Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Photography workshop/Archive/Dec 2011

=Stale=

Eva Braun image
Article(s): Eva Braun Request: Please can you clean up the image by making it less fuzzy (if possible) and crop off the white space at the bottom of the image. Thanks. Peter (talk) 11:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):
 * The image has no source (is it her?) and wrong license. Materialscientist (talk) 11:31, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll ask the uploader for these details. Peter (talk) 11:43, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Highway centerlines, part deux
Article(s): County Road 492 (Marquette County, Michigan), Road surface marking, etc Request: I had previously obtained a photo of this first highway centerline from the Michigan Department of Transportation photo archives, but I have since located a different photo from the Federal Highway Administration archives that I think is better. I would like to see the photo improved for an attempt to nominate it at WP:FPC. Note, I have the original 8 MB TIFF file from FHWA that I can e-mail to anyone; just contact me through the e-mail this user link.  Imzadi 1979  →   23:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

Upload the tif to commons and link to it from File:Thefirstruralhighwaycenterline.png. That way it's available forever and to anyone who wants to work with it. Or, provide a link here to the file you found and someone else will upload it to commons. JBarta (talk) 01:52, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, first the Upload Wizard didn't like the file. Now neither Commons nor Wikipedia will upload it without an error message. The file was e-mailed directly to me from FHWA, so if I can't upload it somehow, I'd have to share it by e-mail.  Imzadi 1979  →   02:11, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Try converting it to PNG. Most any graphics editor can do that. Then try uploading. Personally, I find IrfanView handy to have around and it will convert any image type into almost any other image type. JBarta (talk) 02:49, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The PNG created from the TIFF is ↑ above already.  Imzadi 1979  →  02:56, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I would imagine your 8MB TIF is of higher resolution than the rather small PNG above. Just save the TIF as a PNG without resizing it or altering it in any way. Then upload. JBarta (talk) 03:10, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Which is exactly what I did.  Imzadi 1979  →   22:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * An uncompressed TIF of that size would be less than 1MB. You said your TIF was 8MB. Somewhere you misplaced 7MB. Further, a TIF original from a US govt source is almost never so small as the image above. So if the above PNG is, as you say, a direct copy of the TIF file the FHWA sent you, then there is no need to forward that TIF to anyone and your hopes for a Featured Picture are over. End of story. However, what I would do if I were you is.... stop, back up and start over. Open the TIF in a graphics editor and save it as a PNG. Make sure you are not resizing it. If you figure you've already done this, then do it again. A PNG from an uncompressed 8MB TIF should be an image significantly larger than 796 x 784. From a compressed TIF even larger. JBarta (talk) 23:28, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words, however, the FHWA-sent TIF is the source for the PNG that was created by GraphicConverter as displayed above, and I did not select any options to resize it, since Preview says that the file is a 796 x 784 pixel, 100 dpi, 8.8 MB, 16-bit color depth, uncompressed TIFF. Now, it is my assumption that something in the encoding is such that the servers on Commons/Wikipedia and Flickr can't decode it, and therefore reject the file, or I would have uploaded by now.  Imzadi 1979  →   23:37, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Here's a little more kindness... stop arguing with me, back up, start over, re-read what I said and upload either the TIF or a direct PNG conversion. If and until you get that done we're simply wasting time. If you figure I'm just an unkind and unhelpful dolt who is determined to give you a hard time, then that's OK too. I'm good either way. JBarta (talk) 00:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Fact 1: I have attempted three times to upload the TIFF, and MediaWiki gives me error messages each time. Fact 2: I attempted to upload the same TIFF to my Flickr account, thinking that if I did that successfully, I could get it transferred to Commons; that attempt failed with another error message. Fact 3: The PNG is a direct conversion from the TIFF without any resizing, resampling or alteration. Fact 4: since the TIF was uploaded, it has been edited by a third-party. Now, if you want, I will willingly forward the e-mail from FHWA with the attachments, as I stated at the beginning, but because of server issues, I can't upload it.  Imzadi 1979  →   00:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I have made a fourth and fifth attempt to upload the TIFF to Commons. Using the Upload Wizard, I got a message that just said "upload failed". Using the old upload form, I get the error message screen that pops up whenever the servers are down ("Our servers are currently experiencing a technical problem. This is probably temporary and should be fixed soon. Please try again in a few minutes."). At the bottom, it says: "If you report this error to the Wikimedia System Administrators, please include the details below. PHP fatal error in /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.18/extensions/PagedTiffHandler/PagedTiffHandler.image.php line 211: Allowed memory size of 125829120 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 24158230 bytes)". This is very frustrating to me because the file opens fine in Adobe Photoshop (CS4), GraphicConverter (5.0.2), Apple Preview (5.0.3), yet Commons and Flickr give me error messages. The original PNG version (remember, it's been edited since I uploaded it) was created from the TIFF by opening it in GraphicConverter and saving it as PNG without any resampling, no resizing, no interlacing, no filtering, nothing. That resulted in a file on my computer that reads as 1.2MB, but on upload here showed as 720KB. I don't know what Quibik did, but his edit summary was "Removed some wave patterns in lighter areas." and resulted in a file of 348KB.  Imzadi 1979  →   01:19, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * So, since you have already uploaded a direct PNG conversion of the TIF file, what would you like us to do with it? JBarta (talk) 01:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Imzadi, perhaps you could try 16-bit > 8-bit conversion. Open the original file with Photoshop. First go to Edit > Image size.. Make sure the drop-down menu reads 'pixels', not 'percent' or anything else. Does the size now read 796 or is it larger, as Jbarta suggested? I only ask because I suspect that you may have been mistaking preview/save parameters as original image parameters. Anyway, cancel that (don't resize). Now go to Edit > Mode > 8-bit, then File > Save As.. Select TIF from the lower drop-down box. Name the file (so as not to overwrite the original). Click Save. You will be asked about compression, select 'None'. That's it! The finished filesize should be ~4Mb (half the original), however there is a difference between 'filesize' and 'size on disk' (the latter being larger). Any joy? Regards, nagualdesign (talk) 09:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Hawaiian Poi Dog

 * http://www.xenotypetech.com/samplepdfs/KaLamaHawaii.pdf
 * http://ulukau.org/collect/nupepa/index/assoc/HASHb8f8.dir/001_0_001_023_001_01_mid_18341217.png

Article(s): Hawaiian Poi Dog Request: Could someone please fix the image of the dog? Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

Look any better? Magister Scienta talk (Editor Review)  01:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Paul Emmert
Article(s): Paul Emmert, List of Hawaiian royal residences, John Mott-Smith, Royal School (Hawaii), William Little Lee, Kalaniʻōpuʻu Request: Crop a little more properly, leaving the branching frame, and turn black and white. Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

Baptismal cup
Article(s): Albert Kamehameha, Hānaiakamālama Request: Please remove the glare on the image in a seperate edit and upload it. 1 images but two seperate uploads onto the history, if anyone is confused. And for the second edit attempt to crop the object out and place it on a black background like other artifact images. Thank you. KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:14, 10 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):


 * I think I decoded the assignment and done something, except for isolating the cup in the first image - no time for that now, anyone is welcome to do that. Materialscientist (talk) 08:25, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Abel-Nicolas Bergasse Dupetit Thouars
Article(s): Abel-Nicolas Bergasse Dupetit Thouars Request: Can someone clean this two images up? KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:18, 22 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

Quadroon
Article(s): Quadroon Request: Clean up and remove wave patterns... KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):


 * ✅ Removed the wave patterns. —Quibik (talk) 09:25, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Anything else that can be cleaned up? The sky looks as damaged as the wall behind her.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 14:56, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Cropping
Article(s): William Ellis (missionary) Request: Can somebody help me crop this? I can't tell where the image end and where the book page starts? Edit/upload twice, first just crop to the edge of frame, then center crop on the second upload. Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:54, 4 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s): Didn't I do this an hour and a half ago?! Forgive me for saying, but the 3 newer versions that you uploaded afterwards aren't very good, and re-scaling has introduced some pretty nasty pixelization. I noticed that the image I worked on wasn't 100% plumb, but given the resolution (rotating an image this size may cause loss of detail) I opted to leave it as it is. nagualdesign (talk) 05:23, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ..Okay, I've revisited the image (the version I uploaded) and rotated it fully one-third of a degree! As expected, all the fine cross-hatching on his jacket was lost, so I kept the old image on the new text, which I unsharp masked. I've also centered the image and text horizontally. I'll upload it now. Please don't take this as me wanting to get into a pissing contest. If you don't prefer this version just revert it, no harm done. (I'll just quietly judge you!) ;-) nagualdesign (talk) 05:41, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Judge me as you will. My opinion was that the google book image had better details. Sorry if I offended you, but I'm very picky. Can you do a last crop that remove all the text and centers on the image, only? --KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I wasn't offended. Perhaps you could use instead? That way the original is preserved for other uses. Like this: nagualdesign (talk) 07:09, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * How would I apply that to an infobox on his article?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 14:51, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe this will help. Give it a week, if nothing comes of it I'd crop the image and save it as a new file. I noticed that you've cropped one of the others, too. Not necessarily a good idea if you ask me. We can either create good, archiveable images to upload to the commons or create small images with a specific article in mind. The former is usually preferable, whenever possible. nagualdesign (talk) 21:59, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * All captions and descrpitions in my opinion can be included in the description, and the history of the image and the link to the National Library of Australia list the original file. And in my opinion, again, too much derivative files equal bad, unless there is a great reason in keeping the original as it is, plus it's no longer in the original state since people like you been editing and tweaking it. That's my thoughts.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:24, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay then. nagualdesign (talk) 22:44, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Kuakini
Article(s): Kuakini Request: Clean up first image with minimal cropping. Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:38, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * 
 * Can anybody clean up this link and remove the pixelation and upload to second image?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * And adjust them to be the same height, width and size, without cropping any part of the figure itself.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 14:27, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s):

=Resolved=

Matthew C. Perry
Article(s): Matthew C. Perry Request: Hi! Could someone create a .png version of the photo to the left (with transparent background) just like the photo to the right? Thank you very much, Lecen (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Made .png with transparent background; cleaned up image removing scratches, foxing, etc. (NOTE: I had to reduce resolution from 300dpi to 150 dpi because .png file at higher resolution was over the 10MB file size limit) Centpacrr (talk) 02:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Angeline Lorraine Tenney Castle
Article(s): Samuel Northrup Castle Request: Center crop and whiten background. Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 11:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 11:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Did some parts of the image change? The eyelash look shorter.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:23, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like the current image has been made using 'threshold', which is essentially a 1-bit image (look closely at the outline). I have modified the original (using Pixlr no less!) to produce a much better image, but I can't work out how to upload it. Any pointers? nagualdesign (talk) 00:46, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep at it until you figure it out. JBarta (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that! nagualdesign (talk) 01:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You asked for pointers. You offered no clue as to what your efforts had been and what problems you encountered. On top of that, I have no idea what your skill level/set is. At this time I can be of no use to you whatsoever on any specifics. However... it's been my experience that 1) many people give up (or rely on assistance excessively) when encountering difficulties, and 2) almost any difficulty can be overcome with simple persistance and determination and the benefits of doing so are great. So to my mind, the most useful thing I could offer is to suggest you keep at it until you figure it out. That pointer is far more valuable than you may realize. JBarta (talk) 02:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said, I can't work out how to upload it. Most of the images I've encountered (on Wikipedia) have a link at the bottom of their page that says "Upload a new version of this file". It seems like this image, being on Wikicommons, doesn't offer that simple method. Having spent a good few minutes editing the image I was more than willing to spend time trying to find out how to upload it. However, after reading through many pages of unrelated bumf trying to find a solution, and then using Google to search Wikipedia to no avail, I thought that the most expedient idea would be to perhaps simply ask somebody.
 * If I had known beforehand that I would first have to tell people more about myself, blow my own trumpet a little then concede my inadequacies I would have done so. (More sarcasm there.)
 * I could tell by the way you dealt with other people's requests that you are perhaps a little bit exasperated, but there is very little requirement for you to be so terse. When you said "Keep at it until you figure it out" it made me giggle because I thought you were being facetious (perhaps I should state at this point that I have a sense of humour), and I then spent another half an hour searching, assuming that you might be impling that the answer was right under my nose. Now I know that you think you were giving me a 'valuable pointer' (thanks Dad!) I'm frankly a little shocked. The answer to my original question would, after all, probably have only required one or two sentences, right? But hey-ho, that's life I guess.
 * Would you prefer me to just piss off and leave all the photos to you, or is it okay for me to help out here? I do have considerable experience of photographic retouching, just none of working on this part of Wikipedia. nagualdesign (talk) 05:05, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Seriously now, all this thrashing about isn't really getting you closer to getting your file uploaded. Another pointer... stay focused. That said, your ramblings did suggest a possible clue into your specific troubles. Do you have an account at Commons? If not, you'll need to sign up as a user if you wish to upload images there. Hope that helps... and keep at it until you figure it out ;-) JBarta (talk) 05:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The 'thrashing about' was to let you know that you were being obnoxious and more than a little condescending. Consider it a pointer! The solution was indeed to sign in at the Commons. Given that I always tick the 'sign me in to other wikis' box when I sign in I had assumed that I was signed in at the Commons. Giving me a straight answer (2 sentences) had very little to do with my skill level did it. And I hardly think that the question "Any pointers?" counts as giving up or relying on assistance excessively does it. The 'most useful thing' you could offer was to waste my time, but don't think twice it's alright.
 * If somebody pulls up at the side of the road to ask you for directions, do you tell them or do you suggest that they buy a map, or keep driving around blindly until they eventually find their destination? "Take my advice, son, by the time you find what you're looking for you'll know these roads like the back of your hand!" (That was a joke, by the way.)
 * Don't worry about this hiccup. I'm sure that we can get along together, as long as you can learn to play well with others. Wikipedia is a team effort, right? If you ever feel that people are wasting your time just remember that Wikipedia is all about giving your time freely. And if you really don't want to give someone an answer say nothing. (Another pointer there.) nagualdesign (talk) 14:34, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you got it uploaded... and I'll consider myself straightened out. Cheers. JBarta (talk) 18:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

On a related topic, some of the images I've created/uploaded (like this one) are now to be moved to the Commons. Would it have been simpler if I'd just uploaded it to the Commons in the first place, even if I wish to use the license? If you could point me towards some useful documentation on the subject I'd appreciate it. I've read Contributing your own work and Choosing a license but I know very little about the complexeties of copyright law. I don't even understand the difference between 'Free licenses' ("Free as in freedom"!?) and 'Public domain'! nagualdesign (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * To make it simple: Public domain means you give up any claim to your work. Anyone can use it, modify it, put their name on it. Everything becomes PD eventually, long after the author dies. Free licenses (like CC-BY-SA, the wiki default) allow you to retain certain rights, like attribution. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't be much help in matching you with a specific license that that you would find agreeable. You'll have to sort that out yourself or find someone else to help you. I simply upload my images as public domain and don't give it another thought. I will say this however... it is very useful, where possible, to upload images to commons rather than to en.wikipedia (or any other language). The main advantage is that the image can now be used by any language and any of the wikimedia websites. JBarta (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you both. :-) nagualdesign (talk) 20:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Remove watermark
Article(s): Henry Ford Request: Please can you remove the watermark from the bottom right of the image and possibly sharpen the image to make it less blurry. Thanks Peter (talk) 16:41, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

✅ Centpacrr (talk) 22:56, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Sarah Stickney Ellis
Article(s): Sarah Stickney Ellis Request: Oval crop... KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:04, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅

Death by pussycat
Article(s): Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! Request: Touch up the fold marks in both posters. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 15:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Seems perfectly fine to me. Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:59, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Hinoi Pōmare
Article(s): Hinoi Pōmare Request: Clean up the white spot on the left shoulder and next to his legs. Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 10:33, 30 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s): ✅ nagualdesign (talk) 03:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Rainis 1880 by Robert Borchardt.png
Article(s): Rainis Request: Brightness adjustment needed. --Glebchik (talk) 02:41, 26 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

✅: Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:22, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Rainilaiarivony
Article(s): Rainilaiarivony Request: Do something with them... KAVEBEAR (talk) 14:26, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):
 * ✅ Removed bluishness. Retouched. nagualdesign (talk) 00:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cleaned up stains and uneven lighting. Howzat? nagualdesign (talk) 01:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but could you lighten up the dark shadows on the wall in the first image? --KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:51, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Darkened shadows (against my better judgement). Any more and too much detail will be lost. You might want to adjust your monitor and compare old and new, or view them on a second monitor. nagualdesign (talk) 02:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ooops! Just re-read your request. Hang on, I've still got it open in Photoshop... nagualdesign (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ ...Sorry about that! Removed shadows on the wall entirely. Is that what you wanted? nagualdesign (talk) 02:55, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Wally Backman
Article(s): Wally Backman Request: Upload a new photo from the original source, sharpen. Thanks, Albacore (talk) 16:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion:

Even at full resolution that is a particularly poor photo. So I just grabbed a larger version, cropped it and uploaded it. There's not much (if any) improvement you're going to get out of that image. JBarta (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Indiana Evans and Summer Strallen
Article(s): Indiana Evans, Summer Strallen Request: Can you bring the focus in on Indiana as she is over to one side of the image. Can you make a crop of Summer Strallen, the girl in the blue coat without glasses. Rain the One  BAM 23:20, 30 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s): ✅: nagualdesign (talk) 23:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thankyou for doing it so quickly. :) Rain the One  BAM 23:56, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Keisuke Otori
Article(s): Keisuke Otori Request: cut clean oval and repair of crack... Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

✅: JBarta (talk) 19:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thsnk you!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:55, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Bradley Nowell
File:Youngbradleynowell.jpg Article(s): Bradley Nowell Request: fix perspective and crop... Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:17, 30 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 17:30, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Very good, thank you!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:56, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

L.A. Wrigley Field
Article(s): Wrigley Field (Los Angeles) Request: If possible, please crop out the border around the image, rotate it slightly so that none of it gets cut off, and maybe retouch/remove the many blemishes on the image. Please upload as a completely new file. Thanks. Delaywaves  talk  01:25, 1 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s): ✅ Partial restoration. There's not much you can do about a finger over the lens. Cleaned the rest. I tried to upload this to a new file, as requested, but copyright (Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic) wasn't available, so I uploaded it over the old one. Both are still available though. I'll leave you to sort the rest out. ;-) nagualdesign (talk) 02:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * What you essentially did was create a derivative work. This can be easily uploaded to commons by clicking on 1)upload file, then 2)back to the old form, and then 3)derivative work, then follow the instructions. Presto, new derivative file created with no animals harmed in production. JBarta (talk) 05:13, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Good one. :-) The new version can now be found here. The metadata looks a right mess though, and the copyright didn't pass over correctly. I guess derivativeFX swapped . for # for some reason. Swapped it back in the license section. nagualdesign (talk) 06:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Now add the new file next to the original in the gallery above. JBarta (talk) 06:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * For some reason a whole bunch of # characters got substituted into the description of the derivative file. Weird. Being the good Wikipedian I'll just point it out and hope someone else cleans it up... JBarta (talk) 06:42, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Like that? Yeah, I thought as much with the hash symbols, but previous edit summaries can't be edited. Someone will sort it! Thanks again. nagualdesign (talk) 06:56, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, like that. And you fixed the description page. That's plenty. See, I was right... someone else (you) cleaned it up. My work here is done. JBarta (talk) 07:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Wonderful, great work! Delaywaves   talk  02:04, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Empire of Brazil
Article(s): Empire of Brazil Request: The top and right corners of the photo first photo have blue tone. The left corner of the second photo also has a weird blue tone. Could they be fixed without cutting pieces of the photos? Thanks, Lecen (talk) 18:43, 1 December 2011 (UTC) '''Graphist opinion(s):

'''✅ Centpacrr (talk) 19:12, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Centpacrr, I thank you for your help. However, the second photo's color tone is kind of reddish... could it be more similar to as it looked before? --Lecen (talk) 19:24, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

✅ Centpacrr (talk) 21:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Great! Thank you very much! Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 21:51, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Walter F. Dillingham
Article(s): Walter F. Dillingham Request: Clean up noise... KAVEBEAR (talk) 07:25, 25 November 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s): ✅ Too much? nagualdesign (talk) 06:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's great. Any possibility of clearing up the blur around his hair and behind his head?
 * I'll see what I can do later. Be aware though that it's blurring that gets rid of the noise. I'll bring it back a bit. nagualdesign (talk) 16:43, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ The changes are extremely subtle, but worth it I suppose. The problem with retouching is that as you go on you get diminishing returns. When you stop there's always a tiny bit more you could've done. That's it from me though. Hope you like it. nagualdesign (talk) 07:48, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

William Ellis (missionary)
Article(s): William Ellis (missionary) Request: Can someone change the background to white and crop a little more plus some clean up? Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:36, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s): ✅ Did the best I could with William Ellis missionary old, given the low-res image. nagualdesign (talk) 05:06, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Joseph Mallord William Turner Portrait
Article(s): J. M. W. Turner Request: Is there anything that can be done with this image to make it more accurate to the actual portrait? Many of the Turner scans we have totally fail to capture the colouring of the original paintings but this one is both crucial to the article and particularly bad. IRL this painting is much lighter, more detailed and more brown than this image. (here is a lower resolution image but it shows much more of the colouring and detail of what is actually in this portrait - far closer to what this painting actually look likes. I played around with this image in photoshop a bit but had no luck bringing out any of the detail, so thought I would ask to see if the experts can do anything or if I need to try and scan in a print image I have of this picture which has the colours much better. Ajbpearce (talk) 11:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s): ✅ 'I have adjusted the colors as best I could to match the smaller image. Not perfect but I think at least better.
 * Ok, I think the problem is that that original is just not good enough. I have done my best to scan in the version of this image at[:File:Turner Self Portrait.jpg]. Its also not perfect (the image is larger than my scanner so I had to crop it) but as the main purpose of the image is to show the artist, not as a commentary on the picture - i think it is preferable to have a cropped image that is the right colour than an uncropped version in a fantasy colour palette. Thanks for your efforts! Ajbpearce (talk) 13:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Shennong
Article(s): Shennong Request: Looking for collaborator, to work with me in turning the photo into a suitable lead image for the article. the painting is quite good (can re-photograph if/as desired, but my camera is crap @ extreme close-ups). image needs perspective-correction (& slight rotation) first, which i can't do; cropping, which i can handle; then whatever CAREFUL restoration work can be, done to improve image visibility & clarity. i.e.: blemish removal, colour & contrast (basically the paper has darkened somewhat, & the paints have faded slightly). which should be done by someone more experienced than i am. Lx 121 (talk) 00:37, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * forgot to mention: please create a new "working print" file when uploading, i'd like to keep this one as the original source, for archival purposes @ commons. there's going to be an image set of the painting on commons eventually; this pic, overview pic, & sectional hi-rez scans (once i get time & figure out how to do them properly... )Lx 121 (talk) 03:01, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s): Would you like to remove or keep the paper creases? Is this a restoration of the peice itself or just the image on the paper? nagualdesign (talk) 02:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * if you can get rid of the creases, without "artifacting" it, please feel free to try :) (though i'd prefer to create a new "working file" rather than overwriting the existing one; sry, should have mentioned that before). i'm "agnostic" on the merits of crinkly paper; whatever works best on the article is good. Lx 121 (talk) 03:01, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Then I accept the challenge... ;-) nagualdesign (talk) 03:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Okay, don't panic - the thumbnail up there is just one version and there a 5 to choose from so far. Each has it's pros and cons. Let me know what you think and what else might improve the image. :-) Unfortunately, one thing I neglected is the filename - I spelled 'derivative' wrong! Any hints on how to change that, anyone?
 * Version 1: Basically rotated and cropped, with some distortion removal which could have been avoided with a more careful photograph.
 * (Tip: Always make sure that your camera lens is placed on a line perpendicular to the centre of your image, use a tripod and set your camera on maximum optical zoom.)
 * Version 2: Reduced creases. This version retains some of Version 1 so as not to look too artificial.
 * Version 3: Reduced creases more. Not all of the creases are gone but the 'paper' looks much flatter.
 * Version 2b: Altered the contrast, brightness, hue and saturation of Version 2.
 * Version 3b: Altered the contrast, brightness, hue and saturation of Version 3.
 * Regards, nagualdesign (talk) 06:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * After opening each image in a new tab and swapping between them to compare them I realized that in the b versions I've made his eyes and lips blue when they should be red! That can be fixed though. Personally I like Versions 2 and 3b. 2b adds back in too much contrast on the creases for my taste, and 3 doesn't have enough - it's too flat. It just depends whether you want a restoration or a derivative work I guess. nagualdesign (talk) 07:12, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * it looks cleaner, but also seems kind of "washed out" (colours & textures faded); sharpness seems to have decreased also(?). was hoping the final result would have more definition & "natural-ness".  about the file, you can request a rename @ commons (i'd change it myself, but you need admin-powers). (about my cam; i'm damned if i do & damned if i don't:  i did line it up fairly carefully, but to when i get close enough to grab the level of detail, i also end up with wide-angle-effect distortions, most noticeable in the "curved" edges of the painting boundary) Lx 121 (talk) 09:35, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * btw, how do i get to the other examples (sry if i missed the instructions, not rly 100% awake currently, it's deep in the early-AM here)Lx 121 (talk) 09:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * follow-up: also, the white is too "keyed-up", it seems almost "day-glo" on my monitor, & like a separate layer on the image; i missed that on first viewing; in the real painting, the white is the key highlight, but it blends as well as contrasts, & adds depth & life, especially in the eyes (with the red), but also in the shading of the clothes & hair. 209.195.89.213 (talk) 09:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Morning! :-P To check out all of the intermediate versions scroll down the page and click on the thumbnails. Better yet hold CTRL while you click to open each image in a new tab (Windows/IE), then you can flick between them and see the changes. When you've seen the progression, what I've done might make a little more sense. nagualdesign (talk) 10:09, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

You're going to have rather limited satisfaction simply trying to play with this image. I think what would probably satisfy Lx 121 the most is a complete redrawing of the image based on this (or similar) photograph. Until such is created, any one of the cleaned up versions by Nagualdesign is "article-worthy". JBarta (talk) 09:54, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * hm well, what about going with black & white then, if the colour-balance is hopeless? eventually i'll have flat high-res scans of the whole thing, & maybe someone will be insane enough to help me try & do a full-on digital restoration of the complete painting. for now though, the goal is just to get a better "shennong" pic for the article (we have a pretty meager selection), & although it's not that easy to tell right now, the painting is actually a thoroughly decent & reasonably skillful "iconic image" of the subject (i.e,: this is shennong, instantly recognizable, & "doing his thing" xD).  "cultural authenticity" is also a consideration, in that it's an original & historic/antique image, from within the culture(s) to which shennong/shinno is relevant... Lx 121 (talk) 10:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Personally I'd say that the latest (3c) is your best bet (fit for purpose) in the article, even though it's not that much like the original in terms of colour, texture, etc. It's just supposed to show him, right? Nobody is going to wonder where the creases went. nagualdesign (talk) 10:09, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ok crap, i finally woke up & noticed the "history" selection. i'm sry Nagualdesign! >__< Lx 121 (talk) 10:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * i think i like #2.0 best; it's got the worst of the creases toned down, & it's closest to the real-life colours. i knew that trying to tweak the colour/contrast was going to be a huge pain, & i appreciate the time & effort! :) getting the perspective-correction was the most critical, because i absolutely can't fix that on my end. i'm sorry for being so fussy, it's hard to understand, without seeing the original, what made it "the choice" for lead image (to me, at least). would it be better if i put #2 back "on top" of the history pile, or create a new file, titled for the article? (& leave this one free to play with) Lx 121 (talk) 10:35, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Lx 121, if you're eventually going to have a "flat high-res scans of the whole thing" then why don't you simply use one of the quickie edits for now, then re-visit this effort after you have the scan. Seems to me that with the promise of a much better image to work with, messing about excessively with this one now is just effort that will end up in the dust bin, don't you think? It's a beautiful image, and if you can get a high quality scan, then it would be a valuable addition to Wikipedia. Good luck. JBarta (talk) 10:44, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Done it for you (by clicking 'revert'). Hope the creases aren't too distracting on the article page. To correct the perspective I used Photoshop: Filter > Distort > Lens correction. Standing as far away as possible when taking a photo, whilst making sure the subject is still nicely framed (covering most of the sensor), is the best way to minimise distortions. Provided that the subject is in focus stepping closer won't help. In fact you can only focus so close. Hope that helps. It was good fun trying. ;-) nagualdesign (talk) 10:47, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * added to the article, & many thanks! ^__^ (swapped out the previous lead image, as it showed the exact same pose/activity, with a lesser-quality illustration)Lx 121 (talk) 11:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Jessica Watson
Article(s): Jessica Watson Request: Crop. 67.126.141.125 (talk) 05:56, 4 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

Charlotte of Belgium oval crop
Article(s): Charlotte of Belgium Request: Oval crop thanks, you can see the shadow on the edge and anyway to fix the graininess. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s): ✅ nagualdesign (talk) 05:53, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Jacob Arminius image
Article(s): Jacobus Arminius Request: Please can you remove some of the marking on the image (white marks on left-hand side) and general clean-up/removing blurriness. Thanks. Peter (talk) 23:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

✅: Being a lower quality and lower resolution image, opportunities for improvement are limited, but I did a little cleanup. It's a little better I suppose. JBarta (talk) 00:43, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Pushed it a little further. Removed blue tinge on arms. Cleaned it slightly more. nagualdesign (talk) 07:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Abraham Lincoln
Article(s): Abraham Lincoln Request: Please remove the watermark. Regards, Lecen (talk) 00:20, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, Centpacrr. You did it great as usual. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 00:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk)}}

Hadji Ali
Article(s): Hadji Ali Request: Restore, if possible. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:10, 5 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 12:53, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You've edited out the reflection of the fire extinguisher! nagualdesign (talk) 00:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * No I didn't. Look at the original image. What I cleaned up in the lower left hand corner were scratches on the print. The reflection of the pitcher does not extend into that block of pavement. Centpacrr (talk) 01:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah. Silly me! That's what I get for not viewing the image at full size. ..It isn't even a fire extinguisher! :-P nagualdesign (talk) 05:37, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hmm... still a lot of dust and whatnot. Nothing really visible at thumbnail view, but... Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've done one final pass. Centpacrr (talk) 14:57, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Remove watermark
Article(s): Agnes Monica Request: Remove watermark. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s):Removed watermark from second image. Centpacrr (talk) 18:14, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

USS Arizona
Article(s): For USS Arizona (BB-39) Request: Crop, straighten, and upload to Commons as a JPEG. If possible, do a bit of clean-up (doesn't look all too necessary, but this looks like FP material) Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:51, 7 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Now located on Commons  Centpacrr (talk) 09:24, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Thanks! Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:57, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Photo needs rotation
Request: This Photo needs rotation (90 degrees clockwise)

The photo is displaying correctly when original is downloaded but the previews are not.

I would have done it myself but am not sure how to upload a new version

178.135.121.70 (talk) 08:57, 5 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

That's the result of a new feature on the mediawiki software. I've put in a request for the rotationbot to spin it around, and that should be automagically handled in the next few hours. :) - Bilby (talk) 11:20, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Lighten up Heriot-Watt University's entrance
Article(s): Heriot-Watt University Request: It's awfully dark in the bottom half, probably because of too much light in the sky for the exposure. Can you brighten and/or increase the contrast of the lower dark area please? No biggie if not. Thank you! 67.6.163.68 (talk) 06:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

✅: JBarta (talk) 08:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! That looks very nice! 67.6.163.68 (talk) 08:50, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Signature
Article(s): Pedro II of Brazil Request: Please remove the horizontal line below the signature. Regards, Lecen (talk) 21:20, 6 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 21:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! --Lecen (talk) 22:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

A young Yasser Arafat
Article(s): Yasser Arafat Request: Please can you clear up/sharpen the image (it's currently very blurry) + remove the thin border around the image. Thanks! Peter (talk) 21:28, 10 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ This is a very low resolution image so there is not much that can be done to improve detail without introducing undesirable artifacts. I've cleaned it up a bit, removed the thin borders and gave the image a little more head room. Centpacrr (talk) 21:43, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Abraham Lincoln - fill the blank gap
Article(s): Abraham Lincoln Request: Please fill the blank gap on the top. Regards, Lecen (talk) 00:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 05:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Bob Seger
Article(s): Bob Seger Request: crop to Bob and lighten for detail. new copy if you have to. thanks. Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

✅: JBarta (talk) 20:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't wish to nitpick, but I don't think it's a good idea to enlarge an image like that. If a closely cropped image ends up quite small then so be it. Smaller thumbnail sizes are most common in articles, and images of various sizes are generated on the fly. All scaling algorithms can introduce artifacts so it's always better to resize only once (ie, let Wikipedia do it unless you are producing an image of finished, in-use size). Also Wikipedia 10 years from now might have better scaling/sharpening techniques than today's Photoshop. nagualdesign (talk) 04:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for butting in, but I'm not sure your message will be understood. The original is noisy and shouldn't be magnified for this reason, but a standard thumbnail looks Ok (see to the right). Materialscientist (talk) 04:46, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Enlarging a rather small and crappy image isn't going to make much difference one way or another. Often when dealing with excessively small images I'll bump them up in size. In this case enlarging it allowed me a little more opportunity to sharpen the image. (not that it did much good) Another thing to consider is that the originals are still available, and if in 10 years someone else is able to do a better job, they are welcome too ;-) JBarta (talk) 05:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The new version is certainly better than the 100%-crop of the original, to the right. What I'm saying is that enlarging to then scale down degrades the image. As you both pointed out, this image is rather noisy, and processing noisy images produces far more artifacts/noise than processing clean images. Basically, small and crappy images require more care, not less. And as a general rule sharpening (eg, Unsharp masking) should always be done at final resolution, usually as one of the final steps. I'd have cropped the image at 200px wide (or however wide the navbox is) to avoid any scaling, but that's just me. What I meant by in 10 years is that it can be done automatically by software: No one should be required to re-do anything. nagualdesign (talk) 05:37, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The reason my new version is better than your 100% crop is precisely because I doubled the image size then sharpened it a little. Sometimes enlarging an image has its advantages and does not necessarly result in a downgraded image when scaled back down as you suggest. Sometimes it actually improves it. This is a perfect example. Also, infobox image sizes can vary and can change. Sizing an image to perfectly fit a particular something around here is a dicey proposition. JBarta (talk) 05:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I think you've missed my point. Here we're missing a third example (the one I'm advocating) where the original has been cropped and sharpened without scaling. It would have the same proportions and SNR as the bottom image but with the sharpness of the top image. There are technical reasons why sharpening should be done at final resolution (to improve accutance, etc.) but simply put WYSIWYG, which is always a good thing. And just let WP do the resizing if somebody changes the infobox width, but let it have the cleanest image to work with. I don't want to flog a dead horse here. I am speaking from experience, but it's just a tip which you're welcome to take or leave. :-) nagualdesign (talk) 06:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Go ahead and prove your proposition that one way is preferable to another way (i.e. results in a better looking image). Make your own crop and fix it up as you wish at 100% resolution. Then present yours and mine side by side in two ways. First as default thumbnails, then another set at any size you wish. Then we'll have the advantage of comparing them side by side. Talk is fine, but examples are better. JBarta (talk) 06:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps nagualdesign implied you do that because he doesn't know your sharpening details :-). While this experiment might be of some practical use, my guess is the result will depend on the scaling by the wikimedia software (i.e. whether the thumb size is larger or smaller than the pixel width). Materialscientist (talk) 06:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Exactly. This isn't really my proposition either, some would call it sharpening 101. If I have seen further it is only by standing on the shoulders of giants! Seriously though, see for yourself. You'll be surprized at how much information Photoshop seemingly pulls from a small image. (And that enlarging it first brings no new information to the table.) Trust me. ;-) nagualdesign (talk) 06:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * We can compare them at a few different pixel widths. And while I understand your point regarding sharpening details, even if we were to try keeping all variables the same, we wouldn't necessarily want to because you would sharpen an enlarged image a little differently than you would that same image at original size. At any rate, I think the experiment will still be enlightening if he simply fixes up the image as he sees fit. JBarta (talk) 07:02, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Ha ha! You mean a good ol' fashioned pissing contest? No thanks. You'd asked for advice before about colour correction and seemed to appreciate my input. I guess I'd assumed that I could freely offer advice, but I certainly didn't wish to seem superior. The enlightening bit should be when you try the technique yourself and see if you approve, not to see what I can do. I'm on my netbook at the minute (no Photoshop) but I can tell you now that I'd just do an Unsharp mask (by eye), possibly try a little Curves adjustment, then crop width to 180px (the standard thumbnail size - the infobox image is 300px wide, but that's a bit excessive actually). Finally I'd crop the height, perhaps to a classic aspect ratio (usually rounded to some multiple of 10px!) Try that. ...Whether you're any good at using the Unsharp mask filter is another issue entirely! :-P nagualdesign (talk) 07:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes... a good old fashioned pissing contest. In other words, less talk and more action ;-) Anyone can talk (as you've demonstrated admirably). But the proof is in the pudding. Show me the money! Crop and fix up the image as you wish, then we'll place the two side by side for comparison. JBarta (talk) 08:02, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 10 out of 10 for enthusiasm but the concept is flawed; the result will be largely subjective and the element of competition that you've introduced will have already skewed the results! I've already proved the theory to myself, far be it from me to convince you too using my own doctored evidence. nagualdesign (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

John Caldwell's Manton residence 1913
Article(s): John Caldwell Request: Found this. Thought someone might wish to take a crack at a restoration. It's not very high resolution, but the opportunity for improvement is great and the before & after would be stunning. JBarta (talk) 17:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):Restored. Centpacrr (talk) 18:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Excellent work Centpacrr. I'm sure Mr. Caldwell is smiling JBarta (talk) 18:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comparison available hereCentpacrr (talk) 18:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Truth be told, I had you in mind when I posted this. Thought it would be a nice little addition to your portfolio. Again, fine work. JBarta (talk) 18:40, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * And speaking of portfolios, have you seen this? Check out his samples. Talk about some awe-inspiring work. JBarta (talk) 18:46, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words. These are nice work and similar to the types of restoration, colorization and compositing projects I do some additional samples of which you can see here, here, here, and here. Centpacrr (talk) 19:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Oval crop
Article(s): Jenny von Westphalen, Edward VIII, Leleiohoku, Kamehameha III Request: Oval crop... KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:55, 8 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

✅ PawełMM (talk) 09:35, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Amaia Montero
Article(s): Amaia Montero Request: I'm wondering if anyone is able to adjust this to natural colors. If so, please explain how you did it. If you think it's too whacked to do anything with, then I'd be curious to hear those opinions as well. JBarta (talk) 13:08, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s):

I'm not sure exactly what you want but would it be something akin to this study that I have done of it? Centpacrr (talk) 13:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's actually not bad for a rough edit. It looks like you painted it (more or less) by section. Is that correct? JBarta (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This is just a quick 15 minute rough "study" as it is a little unclear what you wanted altered. It does not involve any painting, overlays, or screening. Also I don't know the subject's actual hair color so that was a guess. Centpacrr (talk) 16:09, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have tweaked it a little more. Are you actually planning to do something with this image, or is this just an exercise of some kind? Centpacrr (talk) 18:18, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm definitely planning something with this image... something really big. JBarta (talk) 18:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I was just wondering as the original request was only to remove a watermark. Centpacrr (talk) 18:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

If anyone else wants to take a shot and work a little magic... have at it. (It would also be useful to explain what you did and how you did it.) JBarta (talk) 01:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Explaining exactly how I did this would probably take a couple of thousand words to do as it is not a simple process and employed many proprietary techniques that I have personally developed over the last dozen years. Nothing was added to the image, however, but the result was achieved exclusively by digitally manipulating and exploiting information that was already in the original file. If this is an image project intended for use in Wikipedia (as I had assumed it was when you posted your request here) then please tell me specifically what it is and I will help you with it by providing a finished, high resolution file. If it is not, however, but is instead for some other off site, non-WP application, then this would be the wrong place to bring such a request as that is not the purpose of this page. Centpacrr (talk) 04:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Settle down chief... it's for use in WP. And I certainly wouldn't want you to take a couple thousand words explaining the many proprietary techniques that you have personally developed over the last dozen years... that would be asking far too much. However, if anyone else were to use non-proprietary techniques personally developed over maybe no more than a couple years, and explain it in a few concise paragraphs, it might be useful and educational to hear what you did. JBarta (talk) 08:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * How's that looking? Still needs work, but is that kind of what you were after? nagualdesign (talk) 10:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's not bad at all. I'm not looking for anything in particular, other than making a badly color-casted image more naturally colored (if at all possible). And yours is certainly an improvement on the original. Would you care to explain briefly how you did it? Of course, if that requires a couple thousand words explaining many proprietary techniques you have personally developed over many years, I would understand if you hesitated. Hopefully though, you have a few non-proprietary tidbits you're willing to share. JBarta (talk) 11:15, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I basically tried every type of layering technique and adjustment that I thought might have the desired effect, then picked a few of these to use as processing steps. The final process was to; (1) Set white balance in Camera Raw with both sliders maxed out, (2) Mask out green cast on face and jacket using original image as replacement, (3) Selectively reduce purple cast using a single hue layer set to green (which was the inverted colour of her jacket), and finally (4) retouched to removed specular green or purple highlights.
 * The hard part is finding what works best, which is different for each image. The logic here was that her jacket should be grey, and the green 'light' was just where the pink light wasn't shining. Oh, and the luminosity should be preseved. And you'll never get a 'white light' colour cast so you have to compromise. I could go on, but mark my words young man, practice makes perfect. You keep at it and one day you'll reap the Earth, tha knows. (I jest!) ;-P nagualdesign (talk) 23:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Wiser words were never spoken ;-) Thank you for sharing your techniques. So, to paraphrase the millionaire show... is that your final edit? JBarta (talk) 00:35, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Did it again (same process) from scratch, only more carefully. Also took a copy of the (pink) original and curves-adjusted in Lab colour, flattening the a and to a lesser extent b, which gave great skin and hair tones but looked a bit odd. Feathered it into the previous layers using color until the skin was continuous (no pink/green). Subtly different but better close up. nagualdesign (talk) 07:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That really looks fantastic, especially compared to the purple original. If I were to suggest improvements, I would suggest that 1) the greenish bits be removed/reduced in the coat and from the microphone. 2) the skin & hair colors be a little more bold and a little less washed-out. JBarta (talk) 13:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Having looked at other images of Amaia Montero from this concert I think that her jacket should be way darker than mid-grey, too. I'll have a tinker later on. nagualdesign (talk) 09:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * According to its host page, this image was originally uploaded two years ago by another user and is currently live on three pages on the Spanish language Wikipedia. As you had requested material changes be made to another user's contribution, as opposed to summarily replacing the existing live original I instead posted my color adjustment study on my own server for you to look at and asked you what you intended to use it for before uploading a final hi res version to a new, separate image hosting page. The only reply I got to my question, however, was that it was for "something really big" which left me with the impression that it may not be for a Wikipedia Project application at all but for some other off-site purpose. As it was (and still is) unclear to me what this is for, I then asked you to please tell me specifically what and where on WP it would be used before providing a finished, high resolution file.


 * As you know I do this kind of work professionally, and while I am perfectly willing to contribute my skills and efforts to the WP it is not my practice to also give away how I do what I do which I have developed over a dozen years of digitally restoring, altering, and creating thousands of images and illustrations. I'm sorry you did not understand that concept and instead would not have just appreciated and accepted my attempts to be helpful by my making the illustration. It puzzles as to why you feel that my efforts to help you should instead deserve to be met only with sarcasm.


 * Despite all this, I am still willing to upload a final hi res version of the altered image to a new hosting page for use in a WP project. As the other contributor's original image is still a perfectly good illustration for its intended use on the three pages on which it is live, however, his 2009 version (without watermark) should also be restored to its current host page. Any materially altered derivative image should have its own separate page which you can then use for whatever new WP application you have in mind for it. I trust, however, that you will not find my offer to help you to be "duplicitous" which I assure you it is not.


 * On an unrelated issue, I do appreciate your support in the Deletion Review of my userpage image for which I thank you. Centpacrr (talk) 13:40, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * You're welcome Centpacrr. Fair is fair and on that issue you were treated with unfair and unnecessary zeal. Regarding this image, you're really making this more complicated than it needs to be. At this point, if you wish to improve the image, do so. If you wish to upload your improvement to a new file, do so. If you don't wish to share your methods, then don't. JBarta (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply, JBarta. My two main points are not really that complicated, however, but are really just the application of principles of how I believe I should operate with regard to working with images on Wikipedia.


 * While I am perfectly happy to help restore, crop, remove watermarks, etc from existing images, I do not believe it is ever appropriate for me to materially alter (i.e. make a "derivative" image) of somebody else's contributions and then overwrite their original file unless I am asked to do so by the original contributor and/or creator of the image file. If made at the request of someone other than the original contributor, such a derivative image should only be uploaded as a separate file on a new host page so that both image files are available.


 * The other is that I recognize that all WP contributors are volunteers who donate and offer their time, abilities, skills, and whatever else they are willing to contribute to building the project gratis. While I always do so in good faith and without the expectation of material reward or praise, I also do not expect that it should make me the target of opprobrium either -- especially for not offering more than I think is appropriate to do.


 * Those are the two main principles that I have applied here as I try to always do everywhere else in WP. I may not always do so perfectly (and sometimes even explain my reasons more than necessary), but that is always my intention to follow them as best I can. Centpacrr (talk) 15:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Centpacrr aside, the image is still there for anyone to take a crack at if they wish. The ideal (if possible) would be a color corrected image along with some explanation as to how it was done. JBarta (talk) 16:03, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Lawang Sewu
Article(s): Lawang Sewu, when I'm done writing it. Request: Please straighten this. The original blueprints were copied onto a column, and therefore curved. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:34, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

✅ PawełMM (talk) 18:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC) Tweaked perspective and adjusted contrast and color. Centpacrr (talk) 22:38, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, looks a lot better!

Hawaiian Reciprocity Commission
Article(s): Reciprocity Treaty of 1875, Luther Severance Request: Crop and clean the first image and crop Luther Severance from the enhanced image. Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:13, 17 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):


 * Could it be less dark?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:31, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Poomaikelani
Article(s): Poomaikelani, Likelike Request: Do something with them...--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:58, 19 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

✅ PawełMM (talk) 10:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Scratch removal
Article(s): Polo Grounds Request: Hi again. If possible, please remove the white crease that goes from the top of the image to the middle of the right side. I realize this may be difficult because of the way the crease goes through the light tower and other detailed things, so if it's impossible to do without damaging the image, just let me know. Any other cleanups would be welcome. Thanks. Delaywaves &bull;&#32; talk  04:13, 20 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s): 04:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC) ✅ Centpacrr (talk) 04:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

✅: JBarta (talk) 04:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Clarity in Technical Reporting
Request: Tilt so that it shows as a perfect rectangle. Work any other magic you want.

Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 17:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Small request
Article(s): 50 articles including Russian Orbital Segment Request: Can two straight lines be added to the new image, just pointers of any kind you like, the original image will show the way they go. I can figure out gimp atm. Penyulap  talk 07:43, 21 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 01:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Guangxu Emperor
Article(s): Guangxu Emperor Request: Is it possible to clean up the picture, please? Lecen (talk) 13:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ I've tweaked it a bit but not sure exactly what you had in mind. It's not really possible to eliminate the noise or "graininess" without also blurring the image unacceptably. Centpacrr (talk) 15:47, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, Centpacrr. It looks great. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 16:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, Lecen. Centpacrr (talk) 16:33, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Robert Dampier
Article(s): Kamehameha III, Nāhienaena Request: Could someone join these two images with a small amount of white space in between them.... KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

You can use the above table markup to place any two images side by side. An "x" before the pixel dimension sets the image height. Make them any height you wish, but make them the same so the image heights are aligned.

If you want more space, add cellspacing as follows:

If you want no space, set both cellspacing and cellpadding to "0":

Further markup can be added to float the table left or right, add margins around the table, etc. This markup will vary depending on the specific use.

JBarta (talk) 18:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Wait how do you add captions or align it right?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 18:34, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * As far as placing it in the page and aligning it one side or the other, that gets a little more complicated. As I said it depends on the specific application. Regarding captions, you can have one for each image or one for both images. You can also have a heading over the images. There's really a lot you can do with it. If you'd like, be a little more specific where and how you'd like the images placed and I'll do it for you. From there you can play with it further or repeat it for other pages. JBarta (talk) 00:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Fix stretched out image
Article(s): Kamehameha IV Request: Could someone make the first image more proportional like the second image and the image in the link? Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):
 * 

✅ PawełMM (talk) 20:38, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No. That's not what I mean. The first image is stretched out and I was wondering if someone could squish it down to make the King's face and body more proportional to what he actually look like which is shown by the second image. Focus on his face which is much longer than the second image.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:50, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ PawełMM (talk) 18:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Eudocimus albus -USA -eating a fish-8.jpg
Article(s): American White Ibis, currently at FAC. Request: Could the watermark in the bottom right please be cloned out? Thanks. J Milburn (talk) 01:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 02:09, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) J Milburn (talk) 00:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

The Milkmaid
Article(s): The Milkmaid (Vermeer) Request: Extract digitization from Google Art, upload to commons, and replace current infobox picture. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 17:26, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Ed Barrow 1916
Article(s): Ed Barrow Request: If possible, please remove the strange pattern/texture all over Barrow's hat, face and body. Thanks. Delaywaves &bull;&#32; talk  23:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s): I'd say there isn't really much that could be done to improve the image's quality. There is just too much lost information to recover, any work would require a vast amount of time resulting in a heavily manipulated image, unfortunately on this one I'm afraid there isn't much that can be done. Regards, Fallschirmjäger &#9993; 12:42, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Pine Valley Mountains
Article(s): Silver Reef, Utah; Pine Valley Mountain Wilderness Request: Could someone do some general cleanup on this image? A few editors and I are working on bringing Silver Reef, Utah to Featured status, and it would help if this image was cleaned up a bit. Thanks, The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs 20:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):
 * Centpacrr, I reverted your edit. Sometimes you do fine work. This wasn't one of those times. I might also add that when viewing mountains in the distance, it is common to have a sort of foggy bluish cast. This is normal. It's not necessarily an error that needs to be "fixed". JBarta (talk) 22:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

What sort of "general cleanup" did you have in mind? JBarta (talk) 21:09, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about editing photos, so I don't know how to describe what I want done. The best I can do is say "make it so it's not as blurry." The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs 21:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Dank was the one that suggested I bring the image here, so you could ask him. The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs 21:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Rembrandt etching
Article(s): Joseph and Potiphar's Wife (etching), List of etchings by Rembrandt, Potiphar Request: Remove white background (the off-white paper) and straighten. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 25 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion(s):

Personally I think this image is fine just the way it is. It's not really crooked and the white paper showing through at the edges is minimal. There are a WHOLE lot of other images deserving of attention instead of fiddling around making unnecessary changes to perfectly good images. JBarta (talk) 12:09, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Concur. Centpacrr (talk) 17:31, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ditto. nagualdesign (talk) 19:24, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ditto. PawełMM (talk) 10:25, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Jackie (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Tito (talk) 10:41, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Jermaine (talk) 10:55, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Marlon (talk) 11:01, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Michael (talk) 11:16, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * What is this supposed to mean? Centpacrr (talk) 15:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I was wondering the very same thing. Something fishy is going on. JBarta (talk) 19:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I presume then that you did not post these. In that case I would suggest that you should promptly change your password and see if you can determine who has hacked your account. Centpacrr (talk) 19:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Those damn hackers. I'll bet it was the Chinese. Those dudes have been hacking the crap out of EVERYTHING. How do you think I might determine who may have hacked my account? JBarta (talk) 19:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that you contact a Wikipedia Checkuser and see if one of them can help trace the IP that this particular posting came from, and in the meantime both change your password immediately and run a antivirus program on your PC to see if there is any keystroke recording app hiding on your hard drive. I would also scan through your contributions log and see if there any other postings listed there that you do not recognize. Centpacrr (talk) 20:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Checkuser won't do any good. Mine might be one of those zombie machines. The hacker will do his hacking through MY computer so it will appear as if I did it myself. You'd think these jokers would have better things to do than mess with random Wikipedians. JBarta (talk) 20:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand. I would still change your password and scan your hard drive for malware. Good luck and let me know if you find anything. Centpacrr (talk) 20:45, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If it happens again, can I come to you for advice? JBarta (talk) 20:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course, no problem. Also check your recent emails to see if you have received or opened anything suspicious. Centpacrr (talk) 20:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I did get something the other day... it was from someone named "mackpt" something and it seemed to be in Chinese. It definitely looked suspicious. JBarta (talk) 21:05, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Email addresses in spam, messages with trojans, malware, etc are almost always cloned and don't represent their real origin. I get quite a bit of spam in Chinese and other languages all of which I simply send to the trash. I never open attachments on anything that I can't confirm its origin. If you are suspicious but not sure, open the full headers to trace its path back to its originating IP. Centpacrr (talk) 21:24, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, it doesn't happen to me very often. I would really like to know who this "mackpt" person is though. I'd really love to give him a piece of my mind. JBarta (talk) 21:33, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

3D plane
Article(s): Sonic Advance 2 Request: Remove the black around the top and bottom and remove the watermark in the bottom left corner. Thanks, Albacore (talk) 16:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC) Graphist opinion: ✅: JBarta (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Touchup on Walker photo
Article(s): Samuel Colt Request: Could I have this old image touched up or cleaned up? It is in an article going through FAC at the moment. ThanksMike - Μολὼν λαβέ 15:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC) '''Graphist opinion(s):✅ Centpacrr (talk) 17:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow, that came out awesome! Thanks!Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:44, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. When I first saw the photo I thought it was a disaster. But you certainly did a fine job bringing it back. JBarta (talk) 00:59, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the kind words but I am not completely happy with it as yet so I have downloaded the hi res 12MB tiff file from the LoC to redo the figure of Walker and will then upload a hi res restoration. (I will not get to it till next week, however, as I'll be spending the next four days working on the NBC telecast of the NHL Winter Classic hockey game which will be played here on Monday afternoon.) Centpacrr (talk) 03:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)