famberhorst 10:00, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thwart and bottom of an old wooden skiff.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 OK for me. --Basotxerri 16:24, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

The Customs House ceiling and split toning

Thanks for the mention over there at Rhododendrites' talk page ... I hadn't realized that was how split toning could be used. I am going to watch that tutorial because I've had that situation a few times. Daniel Case (talk) 15:50, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: Happy to be able to help. :) The split toning was combined with some gradient filters for color temp, blackness, exposure, saturation, highlights, if I remember correctly. Finally a bit of light was added. You look at the different corners and sides of the pic and think "Hmmm, this side looks too cold. / This corner has too much black. - This side is too warm. - etc" and then pull in the gradient filters containing the opposite effect over part of the pic, to see if it gets better. Also 'pinging' Rhod about this. Sorry for being a bit curt last night, but I was not up for lessons then. I was only relaxing with some editing. My mind is less murky now. --cart-Talk 16:45, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't take it as curt. To be clear, I was just looking for a Lightroom file, not asking for screenshots, transcriptions, etc. :) I.e. exporting a "catalog" of just that one file would store all of the adjustments that I could open (presuming the edits were made to the file as it existed here). No worries if you'd rather not, though. The split toning video was helpful. I've played with the sliders but had not yet really dug into what they can do. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  13:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: Honestly, I didn't know you could do that. I'll see if I have the file settings still in LR and see if I can suss out how to do that tonight when I'm at home. If you have som pointers, please let me know. LR is so large it's very hard to know everything you can do with it. I'm at work now, so no access to files or LR. The last brightening was done in Photoshop since it was only a minor tweak. I'll see what I can do. :) --cart-Talk 13:54, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

(TPS) You don't want the catalogue -- it can be many megabytes of database and include private info on all Cart's photos! I think what you looking for is to save the metadata to file for just the one image. See this. Use Ctrl-S to save and it creates an *.XMP file alongside your raw. If Rhododendrites already has the raw file, you just need to send the XMP. Put it in the same folder as the raw file then according to [1]:

• When you import the raws it'll read the corresponding XMPs.
• If the raws are already cataloged go to Library mode, select them all, then choose "Metadata" -> "Read Metadata From Files".
• If the raws are already cataloged go to Library mode, right click on the folder in Folder section of Lightroom's left pane. Choose "Synchronize Folder". Check "Scan for Metadata Updates".

It is a while since I've done this, so no promises. If Rhododendrites wants to keep their edits/version then make a virtual copy first should I hope keep that one. -- Colin (talk) 14:13, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Ouch! Now you make my head hurt. I did the fixes in LR using just the jpeg from Commons and offered it to Rhod. I never had access to the raw file. --cart-Talk 14:21, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh that's even better. @Colin my recommendation of using catalog format comes from when I had to dig through a backed up version to find adjustments to a particular file that I had accidentally removed from my main catalog. It let me export just that one image's adjustments, I think, which I could then import into my main catalog. That said, I don't remember how big the file was and have no idea what sort of information comes along with it. I've heard of XMP but thought it was for something other than LR. :) Thanks for the tips. @Cart I think the "raw file" in this case is just the original file. If I see the adjustments on the jpeg (which I have), I can just reproduce them on the raw file, too by copying/pasting the develop settings. I really didn't intend this to be a hassle, though. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk |  14:26, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

The website I linked seems to suggest that metadata is saved to the JPG (instead of an XMP) if you are editing that rather than a raw file. But this is beyond what I have ever tried. Also, if you want to try to make the adjustments to your raw file, then Cart's edits to the JPG will only be a hint at what to do, as the actual values and results may look quite different when applied to the raw. Editing the JPG is sort of like cooking a cake twice, so hard to apply to the raw ingredients. -- Colin (talk) 14:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Ok, Rhod (and thanks Colin for sharing) I'll see what I can do when I get home. Btw: For very basic, low tech, rookie photography discussions: see this talk page. For advanced, high tech, professional photography discussions: see Colin's talk page. ;) --cart-Talk 14:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: Now then... I gave the option described by Colin a shot, but when you have a jpeg that only seems to add the EXIF from LR to the file (a pop-up window in LR told me this) and since this correction is all about the gradient filters, I don't think you can see those adjustments then. Instead I made a series of screenshots of the Split Toning and how each of the filters eventually ended up. You have to deal with my Swedish version of LR but I think you can figure it out, looking at the pictures. ;D The base of this fixing was this version of your photo and for the final version some light was added in Photoshop as I mentioned earlier. Hope you can get something out of this. The folder with the screenshots is in my Dropbox. Just let me now if you have trouble getting it. --cart-Talk 17:21, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Halloween Sundog.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  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 06:03, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:01-พระที่นั่งคูหาคฤหาสน์.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:01-พระที่นั่งคูหาคฤหาสน์.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moonlight shadow.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 Very creative and an excellent idea. Good quality. And by the way: you look beautifully. -- Johann Jaritz 02:58, 3 November 2017 (UTC) Haha!! Thanks Johan! --W.carter 08:57, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 6 November 2017 (UTC)