File:66-226 Jaipur Amber Palace India 1966 (51194046995).jpg
Size of this preview: 800 × 510 pixels. Other resolutions: 320 × 204 pixels | 640 × 408 pixels | 1,024 × 653 pixels | 1,280 × 816 pixels | 1,800 × 1,148 pixels.
Original file (1,800 × 1,148 pixels, file size: 224 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)
File information
Structured data
Captions
Summary
editDescription66-226 Jaipur Amber Palace India 1966 (51194046995).jpg | 66-226 Jaipur Amber Palace India 1966 |
Date | |
Source | 66-226 Jaipur Amber Palace India 1966 |
Author | wilford peloquin |
Licensing
editThis file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.
- You are free:
- to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
- to remix – to adapt the work
- Under the following conditions:
- attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
This image was originally posted to Flickr by wilfordpeloquin at https://flickr.com/photos/193055396@N08/51194046995. It was reviewed on 25 March 2023 by FlickreviewR 2 and was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the cc-by-2.0. |
25 March 2023
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
current | 07:51, 25 March 2023 | 1,800 × 1,148 (224 KB) | Юрий Д.К. (talk | contribs) | Transferred from Flickr via #flickr2commons |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage on Commons
There are no pages that use this file.
Metadata
This file contains additional information such as Exif metadata which may have been added by the digital camera, scanner, or software program used to create or digitize it. If the file has been modified from its original state, some details such as the timestamp may not fully reflect those of the original file. The timestamp is only as accurate as the clock in the camera, and it may be completely wrong.
Rating (out of 5) | 4 |
---|---|
Keywords |
|