User talk:PiccoloNamek/Archive 2

Archives
Old archives of my User Talk page can be found at:

User talk:PiccoloNamek/Archive 1

Featured Picture
Congratulations once more, and a huge thanks for keeping on giving us these wonderful pictures. Raven4x4x 01:04, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

And again!! Raven4x4x 04:20, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Raven4x4x 07:52, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Raven4x4x 08:46, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks heaps...
But your the one who deserves the real gratitude! Raven4x4x 11:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)



Cirrus
I have replied on the FPC page for your picture on a sky full of Cirrus clouds. Please share the color version. Nice job on all those featured images. - Mgm|(talk) 08:46, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Your image tags
I took the liberty of changing the code of the tags you put on images. The br style="clear:both;" line causes large empty spots when metadata tables are presented and you forgot to close the table tag causing the GFDL tag to be stretched which to me looked very ugly. I took out the clear:both bit, so the tags would be displayed without needless empty space and I closed the table tag for you avoiding any stretching due to nesting. I hope you like how it looks now. (see the tags on your gallery images and PiccoloNamek for the changes) - Mgm|(talk) 09:48, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * P.S. You forgot to tag Image:MorningGlory-Pink.jpg. I'm guessign you want to use the same tags, but I'll leave that up to you. - Mgm|(talk) 09:49, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Below are the "before" and "after" shots of how your tags looked to show why I made the change. Keep those pictures coming in! - Mgm|(talk) 09:55, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

EOS 20D
This is a superb camera as I'm sure you've gathered from the many reviews on the internet. Startup time is unbelievably quick, autofocus is v. good (although this of course depends on the lens), ISO noise and shutter/burst speed are probably the most sensational advantages. You can easily shoot up to ISO 400 without any visible noise, and ISO 800 is pretty good still. I'd recommend buying at least a 2gig card as you tend to chew through space pretty darn quick (especially if you are shooting in RAW), and getting a lens which has a max aperture of f/2.8 - not only because it gets great bokeh and is usefull in low light, but apparently (and I don't fully understand why) if the lens has an aperture of f/2.8 the 20D can make full use of it's autofocus capabilites. There is supposed to be a difference b/w lens which haven't got f/2.8 - something probably worth investigating more. The lens I have is, well OK - acceptable image quality/sharpness/focus time/macro but it is just a beginner. A really good value lens is the Canon 70-200mm L f/4, but obviously you'd probably want a more wide angle zoom for every day shooting. The 180 is superb! It is my dream lens. Have you seen [www.fredmiranda.com www.fredmiranda.com]? It's got heaps of good reviews. Make sure you research your lens thoroughly because you'll find that it will be the bottleneck for your camera. Anyway I strongly recommend this camera - you'll not be disappointed. I guess if you had another $1500 or so you could splurge out and get the fantastic 5D (which Diliff has, but this is a great camera. Hope to see your result soon! --Fir0002 07:08, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Flying bug pollinating a flower
The insect is definitely a flower fly, family syrphidae, but I cannot with certainty say genus or species and the flower looks like a dayflower (Commelina sp.), but it may have other common names. The purple fringe on the anthers is pretty distinctive. Look at the filaments under a microscope.

Image Tagging Image:Aleste.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Aleste.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by going to "Your contributions" from your user page and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Steve block talk 20:57, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * That's brilliant, thanks a lot. Steve block talk 21:14, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Digital image enhancement
Usually when checking an image for artifacts, you expect to have to at least zoom, or use image analysis techniques. In this case, the "improved" image had artifacts clearly visible to the naked eye! I mean wow, I haven't seen anyone try to pass something like that off in a long time.

Like make-up, digital image enhancement is a separate artform, and something that at the best of times should be applied with great moderation and restraint.

Just like a naturally beautiful woman can look good even if she overdoes the make-up, I think you get so many images featured because you are a very good photographer. :-)

Kim Bruning 02:08, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Um, isn't Gmaxwell one of the people who helps program and maintain the automatic image filters for mediawiki (the software that runs wikipedia)? I think they put some of the downsampling filters that are also in photoshop into the software here so that downsampling happens automagically, based on the wikicode people use. Hmm, also, wasn't there a rule of thumb that you should always only downsample just once? Kim Bruning 07:30, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, well .. pretty much, although thats not my doing... Our downsampler is in the same class as the current photoshop bicubic. For downsampling we use a Lanczos filter which is generally regarded to be superior, and for upsampling we use Mitchell which is effectively the same as photoshop's bicubic. It's all automagic (through ImageMagick), the design goal being to get images uploaded with the highest resolution and use them for the greatest number of applications. And yes, esp. with 8bit output it is highly preferable to downsample only once... the accumulated error in two passes is probably more than the difference between any of the first class filter functions. --Gmaxwell 07:46, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

When you click on the image on the image page itself, you get access to the original (hopefully undownsampled) image. :-) Kim Bruning 07:55, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, not quite.. You'll get the orignal only if the image isn't bigger than what we expect the users screen to be (I forget the extact metric, I'd have to check the source and I need to get to bed). If it's really big (see Image:Lexus-es300-side.jpg for a cruddy example) you've gotta click one more time. We do everything we can to make it easy for people to upload really large images. --Gmaxwell 08:27, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, well I have this friend who a long time ago downsampled all her images to 640x480 resolution. That was her entire screen at the time! She then deleted all her originals. After all, the downsampled versions looked much better on her screen, and better yet, took up a lot less space.

Then, later, she bought a new computer, since the last one was getting too old. Of course, on her new 1280x1024 screen, the images now looked TERRIBLE. Suffice to say, she now religeously keeps her originals :-)

In the same way, we don't mind the artifacts on images that haven't been downsampled, we don't mind that they don't fit on our screen. We can always downsample or do whatever other filter we need later. But that only works if we do have those originals first!

Kim Bruning 23:36, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

FP once more
I thought you'd appreciate some nice news :) . Congratulations again. Raven4x4x 05:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

You are a busy photographer... Raven4x4x 06:34, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

FF image status
Hi, as part of the crackdown on copvios, I see that the images in Spira such as Image:Calm Lands.png do not mention a source. If somebody slaps the "nosource" tag on those, that is a 7-day countdown to image deletion, so you might want to consider preemptively documenting source and fair use justification for use for each (I'll pass over them for now, many others to work on). Stan 16:32, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day
Hi Piccolo,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Photos-photos 1088103921 Floating.jpg is due to make an appearance as Pic of the Day on the 10th December. As this will be a weekend, it should also appear on the Main Page. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Picture of the day/December 10, 2005.

Instead of using the image on dandelion (where we have just recently had a POTD on another FeaturedPicture), I've placed the image on Biological dispersal as an example of wind dispersal and based the caption on that. -- Solipsist 09:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Iceland Dettifoss 1972-4.jpg
Please do not forget to correct the turquoise blotches... Lupo 16:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

A small FF-related note
First to say thanks for the kind words regarding my Pyreflies rewrite - thanks =) Secondly (and I can't believe I just wrote all this about one word!) I spotted your revert to the word "relegated" in the Spira article; you're thinking of the word 'delegated' here, I'd have used that in my update today but for it carrying connotations of authority which don't really fit in this context... Um, anyway, just wanted to explain why I changed the word to "passed on" ;) Gamemaker 17:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:AnnanStaff2-2.jpg
This image is taged as GFDL but without informations on the copyright holder. As a follow it would be a copyvio to use it. Beside please use Wikimedia Commons to upload you images. Thanks, Saperaud 07:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day
Hi Piccolo,

Sorry for the late notice, but just to let you know that your photo Image:Zorak-Mantis.png is due to make an appearance as Pic of the Day tomorrow. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Picture of the day/December 13, 2005.

Image:Baaj Temple.png
I want to notify you that I've put nosource on this image you've uploaded. Fair use images need a source and if you can provide one, you can remove nosource from it. If you can't provide a source seven days from now, this image will be deleted.--DarkEvil 17:06, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking care of this, you're actually only the second user who've ever responded to one of these from me.--DarkEvil 17:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks once again for caring about this image, I know you were so proud of the Spira article. I don't want to get annoying, its just that I wanted you to know that I plan to convert the png images used in this article to jpg since they benefit from it. I convert them in relatively high jpg quality making no apparent difference to the human eye at 100% zoom in, since these were not designed to be pngs making 400 kb more or less while in jpg, the one I converted makes only 75kb. You can check for now the png and jpg version of this image, but I am putting the PNG version for deletion. PNG: Image:Baaj Temple.png JPG: Image:Baaj Temple.jpg

Spira images
Yeah, don't worry, I can definitely wait, I'm not going to stand in your way when I know you're trying to get things right too.--DarkEvil 20:49, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * So, do you have an idea if you can find the source back for Image:Bevelle.png, Image:Calm Lands.png and Image:Gagazet-Fayth.jpg, I tried searching through major fansites as well as typing several things on google such as ffx locations artwork and any other combination you might think, but I was not able to find any myself. As promised, they're still not nosource tagged as I know you want to keep them, but we'll have to do something about it one day, but I'm still leaving you a week if you want.--DarkEvil 22:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


 * OK, then the alternate images or CG versions should be used for now, until you find the source. I also like things like work of art/paintings better, but it's wikipedia's policies to have source, we can't do nothing against it. Thanks for trying, I think I can put nosource on Bevelle and Gagazet if I understand.--DarkEvil 22:54, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I think the Bevelle image is just right. Crop it and it will be ready, plus you have the source for this. This leaves only Gagazet.--DarkEvil 23:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the Day
Hi Piccolo,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Hornet-vespa.jpg is due to make an appearance as Pic of the Day on the 22nd December. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Picture of the day/December 22, 2005.

Image:ZanarkandRuins.jpg has been listed for deletion

 * --Romeo Bravo 19:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

RainbowCD
I saw your picture of the RainbowCD and I was wondering how long it was in the microwave. I'd like to try and reproduce the effect, but I don't want to have it explode and send glass shooting all over the place :). freestylefrappe 18:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Picture of the Day
Hi Blaise,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:P1010027.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on the 22nd January. As this will be a weekend, it should also appear on the MainPage. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Picture of the day/January 22, 2006. -- Solipsist 08:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Great picture. Well done ! No Guru 00:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Your images
Wow! I just saw the lizard one and then linked here and have been looking at a lot of them, very nice! I really like Image:Hornet-vespa.jpg :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 00:18, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Picture of the Day
Hi Piccolo,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Crepuscular rays color.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on the 24th January. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Picture of the day/January 24, 2006.


 * ...and the next one is...


 * your photo Image:BlueMorningGloryClose.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on the 31st January. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Picture of the day/January 31, 2006.

once more into the breach;

This time it is Image:FlyingBugPollinating-Oct15-lighter-cleaner.jpg which will appear as Picture of the Day on the 2nd Feburary (tomorrow). The caption is at Picture of the day/February 2, 2006. -- Solipsist 18:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Cool Map of Spira
I scanned it from my The Art of Final Fantasy X book. Check it out quickly because it will be deleted soon. If you want to use it, you will have to resize it so it gets to be "fair use"

PS: I noticed people were giving you grief about the source of your Spira pictures. They can ALL be scanned from my book with the exception of the "Floating Ruins" and the "Bikanel" pics. So you found your source ;-) Renmiri 18:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri

Pic of the Day
Hi Piccolo,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:BeadedLizard-AHPExotics.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on the 9th February. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Picture of the day/February 9, 2006.


 * And Image:Beetle-Bessbug.jpg is up for POTD tomorrow, which will also appear on the Main Page. The caption can be found at Picture of the day/February 11, 2006. Nice one. -- Solipsist 18:42, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

You take wonderful pictures! I mean that. You should write about what kind of camera you use and so on. I see somebody up above mentioned camera setups but it's signed by somebody else. Keep it up! Jason Quinn 00:12, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Beautiful photographs.THB 00:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the correction. I tend to just assume that every third FP is one of yours :) We should have a link to the original version on the image page. I'll fix it up. -- Solipsist 14:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

UPNetwork
To my knowledge, theres only one damicatz on the internet :P. So yes, I'm the same damicatz from UPNetwork - Damicatz 08:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

User Page Vandel
Just was looking through the edits : http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:PiccoloNamek&oldid=39185125

Needing to get a life is an understatement considering this guy already has 1500 accounts banned. Damicatz 08:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Where did you go?
I was just looking through my contributions, and I realised that I haven't congratulated you on a new FP for almost three months. Are you giving your camera a rest for the moment? Raven4x4x 10:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Picture of the Day
Hi Piccolo,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:CirrusField-color.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on the 4th March. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Picture of the day/March 4, 2006. -- Solipsist 01:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The pic looks great, could you share the location where this photograph was taken? --Blainster 16:49, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Great shot!
Hey Man! Love the image of the cirrus clouds! And your contribution to the Final Fantasy project is much appreciated from us fans! GazMazk