Talk:Canon PowerShot A540

Regarding sample pictures
The gallery is there to show the quality of pics, taken by this camera, so it has encyclopedic value. And having a section for sample pics is quite common on every camera entries here in Wikipwdia, like:

Canon PowerShot S3 IS, Canon PowerShot A95, Canon PowerShot A430

Also the format of the article here, is very similar to those of the above, too. Sbn1984 04:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The gallery should be removed from this article because of the subjective nature of personal photographs. A few pictures taken by wikipedians cannot best show what this product can do.  If a visitor/reader desires to see products of this camera a link can be added to the article for the Flickr Camera Finder page for this camera.  I'll replace the gallery with a link later this evening if I don't see any responses here.  Gh5046 21:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have replaced the gallery. The images that can be viewed from that link and also the images on the dpreview site will do the job nicely (I was incorrect about the dpreview page having sample images).  Gh5046 23:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't see any problem with users sharing some of their photos on this page. You can add the flickr link as well, but there is no problem with having them both, is there? We are trying to make the page as encyclopidic as possible. How can we do that without having a single sample pic/gallery directly in the page, and it's not like there is a copyright problem with the image; so there shouldn't be any worry or caution about that.
 * And as I mentioned before, this is the common style for every single entry for cameras on Wikipedia, and I don't think there is a need to change every single entry.Sbn1984 17:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Few articles do have galleries and in most of these instances the galleries are pictures of the camera itself, not pictures taken with the camera. If you take a look at the articles for Nikon cameras, Canon cameras, and Sony Cyber-shot cameras you'll see that not "every single entry for cameras on Wikipedia" have galleries of sample photography.  It's very few.
 * Please look at the discussion page for the Canon EOS 400D camera, user Megapixie did a pretty good job explaining why user provided sample galleries aren't encyclopedic. Gh5046 18:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I did look at the discussion page for the Canon EOS 400D camera (even before you mentioned it) and frankly, I don't find that convincing one bit.


 * We can't have a gallery because it would encourage different users to add their pics to it, and their pics might be of a poor quality?!!!!


 * So what!!! That's what is happening on every single pages on wikipedia. Everyday users come to wikipedia with some new pics that they might think is of good quality and add them to pages of all topics; some of them are actually good, the rest not so good. It is the responsibly of the editors on each page to decide which one worth the staying and which on don't. They don't simply ban every single pics from their respective pages, on the ground that, future pics might be of poor quality!!!!!


 * Besides, as I said before, we are trying to make the page as encyclopidic as possible. It is a little ironic to have a page about a camera and not have even one sample pic. Have you look at pages on digital cameras on the internet? (other than wikipedia, like th dpreview you mentioned) They all have sample pics, because even thought it will definitely won't represent the quality of the pics that everyone using that camera might shoot, it still give them some sort of reference. It shows the limits of the camera to some extend.


 * Now if your problem is with the low quality of the pics that are presented at the moment on this page, well I am sorry but that was the best I could do; I never claimed to be a professional photographer. I most certainly welcome professional photos here. (although it is very unlikely for a professional photographer to waste his or her time with a camera like A540) But until then, this is the best we have & we shouldn't give it up for a link on another site. (Flickr) Because why should we? When we can have all these free images here. We can simply filter the images we have, and keep the best images at each time and wait for even better pics to be uploaded. Try to remember we want to have a complete encyclopidic article here.


 * I am going to wait before I revert your edit, until I hear from you here; we should complete our discussion here before engaging in any further edits.Sbn1984 22:02, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * This isn't about removing any and all images from wikipedia articles submitted by users. I have uploaded photos to wikipedia to provide content for other articles as well.  I've checked out a lot of the photos you have uploaded and they are good pictures and provide great value for the other articles they're in.


 * The problem with sample photography for camera articles like this is the usefulness and value is subjective. You did take good pictures, but they don't necessarily show the extents, the technical capability, of the camera.  How many of the shooting modes do they cover?  Why were these pictures edited with Photoshop before being uploaded, shouldn't they be in their original format?  Why was the metadata removed from some of them? Why several pictures of separate subjects shot in just one or two modes?


 * Don't get me wrong, they are good photos and the ones used in other articles are providing good value, I especially like Dandelionclock.jpg, but camera review sites and what's available on flickr camera finder will provide a much, much, better job of presenting what a camera is capable of than a few pictures uploaded to wikipedia.


 * Megapixie's comments on this subject aren't the most eloquent, and I apologise if my reference to them made it seem if I thought your pictures were of poor quality. Gh5046 01:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It would be awesome if Wikipedia had the ability to search for uploaded images based on certain meta data fields, for example: to be able to search for pictures taken by the A450.  That would be an awesome link to have on this page as well.  Gh5046 01:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * There is no need to apologies. I really didn't think you meant that as well; I only included that paragraph because I wanted to make sure I understand your argument completely. I actually see what you are trying to point out here, and believe me, I am 100% with you on that.
 * Yes of course these random sample pics don't really represent the extend of the technical capability, of the camera. I acknowledged that before and I acknowledge it now, again.


 * About the Photoshops edits, I only can say that, I prefer post processing in Photoshop a lot better than changing the camera mode for every single shot. Call me crazy, but I find this to be a lot easier, & Photoshop just gives you more options than you can ever imagine possible from your camera. I know, the result won't be exactly the same, but it just wouldn't be fair to upload the shots in their original format, especially when I didn't use the appropriate mode for each shot.
 * The metadata isn't available on some of the pics, because I have copied the original picture in a new window in Photoshop. For some pics it's just easier to crop them in a new window; that way you can position the pic perfectly, exactly the way you want to.


 * Anyway after reading your response, I really think that we are getting somewhere here; at least that's what I understood from your response:


 * but camera review sites and what's available on flickr camera finder will provide a much, much, better job of presenting what a camera is capable of and a few pictures uploaded to wikipedia.


 * I agree with you that third party sites are better for this job, but I still believe that we shouldn't limit ourselves to those third party sites completely; and from your statement it seams that you agree that a few pics here in wikipedia won't hurt. I think, in the absence of a search capability in wikipedia - based I metadata - and a set of pics that represents all the modes and technical capability of this camera, the best we can do is to settle for what we have here, for now and lets just hope that in a near future better, more representative pics get uploaded for this article. After all we should give this page some time, it is fairly a recent article, I created it just about five month ago.


 * If you still have some concerns or suggestions, I would be more than happy to hear them. I leave the decision up to you; you can either keep a few of those images in the article or if you are still not convince, leave the article as is - without any pics representation for now. Either way it's your call now. Sbn1984 04:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The "and" in that statement, "and a few pictures...", was a typo, I went back and changed it before you finished responding. It now reads "than a few pictures..."


 * However, If they are pictures that illustrate differences between camera settings (i.e. noise/grain differents between different shots of the same subject at different ISO settings), like what can be found here, I believe they would be beneficial to these kinds of articles.


 * I post process a lot of my photographs as well, something like Photoshop or GiMP can really help with the quality of a photo. But, that's the problem with post processing images that are meant to be an example, a sample, of a camera's product:  what's posted isn't the image the camera recorded.  For other articles that the images are used for that's fine, images should look as clean and professional as possible.  But, for displaying the quality of a camera it shouldn't be modified.


 * I'm still of the mind to leave the gallery out. Perhaps I, or we, can request a feature from the wikimedia project to include image searching based on metadata (you don't have to be involved if you don't like).  Gh5046 04:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well of course a set of pics like the one you mentioned on dpreview would be perfect, but who has the time for that; I know I am not up for that. Any way I said it's your call, and I meant it. What can I say, you convinced me.


 * It's not a bad idea to request a search option like that, and I am all for it; I just don't know how I can help with that. You tell what to do, and I shall do my best. Sbn1984 05:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I submitted a feature request. I'm crossing my fingers.  Gh5046 18:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)