User talk:Hohum

English: Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Hohum!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: `[[:Image:Foo.jpg]]`, which produces: `Image:Foo.jpg` If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: `{{bad name\|correct name}}` For more information read the full deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

--MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for fixing my SVG, I'm trying to get the hang of it. Assyrio (talk) 04:41, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token 1547aa05fd545eea8b385a2afcac69bd

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Image:M9ace2.jpg

Hello. Did you use Commonshelper to generate the details for Image:M9ace2.jpg? Thanks, Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The reason I asked is that the description had got the edit history confused. I thought Commonshelper had stopped doing this, but evidently it still does. So I'll let Magnus Manske know. Many thanks for your help! Best wishes, Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:08, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo improvements

Hi there, I see you've made some really nice improvements to photographs.. can you tell me how you do it ? Regards, Rod Rcbutcher (talk) 08:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For improving the quality of my (and other's) images on Commons! w:Kudos! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I echo that: I know where to find pictures sometimes, but I don't know how to clean them up. Nyttend (talk) 06:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, great job on File:Museum in Poznan - Stanislaus II August.JPG. I am looking forward to many more of your fixes! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:26, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

thank you for adjusting the colo(u)r in Town House, Kirkcaldy.jpg. it is just something i could never have done on my own. i'm planning to do an article about the town house on wikipedia and may decide to include this photo. Kilnburn (talk) 23:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:-)

Hoi Hohum, that was quick. Many thanks for your rework, the shot looks much better now! (… even if the shaft of the tower appears not that bright and clean in reality) --:bdk: 17:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for the adjustment. That was fast ;-) --RalfHuels (talk) 22:53, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retouching pictures

Hi Hohum--I just wanted to draw your attention to the retouched picture template: Template:RetouchedPicture. If you're doing image adjustments, it's a good idea to inform the user that the image is retouched from its original version. In addition, some edits you make may count as original work in some countries; so if an image is in the public domain, its license may not apply anymore unless you release your work into the public domain too. Cheers, - Gump Stump (talk) 21:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think uploading over the old version and adding the retouched template is enough (that's my personal opinion anyway), since almost any retouching is not creative, and you can still recover the older version in the file history section. The 'original work' situation is a specific and uncommon case, so I probably shouldn't have even mentioned it; I've just had to deal with it before when getting acquainted with the PD-scan license, so it came to mind. There's an extremely long discussion (sort of a case study) about what constitutes copyrightable original work here, if you're interested... Cheers - Gump Stump (talk) 20:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colour leveling

Saw your colour fixes to File:Pearl River barge transporting Saturn V S-I on East Pearl River.jpg, and wanted to say thanks. Please feel free to fix up anything else NASA related! :D — Huntster (t • @ • c) 11:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rocket nozzle expansion.svg

It's very good indeed, but there's a slight error though; the angle on the overexpanded nozzle, where the jet intersects the wall should be nearer 60 degrees, you've drawn it closer to being 15 degrees. There's diagrams on both page 72 and 73 of Sutton if you've got that to hand.Wolfkeeper (talk) 13:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think if it was as small as 15 degrees the jet would win (suck out the air between it and the wall via Bernouilli) and the nozzle would fill. I may fix it myself if I have time.Wolfkeeper (talk) 13:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Change of License

Hi Hohum,

JFYI: I just stumbled on an issue with this image that you once did a retouch on. Before you retouched it the license information had erroneously been altered to a CC-license in a two-step process, but the original license was Public Domain. Personally, even if greatly appreciated (!) I don't consider retouching of enough "artistic value" to warrant a change of license so I'll presume that had you retouched it while published under the correct, original license (PD) that you would not have altered the license to the CC-license yourself. I'll therefore change the license back to the original PD licensing. If you disagree you may want to upload your retouched version as a separate file with a new license, keeping the original non-retouched file clearly available under the original PD license. Cheers, Pudding4brains (talk) 23:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's perfectly fine. Hohum (talk) 00:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent :o) Thanks! Pudding4brains (talk) 01:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retouched Herringbone gears

Thanks for that. It's not a photo in the main book, just an advert at the rear, and the paper copy, let alone the scan, is of very poor quality. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:37, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aerial photo of Bodiam Castle.jpg

Hi, I just noticed your changes to the above photo and wanted to say thanks, it looks a hell of a lot better now. Nev1 (talk) 18:22, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token 9f4887c3f52773c44a5510ce32a889bc

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:T-33A 167th TFG West Virginia ANG.jpg

Hello! I uploaded the above photo. However, it is terribly pink! Do you think you could do something about it? My skills in Corel Photo Paint are not good enough. Thanks and Cheers Cobatfor (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried several techniques to sort out the colour issues with that image, but changing it to greyscale preserved more information and gave the best result. Hohum (talk) 19:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

en:Almirante Latorre-class battleship

I just noticed that you cleaned up two of the images from this article. Thank you very much for the unexpected help! Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 01:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I typically take a look at the images used in military articles undergoing review and see if I can provide some improvement. If you need any worked on, just tell me. Hohum (talk) 02:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's much appreciated! Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 02:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:20111013_Basilique_Saint-Epure_Nancy.jpg

Hello Hohum, you cleaned up the picture File:Duimstok 50cm.jpg which I uploaded some time ago. You are an artist! I never thought it could as good as this, so thanks many times. Today I contributed File:20111013_Basilique_Saint-Epure_Nancy.jpg which currently appears to be the only picture we have of the interior of this historical church. It was quite dark when I was there and the resulting photo is not very sharp, but I think the lightness and contrast can be significantly improved. The thumbnail on page fr:Basilique Saint-Epvre de Nancy is not as clear as it should be. If you have a moment, do you think you could try your magic skills on this one too? Thanks again, Ivory (talk) 22:20, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Danke...

...für das da und hier wäre auch noch Handlungsbedarf.--Unterillertaler (talk) 19:10, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the second image has motion blur, which I can't fix. Hohum (talk) 19:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DC-3 color correction

Hi - I noticed your color correction on File:DC3 on ice.jpg. I do not think the pink was color drift - there are lots of bright whites among Nygren's arctic shots, and I do not see at first glance what your cleanup entailed. In any event I think the original should remain accessible. The corrected version is probably good for those who want to focus on the plane, but the uncorrected is probably truer to the setting. I'd appreciate it if you would re-upload your color corrected version as a new file and revert the to original image on the original file. The corrected version probably ought to be marked with the retouched image template. Thanks, Dankarl (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From the shadow I can see the sun is too high in the sky for pink dusk/dawn light. It's also the kind of colour caste you get when taking a picture in natural light with the fluorescent white balance setting on the camera, and this appears to be a picture of a print. Additionally, the image is from a US government source, and their older images tend to have significant white balance issues. Hohum (talk) 00:07, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The original was probably a Kodachrome slide, in any event the same as Nygren's other shots , definitely not digital. My point remains, other images in the same set do not show the pink cast.Dankarl (talk) 15:53, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The image is a digital picture of a *print*. The scratches/dirt are black, not white. That would happen with slides too. The capture *of* the print caused the white balance issue. Hohum (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and separated the images. I tend to trust Kodachrome, and a systematic scanner artifact would show in other pictures. One possible reason for the pink color would be a bloom of pinkish algae in the snow surface, with reflected light from the snow dominating illumination of the clouds. Irrespective of the correctness of that explanation, original scans of historical images should be kept accessible during restoration. Cheers, Dankarl (talk) 23:08, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That wouldn't make the clouds as pink as the snow (i.e. clouds don't go green over countryside, or yellow over desert), nor the upper surfaces of the plane as pink as the clouds. Badly colour adjusted images aren't kept for the hell of it, but your compromise is acceptable. Hohum (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Comanche Point, on the South Rim of the Grand Canyon.jpg

Thanks for fixing the colors on this nice aerial! I may hit you up for others sometime.... Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 17:59, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime. Hohum (talk) 21:16, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Shiprock (inselberg).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

File:BBC Micro Front Restored.jpg

Hi there, thank you for your lens distortion correction on the lead picture in en:BBC Micro, however I feel you have overestimated the case yellowing in the picture. The BBC Micro's case has always been 'beige' (Light Straw?) rather than cream or white, and the current version looks unpleasantly tired. The second revision by Ubcule gives the fairest representation of the case colour, especially around the edge near the speaker grille and ZXCV keys. Do you think you could have another look at it? Thanks. Regregex (talk) 00:34, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have a BBC Micro, got it when they first came out. It has become far yellower than it was with age. I agree that it was never pure white. The problem with the image that you suggest is that its colour is rather patchy, and definitely too yellow. I looked at several images on the web - but part of the problem is that they are often taken indoors with the wrong camera setting - so are even more yellowed. Oddly, the oldest promotional images I can find show it as bright white. That said, I'll see what I can do. Hohum (talk) 11:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tomates farcies

Hi !

I don't know how you did that but thank you, it's great !

DocteurCosmos (talk) 09:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the retouching of my photos

Looks great! you can see more of my pictures here... --SuperJew (talk) 07:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

In 2009, you touched up File:Hmsrenown.jpg -- "Cropped border, greyscale, levels, cleaned scratch." This is good.

Unfortunately, when cropping the border, you removed the part that said "COPYRIGHT NO. 2577". The presence of such details in images is not something that we can remove from the image.

I'd appreciate it if you could go back through your own uploads and double-check to make sure that you haven't accidentally hidden any other copyvios. Thanks. DS (talk) 15:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have retouched ~4,000 images over several years. It would be a lengthy process to review all of them. I usually notice obvious copyright issues and tag them for deletion - I'm surprised this one slipped through. Because I think it would be a very low hit rate, I think my time is better spent improving images (with added caution) rather than reviewing them all, which will likely drain any enthusiasm I have. I hope you understand.

I'm puzzled that you haven't tagged the image in question for deletion. Hohum (talk) 19:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ack, hadn't realized the figure was that huge. Okay, that's fine. As for why I didn't tag it for deletion yet -- I wanted to make sure it wouldn't get deleted before you had a chance to see the copyright notice for yourself. DS (talk) 14:03, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Hohum (talk) 23:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No Man's Land - 1ed ed cover.jpg

Much better! Many thanks for improving the image. - SchroCat (talk) 18:44, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - I have just uploaded File:Cyril McNeile-Sapper-card.jpg. Although the NPG seems to claim copyright, they also say the author is unknown, and that its a cigarette card from 1937 - which should make it {{PD-UK-unknown}} by my reckoning. Hohum (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's fantastic - many thanks indeed! I've dropped it into the article as the main image as it's better than the photograph (which looks like it's being viewed underwater). What's the copyright limit on UK photographers - is it 50 years post-death, or 70? I always struggle to remember which one! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 19:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

70 I think. Although {{PD-old}} and {{PD-old-70}} make for confusing reading. Hohum (talk) 17:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eggs

All these images are on millimiters background with color references. Our screens are regularly calibrated. There is no error in contrast. We're here to show the reality of objects not to colorize. Finally, the first thing to do if in doubt is to ask the author, I have never refused an explanation. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:12, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you're sure, fair enough - but the colour balance looks off from the RGB graphs, and the eggs appeared flat, but perhaps that's the lighting. Hohum (talk) 21:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Some of the other images in the same collection have normal looking RGB graphs and more normal visual cues for roundness. Hohum (talk) 21:53, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. -- Rillke^(q?) 21:12, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Al Pacino

	Pacino
	Muy bueno el archivo,pero creo que deberia cambiar la imagen por una más actual Pabloo 910 (talk) 18:45, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Danke

Danke hierfür :-) --aconcagua (talk) 18:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:WW2Montage.PNG

One of the images in the montage File:WW2Montage.PNG is probably unfree; see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Soviet Offensive Moscow December 1941.jpg. As you have already in the past replaced an image in this collage, I suggest that you also replace this one. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 10:23, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Hohum (talk) 18:59, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Renault FT" at Borden isn't.

Hello, Mr. Hohum. I notice that you have in the past made alterations to this image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Renault_FT-17_CFB_Borden.jpg without addressing the fact that the vehicle is not a Renault FT but an M1917, or Six Ton Tank. How does one change the captions? Regards.

You might find Template:Rename useful. The description itself can be altered by regular page editing. Hohum (talk) 17:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:WW1 TitlePicture For Wikipedia Article.jpg

Hello Hohum, thank you for the replacing of a problematic image at File:WW2Montage.PNG, so the file did not have to be deleted. File:WW1 TitlePicture For Wikipedia Article.jpg is deleted for the same reason, because nobody did the same for it. Now I asked Jameslwoodward, if he would restore it. If so, do you know a good picture to replace the deleted one at the WW1-montage? Best regards, -- JCIV (talk) 21:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have created an alternative at: File:WWImontage.jpg. Hohum (talk) 19:52, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BoB map

I was wondering if I might be able to get you to make a version of the BoB map, but "zoomed in" on the southwest (11 Group) area. I have all the data for the market locations and such.

Also, some of the airbases on your map don't' seem to line up with other (non-free) maps I've seen. What is the source of the data in this case?

Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you wikilink the file you're referring to please? Hohum (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Snow in New York.jpg

Whenever you upload a new version of an image, as you did with this file, you also need to update the source information if that is different from the original version. Thanks, Postdlf (talk) 18:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doh! I've just uploaded dozens of higher quality images from the National Gallery of Art in Washington, and updated their sources - but then missed that one - last one in a run of them I guess. I 'll sort it now. Hohum (talk) 01:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hohum (talk) 01:58, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Postdlf (talk) 17:45, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna images that need retouching

Hello there! I saw what you did on this image and wanted to see if you could retouch these images as well

1.Candy 2.Sceaux

Thank you!!

I've done what I can. Hohum (talk) 13:06, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Hohum. I just noticed your level adjustments to File:Saft55.jpg. Thanks for this; it looks great. Would it be possible to do something similar with File:Safbtr60.jpg and File:Safmig21.jpg? Best, Middayexpress (talk) 10:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hohum (talk) 20:41, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Europa Germanen 50 n Chr.svg

In der Legende wird noch blau erwähnt. -- Polluks (talk) 10:47, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tobruk Agedabia road2.jpg

Dear Hohum..thank you for uploading a new version of the file. However, I think the old version are more correct. I have not visited the road by myself, but there is no source mention the crossing of the road through Bir Hakim and Tengeder..it's running directly from El Adem to Agedabia (for example see File:Un-libya.png). Your map is possibly about desert tracks, not the actual asphalt road.--Maher27777 (talk) 21:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Maher27777: The map I used is WW2 era data, the one you just referenced is modern. Hohum (talk) 16:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about the modern road! Please re-upload the old image or some one like it.--Maher27777 (talk) 16:28, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The map is used on:

Operation Compass (WW2)
Battle of Beda Fomm (WW2)
Combe Force (WW2)
Tobruk–Ajdabiya Road (current, obscure, little used road)

In the next few days, I'll upload my version to a different file, so we have the current version and the WWII version.

Hohum (talk) 23:40, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-351-class_submarine#/media/File:Japanese_submarine_I-352_in_1948.jpg

thank you for the superb image of the I-352 submarine. the article indicates the I-352 was destroyed in 1945, but the photo year states 1948. some fact relating to the year is wrong or requires clarification (e.g. was it only damaged?).

I only did some cleanup work on the image, please ask the original uploader. Hohum (talk) 21:22, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, on further reading in the article "I-352 was 90 percent complete when she was destroyed during an air raid by Boeing B-29 heavy bombers on 22 July" - It's entirely possible that is an image of the destroyed hull in dry dock where it may have been bombed before completion - and was still there in 1948. It does look pretty beaten up. Just a theory. Hohum (talk) 21:27, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cliveden (Germantown, Pennsylvania)

Thank you for the fine work you've done color-correcting the HABS photos of Cliveden. It's long been a disappointment that the originals are so far off the true colors. And what you've done to restore them is amazing! == BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 01:33, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. Hohum (talk) 16:40, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Battle of Britain map.svg

Hello Hohum, I am wondering what sources you used to create this map? I am conducting research about the Battle of Britain and I need detailed information about radar locations as well as airfield and fighter command locations through out the war. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trm29 (talk • contribs)

I originally used this from Strategy for Defeat, The Luftwaffe 1933-1945 by Williamson Murray

Possibly better data here:

Group boundaries here.

Stations for groups 10, 11, 12 and 13. My map could do with being updated - feel free.

Hohum (talk) 17:10, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Overwriting files

Hi Hohum, I noticed you overwrote a couple of my uploads with improved files. I reverted those. Please, upload these files as separate images. I can imagine you find this childish behaviour of me. In fact, I used to do the same thing, uploading improvements, but at the moment I am harassed to such an extend by some wikimedians about this that I simply take this standpoint: if you think you can improve a file upload it as a different file, not on top of my work. Selfish behaviour, I know, but I am forced to. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 18:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per COM:OVERWRITE:

DO overwrite. Minor improvements

✓ As a general rule, use the link "Upload a new version of this file" only for relatively minor improvements. Examples include

minor and uncontroversial color correction, noise reduction, perspective correction etc

Do you truly think my colour correction and noise reductions were controversial? The very fact that you just said they were improvements suggests otherwise. It seems to me that you're passing on bad practices from being harassed yourself. You aren't forced to do any such thing. Hohum (talk) 23:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please, upload them as different files. The interpretation of COM:OVERWRITE by our fellow wikimedians differs per case depending on the outcome they are trying to pursue. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 08:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating Battle of Prokhorovka Image!! Please one request

Thanks for really making the image much better. I have one request. Can you please remove the blot that is beneath the second "Totenkopf" going from left to right. I had reuploaded a second version without it, but it seems you pulled from the first version and edited that one. Thanks. After you make the change, I will try to get the versions with the blot deleted. EyeTruth (talk) 03:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. There is no need to get old versions deleted really. Hohum (talk) 16:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grey issue with images

Hi Hohum! I saw that you improved an image I had uploaded of the battleship Nagato. I was wondering if you could take a look at these:

Thanks so much! Gunbirddriver2 (talk) 01:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done, although I'm not entirely happy with the last one. Hohum (talk) 18:05, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks! They look a lot better. I really appreciate it!! Gunbirddriver2 (talk) 03:20, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hohum, could you work your magic on one more for me?

File:Patrick Dorehill.jpg

Thanks! Gunbirddriver2 (talk) 04:50, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried, but I can't improve that one much. Hohum (talk) 19:23, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Harlekin

Hello! You removed the category Harlekin from File:Münster, Prinzipalmarkt, Nasenschild -- 2017 -- 2101.jpg without replacing with another, better category. It's a harlekin, so I reverted your modification. --XRay ^talk 18:28, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it is just a generic clown, unless you know something specific about this specific item. Hohum (talk) 18:31, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a little bit information. The sign is often (or may be only) known as "Harlekin" in Münster. --XRay ^talk 18:43, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ideal! Hohum (talk) 18:45, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One more little project

Hi Hohum! Hey, could you see if you can darken up this image? File:1944 Note from Jabs to John Caulton.jpg Thanks much! Gunbirddriver2 (talk) 05:52, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah Hohum, beautiful! Many thanks!! Gunbirddriver2 (talk) 03:49, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Giovanni Dupre and Michelangelo

Giovanni Dupre: ok, I will search a version more similar to that of Gettyimages, but actually neither the image uploaded by you is so similar. Michelangelo: the version you've reverted is too dark. Even the original uploader had uploaded a new, less dark, version of it. Maybe you like dark pictures, but I doubt it makes sense to keep dark pictures like that. --Chiorbone da Frittole (talk) 21:00, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There was only so much I could do given how bad the colour is to start with. Trying to make it brighter caused posterization. Hohum (talk) 14:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For the Michelangelo - if an upload is challenged/reverted to original, you need to stop revert warring and just upload your version as another image. Also, when an actual painting is dark / low contrast, the image should also be that way. The original uploaded brightened the image, but blew out highlights and caused posterization over a year after originally uploading. Hohum (talk) 14:28, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Revert File:Poffert.jpg

Hi there, I just reverted your colour correction on File:Poffert.jpg because the 'Poffert' looked like another type of cake. The Poffert is lighter so the lighter colour is important to show. Although, thanks for your work! Kind regards, DutchTom (talk) 11:27, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

US Dollar bill upload File:United States one dollar bill, obverse.jpg

Hi Hohum,

didn't want to argue with you. If you think, this old dirty and unsharp dollar bill has more detail than my upload, go for it. It's not just about size of the picture, but about sharpness and clean display. Others still can decide, which one is better. But for now, you win! ;-)

Best regards, Paddy --Paddy.84 (talk) 09:44, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blowing out the highlights and thinking it is has more detail is the opposite of improvement. Hohum (talk) 12:44, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help Adjusting/Cropping Pics

Hohum,

Would you be able to help crop/adjust some of these 2 images please;

It would be a big help and much appreciated. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Black BIC Ballpoint (talk • contribs) 19:21, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hohum (talk) 22:21, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Hohum, When you have the time, I have just one more for you; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ADandEHinWC.jpg

Thanks in advance and thanks again!Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 00:14, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Hohum,

When you get a chance could you help crop/adjust these 2 pics for me please (it would really help)

Martha Raye https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MarthaRaye1944.jpg

And another one of Earl Holliman; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EHinPW.jpg

Thank you!--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 20:56, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hohum, If able, could you please help my crop/perk up this pic here that I uploaded;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BarbaraRuick.jpg

Thanks so much and have a great weekend!--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 13:48, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hohum,

I hope you're doing well. When you have a chance could you help me crop this pic here;

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EHinTTRAP.jpg

If you can it would help a lot; shave off that bottom and crop all the whitespace west, north, and east. Also, a touch of bright might be good too. I hope you can lend a hand (I'd much appreciate it). Have a good day and a Happy Halloween come Thursday.--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hohum Thank you so much for fixing that so quick as you did (not too mention taking leadership and helping some other files I uploaded today too). It means a lot. I want too ask you for another assistance with some more pics; these in particular, These 3 might be a bit of a challenge but if you know any tricks too bypass the watermarks and what not it is worth a shot (if not no biggie; all the ones you helped today turned out fine/dandy anywhow):

If you can, thanks and thanks again for helping with the files you did for me today prior too my mention of this.--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 20:47, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon, Hohum, Hope you're well and are enjoying a Happy Halloween. I wanted to drop by to request your help for something much more standard same as simple. If able, I need your help cropping/brightening this image of Earl Holliman from The Rainmaker;

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EARLHollimaninTRainmaker.jpg

Same as the still of him earlier this week with The Trap, it just needs your touch in terms of shaving off some nooks/crannies and a touch of bright. Thank you so much in advance for your help with this piece when time allows. Enjoy what remains of Halloween and may the coming month of November, and the Holiday Season, be enjoyable for you.--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 19:33, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening, Hohum, I'm sorry too bother you again, I have one more of Earl I forgot too give you;

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EarlHollimanLTFGH.jpg

Like the first one above it just needs some cropping/trimming when time permits. Thanks again and have a restful evening.--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 22:35, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hohum, When you have time, please help crop this pic for me, it still needs an adjustment.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EarlHollimanLTFGH.jpg

Thank you and have a great rest of the year!--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 21:39, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You can link to commons files more neatly, like this:

File:EarlHollimanLTFGH.jpg

- Hohum (talk) 17:14, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, Hohum, I hope you're having a good day. When you're able, I found a few new pics, that could use your touch when you get a chance (some need adjustment, lighting, and here/there; once you see them, I'll let you take them and judge how they'll be redone. This is what I found for you:

That's all for now and I hope what's left of November and the Holiday Season will be good too you and yours. I want too thank you and say, I appreciate your helping these when you get the chance. Have a good day.--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 16:00, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hohum, Could you help with this one?:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LaraineDayJFM.jpg

As you can see it needs a crop, alignment, and a touch of bright. I hope you can aid this pic with your expertise. Thanks and have a nice Holiday and remainder of 2019.--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 01:59, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hohum, When able, could you please help crop-adjust-tone this latest image I uploaded?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DAVIDWayne.jpg

Thank you, it is much appreciated. Have a nice holiday!--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 19:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:USS Ford (FFG-54) as a target ship off Guam on 1 October 2019 (191001-N-CO914-1146).jpg

Hi, you are always good in adjusting colours! I tried everything I know with this file and ended in thinking to convert it to b/w. Can you do something about it of give me a tip? Thank you Cobatfor (talk) 05:53, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eesh. I tried a lot, but there isn't enough good colour information in there. Best I could do was a greyscale, and even that needed some blending of RGB channels. Uploading, as it better than current. Revert as desired. Hohum (talk) 14:14, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Auschwitz image

Hi Hohum, do you mind if I revert to the original of File:Arrivals and inmates on the ramp at Auschwitz-Birkenau, summer 1944 (Auschwitz Album).jpg. I've only just noticed it was changed, and I prefer the original. Generally, it's better to upload a new version for any significant change, perhaps especially with these images. SarahSV ^(talk) 04:22, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free, however, the image was taken with a "black and white" camera, and the yellowing caused by aging of a particular print, although possibly more artistically warm, doesn't seem relevant for showing how the original print would have looked. Hohum (talk) 21:08, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rocket_nozzle_expansion.svg (again)

Hello Hohum, and thank you for your graphics work on "rocket-science", it rock(et)s !

But, well, I have to warn you that your file doesn't display well while transformed in PNG at some sizes (but not all !). I discovered the problem on this [1] that the display depends on the zoom in my browser (FireFox), and the same error exists on the file page itself. So I signaled it on the French Wikipedia, including a table of your SVG file rendered in PNG at different sizes (1-120 pixels). Please have a look at this table, and tell me what do you think about it. (I suspect either a problem of cache, or a bug in the PNG generator code) Philibre (talk) 13:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is very strange. I think it has to be a problem with the PNG renderer. Hohum (talk) 18:35, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:F1 grenade DoD.jpg

Hello Hohum!
I saw that you updated F1 grenade DoD.jpg with a new version. Even though it is good to improve image quality, you clearly missed everything you should have done when you replaced the image. You used Ֆ-1.jpg or F1 grenade travmatik com 01 by-sa.jpg for this image. This image is licenced under CC-BY-SA-3.0. You must not use this image and neglect it's licence! The licence's terms also apply to every usage con Commons. If you have a look at this website, you can already see that the image is used and the original creator is not attributed anywhere!
In general: If you want to improve image quality, but exchange parts of it and it is not your own image, upload it as new file and link it to the original with a link in "other_versions=" in {{Information}}
--D-Kuru (talk) 20:22, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RMG permission statement

Why is that not enough to cover the text? Broichmore (talk) 16:43, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The original artefact or artwork has been assessed as public domain by age, and faithful reproductions of the two dimensional work are also public domain. No permission is required for reuse for any purpose.

The text of this image record has been derived from the Royal Museums Greenwich catalogue and image metadata. Individual data and facts such as date, author and title are not copyrightable, but reuse of longer descriptive text from the catalogue may not be considered fair use. Reuse of the text must be attributed to the "National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London" and a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-SA-3.0 license may apply if not rewritten. Refer to Royal Museums Greenwich copyright."

In short, the image is is a reproduction of a two dimensional work of art which is PD by age. Information like date, author, title (size, medium, paint type etc.) are not copyrightable. But the descriptive prose is copyrightable, because it is original work by someone. Hohum (talk) 16:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, according to https://collections.rmg.co.uk/page/7d7ded6fb50d6031e2884961a200be58.html - only items specifically marked with a CC logo have CC rights. I don't see that for these items. Hohum (talk) 16:55, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Change of images

Hallo Hohum, please be so kind and do not change anything in the future about pictures like the Ferrari with Niki Lauda I uploaded, at least not without asking. Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 09:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody needs to ask anyone's permission before editing an image on commons.

The image you have re-added has very noticeable, and amateurish digital alterations to it. Although it's pixel count is higher, it is a far worse image than the original. Hohum (talk) 12:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Colour changes

Can you colour adjust other 2017 parliamentary portraits like File:Official portrait of Keir Starmer crop 2.jpg and File:Official portrait of Rebecca Long Bailey crop 2.jpg, as you did with File:Official portrait of Clive Efford crop 2.jpg? Thanks Alex B4 (talk) 17:46, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gregg Wallace Masterchef Live 2010.jpg

Hello Hohum -- You are much better at colour adjustments than I am, and, in spite of my crude but sincere efforts, this image will not cooperate for me. I'm not sure if it's me or GIMP, but I seem to have particular difficulty cleaning up excessive magenta, purple, or mauve tints. Please take a look and, if you think it's worth it, give it a shot. Thanks. -- WikiPedant (talk) 20:26, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Color correction on my photo of Billy Idol

Thanks. It's looks nice. I'm glad it's still up. Those were the hood old days. Cheers, --carlos Carlos6466 (talk) 00:29, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deportation Grand-Pré Image

Dear Hohum,

Smithsonian Folkways Recordings are currently in the process of developing a new series of curriculum materials (called Smithsonian Folkways Learning Pathways) for educators (mostly music and social studies educators). These unique resources place recordings from the Smithsonian Folkways collection at the center of the learning experience. These will be FREE resources for all educators, everywhere. Each learning pathway is a curated musical journey through a historical, cultural, or musical theme (e.g. Music of the Chicano Movement; Sounds of the Civil Rights Movement; Cajun & Zydeco Music; etc...).

As part of these learning pathways, we are creating interactive student slideshows that will help teachers facilitate learning experiences in any educational environment both in-person or online. We wanted to let you know that we will be using the 'Deportation Grand-Pré' image seen on your Wikimedia Commons webpage. We are planning to use the image for our 'Cajun and Zydeco' learning pathway. We know that the image is under public domain, and we will make sure to give the painter the rights for the image.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Deportation_Grand-Pr%C3%A9.jpg

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns about any of the information.

King Regards, Gisele, Smithsonian Folkways Recordings --Giseh (talk) 16:37, 8 July 2021 (UTC)Giseh (talk)[reply]

Soyuz MS-12 crew during the tree planting ceremony.jpg and other

Hallo Hohum, what is wrong with the category Buckets and spades in my pictures? Both, the bucket and the spade are visible together. Regards --Ras67 (talk) 08:50, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the category specifically refers to en:Bucket and spade. The category being within the categories "Beach Toys" and "Traditions of the United Kingdom" tends to confirm this. i.e. We don't have arbitrary pairing of items for categories (like "Buckets and forks") unless there is a specific reason. Hohum (talk) 16:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

British Army in Concord Detail

What you have done here is sadly incorrect. See File:British Army in Concord Detail.jpg. You cannot (should not ) overwrite an image with a completely different version of it. You need to retain the original and re-upload the other version (yours) as a fresh file. The two need to be referenced against each other. The same applies if you crop a file to take the captions off. The latter is not a good idea with this kind of vintage image; however the crop tool does leave cross referencing information in its wake. Broichmore (talk) 14:18, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What use can you think of for the initial image? It's a very bad colour rendition at low resolution, of the same source, which has also been badly cropped. Hohum (talk) 17:35, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not unsympathetic to your view; here Pigsonthewing took me to to task on a similar issue here. My picture was an improvement, from exactly the same source. In that case there is only one of this painting in the world. Your problem is a hand made, hand coloured print, which was probably printed a thousand times, each one unique in some way. Overlaying the original has also obscured it's provenance (source) too. Who's right? Broichmore (talk) 11:50, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:QBZ95 automatic rifle 20170902 (edited).jpg

File:QBZ95 automatic rifle 20170902 (edited).jpg has been marked for speedy deletion. (Reason: 请求删除的原因：类似相同的图片File:QBZ95 automatic rifle.jpg)

Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk.

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Tyg728.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:BrendaFassier.jpg

Hello Hohum, I saw that you had uploaded a new version of File:BrendaFassier.jpg with the comment "reworked watermark removal", but the watermark is present in the version next to that comment. I'm not too familiar with Commons, but I don't think that is what was intended. Thanks,SchreiberBike (talk) 12:41, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not. You probably need to COM:PURGE your cache. Hohum (talk) 13:02, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right you are. Thank you. SchreiberBike (talk) 22:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bee hummingbird size chart adjustment

I noticed you recently uploaded a new version of File:Mellisuga helenae Size Comparison.svg. I like the edit you made, and I have no problem with it. However, I do ask that if you have a suggestion or criticism of my work that you notify me first so I can make corrections if possible. Thank you, -SlvrHwk (talk) 02:38, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:M2 loading.jpg

Hi Hohum, I reverted this file to the first version because by modern standards 2.848 × 4.288 or 2,07 MBs isn't big at all (actually it is rather small now). Unfortunately your colour adaptions from 2008 are now lost as a collateral damage, too. I just want to let you know that my revert didn't aim at your changes and I am sorry that they are lost now. If you want you can repeat them with the higher resolution version of this image. -- Chaddy (talk) 02:03, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have adjusted the colours again. Hohum (talk) 16:23, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, too. -- Chaddy (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Folklore 2023 has started, Join us!

Hello Hohum,

Greetings from Wiki Loves Folklore International Team!

Wiki Loves Folklore is an international photography contest hosted on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from around the world, such as folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, folk games, folk cuisine, folk wear, folktales, folk games, folk religion, mythology, and many more.

The campaign invites participants to document photographs, videos, and audios linked to folk culture and fit within the contest's theme. Through this campaign, you may become a part of a community dedicated to preserving our intangible culture, which has been brought and passed down for thousands of years.

How to Contribute?

The dates for the submission in the photography contest on Wikimedia Commons are from 1 February to 31 March 2023. Probably you are wondering how you can take part. It’s simple: grab a camera, record an image, video or audio under the folklore theme and start uploading ! To learn more about the rules, check out our Project page on Wikimedia Common. Here are the exciting prizes which you can win internationally.

International Prizes

1st prize: 500 USD
2nd prize: 400 USD
3rd prize: 300 USD
Top 10 consolation prizes: 40 USD Each
Best Video prize and best Audio prize: 150 USD & 150 USD
Top uploader prize for images: First Prize: 100 USD, Second prize: 50 USD
Wiki Loves Folklore Postcards to top 100 Uploaders
Certificates and postcards to Local Organizers.

(Disclaimer : The above prizes will only be disbursed in form of gift card or voucher format only)

You can win both International prizes and your local Prizes simultaneously !

If you are interested in participating in the photography campaign, start photographing and collecting media of your local culture and get ready for the photo campaign happening on Wikimedia Commons. For more information about rules and prizes of the contest, refer here. For any questions, email us or join our telegram group

Warm regards,

Rockpeterson

Wiki Loves Folklore International Team.

File:USS Saratoga (CV-3) underway at sea, circa in 1942 (80-G-K-459).jpg

Hello, I know that you are very good with colour adjustments. Can you do something about this file? Thank you and Cheers Cobatfor (talk) 15:24, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. What do you think? Hohum (talk) 18:20, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very good! I have some problems with seeing red and green correctly, therefore I don't always trust my corrections ... . I think, the flight deck in the NHHC file is just too brown. Although the decks were covered with wood, they were only brown before the war (File:USS Enterprise (CV-6) underway in June 1941.jpg) and later painted in shades of dark grey, blue grey etc. (File:USS Wasp (CV-7) in at anchor in Casco Bay, Maine (USA), 25 March 1942 (80-G-K-448).jpg). Therfore, I think, the colouring of the NARA version is much more accurate and you made it just fine. :-) Cobatfor (talk) 07:51, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That was my understanding from (the few) reference images that I could find too. Hohum (talk) 17:16, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:King George V 1911.jpg

@Hohum: I saw you added HQ photograph as the new version of this file. However, while I searched for the original source to add it, I found you'd obtained it from Government Art Collection's website. However, that is not the original painting by Luke Fildes (which is in the Royal Collection), but a copy made after by a different artist (credit to Frederick Howard Michael). 83.61.231.21 01:18, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hohum: I just created an entry to Wikidata about the Frederick Howard Michael's copy. I'll suggest revert File:King George V 1911.jpg to the version with Luke Fildes' original painting and upload Howard Michael's as an other different version for Wikidata's entry. 83.61.231.21 02:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted. My mistake. Hohum (talk) 02:10, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hohum: Don't worry. It's common to think in the beggining that it was a HQ of the original painting, as that was copied by various artists. However, it' ll also be useful if you can upload Howard Michael's copy in a proper new file, to include it at Wikidata for its own entry. Thx. 83.61.231.21 02:28, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Map

Hello I saw that you edited these maps: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bashan_salient.png and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cast_lead_map.png

Could you upload new versions where the occupied Golan Heights is not shown as part of Israel? Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:52, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just improved the colours of the previous image, I'm not getting involved in border changes for specific dates. Hohum (talk) 10:14, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Curtiss P-36C Hawk of the 27th PS in flight, in 1939 (325594552).jpg

Again, I am calling on you for the right colours! Maybe you can do something to the above photo. The same aircraft is visible here: File:P-36C 27th PS 1939 National Air Races.jpg. Thank you and cheers Cobatfor (talk) 20:01, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've adjusted it, but I can't get it anywhere near what it should look like... this. (without getting into the realms of artificial colourising.) Hohum (talk) 20:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I got something similar, but my eyes are just not that good for colour adjustments... Thank you! Cobatfor (talk) 21:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Советский и югославский флаги над Белградом фото Халдея 1944 год.jpg

I've noticed you restoring images on articles that I have created before. Would you be able to adjust the colors on this image? There is no other hi-res version of this photo with this exact perspective on the internet. Also File:Героическая оборона Одессы. Командир взвода противотанковых орудий лейтенант В.Г.Кабаненко подаёт команду.jpg would make a good article image if it can be salvaged at all. Kges1901 (talk) 13:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first image is so faded and discoloured that I can't make a decent colour image out of it, making it black and white / grayscale would look better than an attempt at colour balancing imo. The second is a discoloured black and white image which I have done my best to improve - your recent 1,149 × 780 upload may just be an upscale of the previous 756 × 507 version, as is looks grainy (not photograph grain, but a kind of bumpy artefact that can happen when upscaling). Hohum (talk) 19:19, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I meant greyscale, didn't know that color balancing involved colorization. And for the second image then it would be better to revert it to the original and greyscale the 756 px version. Kges1901 (talk) 19:23, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes images have enough colour information in them that they can be restored to a realistic image - i.e. they were a colour image but have been scanned with bad settings, faded over time, etc. I'd use the term colorization when monochrome images are manually "painted" by hand (or "AI"). Hohum (talk) 19:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Colour balance repair, where the colour of the entire image is rebalanced as a whole:

from its previous version where it looks like monochrome red

Colourization, where a greyscale image has been coloured, from reference, imagination, or "AI":

Hohum (talk) 19:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately Soviet war correspondents shot only with black and white film (during World War II there was practically no color film in the Soviet Union). Would you be able to improve the original version of this file if it comes out less grainy, and greyscale this one? In addition, there are several other Soviet photos that I've uploaded that would benefit from greyscaling. Kges1901 (talk) 19:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the files I've found/uploaded that need greyscaling:

The quality of them is inconsistent because these were digitized by archives and have likely never been published before. Kges1901 (talk) 23:46, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Hohum (talk) 21:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More files

Thanks! Your grayscaled versions made the images much more compelling. I would appreciate it if you could greyscale the following previously unseen images, at your convenience:

I'll get to them over time. If there are any you would like me to prioritise because they already in use in an article, or you want them to be, please make those bold. Hohum (talk) 21:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrary break

Again, thanks for your efforts, I've added all the files from the previous group of files to articles. Another group of files that could benefit from greyscaling, all currently used in articles.

Public domain files with watermarks

Is it possible to remove watermarks from the following files? These are the highest resolution versions I was able to find online, but the watermarks remain even though the photographs passed into public domain at the beginning of this year when 70 years after the photographer's death passed. Kges1901 (talk) 18:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not very good at doing those kind of watermarks (with a semi transparent background). Some of the people at Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Photography workshop get better results than I do. Hohum (talk) 20:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:200295103315mk47.jpg

Yours sincerely, Consigned (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2023.

Round 2 will end at 28 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:1973 block e.gif

File:1973 block e.gif has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.