User talk:Jean-Christophe BENOIST

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Riemann sphere
Thank you for the picture you uploaded. I removed it from the article however, just for now, as it is hard to see what is going on in the picture, while the previous one was clearer (see your picture on top right, and the one I reverted to below it).

Would it be possible for you to make the elements in the picture larger, such as text font size, thickness of lines, etc? Also, it is not clear which point is projected where.

In short, for now, the picture below explains things better I think. If you improve your picture, we may put it back in the article.

You can reply here to any comments. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello ! Thanks for your comments. I have actually updated the english article to obtain comments and hints about this picture (as the french article is seldom read..), and you have fullfiled my desires. I understand this picture needs to be zoommed to be understood, and this was not the case for the former one. But, once zoomed, I find it very clear, isn't it ? Especially point A projected to $$\alpha$$ should be clear. One concern is shadows on the sphere, which adds unnecessary elements, but gives a nice 3D effect to the sphere. What do you think about this ? Former 2D picture is indeed clear, but one cannot see directly where the $$\mathbb C$$ plane, or the unit circle, is. I'll try to upgrade this picture. I keep you informed. Regards. --Jean-Christophe BENOIST 23:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * How do you feel with Image:Riemann_sphere1.jpg ? I have added to projection cases, when |c|<1 and when |c|>1 --Jean-Christophe BENOIST 23:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Things are still rather hard to see I believe. Ideally one does not need to zoom in to see the details in pictures I think. Perhaps more work is needed. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * But picture in article is rather small, and smaller than standard size in WP (250px). If picture was standard size, things are better. This picture (not mine, but a projection explanation picture) is important and deserve IMO at least a standard size. I have slightly zoomed the new picture (don't forget to refresh your browser). If you have more hints don't hesitate. --Jean-Christophe BENOIST 06:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that it looks good now. Could you also make the lines a bit thicker and the arrows larger? Now they are also a bit hard to see. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Here it is (refresh your browser). You are right, this is better with thicker lines. We always need other's eyes.. --Jean-Christophe BENOIST 15:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * How about the arrows, I can't see well the x axis, and y axis even less I think. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I've made axis lines a little bit thickier (but not more, because IMO they obfuscate the picture if too thick) and longer. They should be more visible. You are a perfectionnist (but like me, so I'm not upset with small detail updating.. ;) ) --Jean-Christophe BENOIST 16:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I am very happy with the picture now! I added it to Riemann sphere. One more question. Could you add the source code which was used to make the picture to the picture page on commons? I think it is helpful to have the source of the picture, for the future, and some people may learn from it (me, for example). Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was considering to give the source, but there is two little problems for now. First, the source use an external library I cannot disclose (but I can give a WWW link). By the way, I have mailed the library's author and he is OK for using it for WP. Second, this is my first picture with this library (!), and source doesnot meet my usual quality standards (a lot of copy/paste, dead code etc..). But I plan now to do some pictures of quantum spin states using Riemann Sphere, and I'll rework the code. As soon as it will be publishable, I'll release it on Common). But I can email you the code straight away, if you want. --Jean-Christophe BENOIST 11:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No rush. :) Once you are happy enough with the source, releasing it would be very nice I think (of course, without the library which is not your code). If you don't forget, perhaps you could let me know when you release the source, I'd like to see how such nice pictures are made. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 14:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Jean-Christophe, I would like to thank you for uploading this original picture. It is a great visual aid. I also am interested in finding out how to make similar pictures. I noticed in the picture's metadata information you said (or it said), software: Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows. Do you suggest other ways other than big software like adobe? would using POVRay be efficient?

Is the source you mentioned earlier source code for the Photoshop software, or some other standard raytracing or 3D scene description language? If so would you mind emailing me the source code ? Thanks again. Scriber (talk) 03:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You've got mail!
--Cameron11598 (Talk) 00:28, 28 May 2017 (UTC)