Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates/Japanese river boat

More precision
Sorry, I was not aware of the nomination until now:

This photograph comes from a familly album. The full album can also be seen here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/styeb/sets/72157606263190363/ (I can't use PD on flickr, so the licence is CCBY, anyway I am french, I am not allowed to release in public domain, technically speaking.) All of the content of this album is also present on Commons, maybe I should add a sub category to farsari cat.

About the original photograph
Those are painted photographs, probably by Farsari (or his workers). There is a note dated from 1886 on the first page of the album, with other various notes illustrating when the album was passed down in my familly.

Scans or photographs
Those are photographs, not scans.

The procedure to make these images (from what I remember) was the following :

For each images, 3 photographs (+1 EV 0 EV -1EV) taken with a tripod using my panasonic fz-18.

I used Picturenaut, with adaptive logarithmic tone mapping orerator, and adapted each image to what was seemt to be rendering properly to my eyes.

The image were redressed with gimp; saved as tiff.

I did the final cut with picasa and conversion to jpeg using picasa for commodity reasons.

No restoration was performed on those images.

(I did it at my father place, so I don't know if I have the original jpeg here or not, I'll check that tonight.)

Conflicting licence, huh?
As I said here: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Esby&diff=18117987&oldid=18084271

Here my rationale: I did not release under PD, because I am french and that by the law I ain't allowed to release it to PD technically speaking. I also can't deny my attribution right. The french law considers attribution a moral right, which means it cannot expire, so if my attribution is mentionned, the attribution of Farsari has to be mentionned, even if the photographs are PD.

I originally used GFDL + CCBY on commons as this is what I usually uses for my photographs. Since there might be a threshold of originality (due to the HDR tone mapping and the fact the colors have probably been altered with time) I kept the licence. There are also 48 other images in those album, so they should have the same licences too.

I had noticed the licence change, but I was not even aware of the nomination.

esby (talk) 09:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)