User talk:Slaunger/Archives/2017/6

Maagen and Skagerak

I think you have incorrectly stated that File:Rudder and propeller Beached fishing vessel Nørre Vorupør Denmark 2017-04-14.jpg is Maagen. I also photographed a propeller File:Propeller of beached fishing vessel, Nørre Vorupør, Denmark 2017-04-14.jpg which is a different one from yours. But I can see another boat in the background. Assuming there are only two boats, then looking at File:Beached fishing vessels, Nørre Vorupør, Denmark 2017-04-14.jpg you see I must be photographing Maagen, and so yours must be Skagerak. Also from that photo, it appears that Maagen 's propeller touches the rudder whereas Skagerak 's propeller does not. It isn't very clear but that would also correspond with your photo being Skagerak.

Your File:Protective rails on wooden hull of beached fishing vessel, Nr Vorupør 2017-04-14 7160.jpg (and 7161) photos are the same as mine: File:Protective rails on beached fishing vessel, Nørre Vorupør, Denmark 2017-04-14.jpg. So I think those are Maagen as the joint-photo shows that ship has a square pattern to the gaps in the protective rail fins whereas Skagerak has an triangular pattern.

Both boats are painted pale blue above the red bottom, yet your propeller photo appears white. Did you adjust the white balance to make that part white? Try 5500k (Daylight preset) to see how it looks. -- Colin (talk) 16:55, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

My dear Holmes, Colin Holmes! You are absolutely correct in all of your analysis and conclusions! Elementary! - now that you point it out to me. I have corrected the description, categorization and metadata of File:Rudder and propeller Beached fishing vessel Nørre Vorupør Denmark 2017-04-14.jpg. You are also correct wrt to the white balance. I recalled the upper paint as pale gray and not pale blue and adjusted used the WB brush in Lightroom to adjust the white balance (giving it a too high color temperature). I have now set the color temperature to 5500 K as suggested by you in a new version and it looks more correct now wrt colors when compared to the many other photos containing this fishing vessel. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:26, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@XRay, Daniel Case, Basotxerri, King of Hearts, and Archaeodontosaurus: @Yann, Albertus teolog, Frank Schulenburg, and Jkadavoor: This image s currently an FP, that you voted on in this FPC. Some of the information I presented originally has turned out to be wrong - sorry! It is not the propeller and rudder of a fishing vessel Maagen built 1935. It is the much more recently built fishing vessel Skagerak, built 1986. Moreoever, the colors in the nomination had a wrong WB now corrected. However the new version has less vivid colors due to the changed WB and this may impact your original assessment of the photo. I would be happy to hear if any of would have voted differently based on the updated photo and background information? If so, and if more than three users express that (which could have changed the result). I will see to that it is re-assessed or simply propose that it is demoted from its FP status. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:26, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Slaunger, regarding my vote, I'm not sure and I like the older version better. However, you could put a gradual filter over the the top and let the white tones somewhat blue while maintaining the red and yellow tones of the bottom. Would it be a solution? --Basotxerri (talk) 20:24, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I think that unless one were to view it as just some artistic abstract, then the colours should aim for accuracy, even if the bottom takes on a slightly colder tone. It isn't really a huge change that I think would have made people oppose had you nominated the current version. -- Colin (talk) 21:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for pinging me. I still like the image a lot. All the best and thanks for the many excellent pictures you've been uploading for years. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC) 

Looks fine to me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Looks good. Earlier I too had a tendency to make warm colors; now I prefer white as white. Jee 02:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

No change of my vote/review. Everything OK. Thanks for asking me. --XRay ^talk 04:19, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

These different points would have posed problems in VI. But not in FP; We discuss in FP the artistic and emotional value. No problem for me. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Nice place anyway. It seems to be like a "Commoners" meeting point ! Can this help ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Nice place indeed, Jebulon. Quite interesting how many Commoners have come to this remote location in Denmark. No place in Denmark further away from Copenhagen (by the end of the pier that is). Your picture completely matches Colin's observations, regarding protective rails although the propellers are not visible. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

@XRay, Basotxerri, King of Hearts, and Archaeodontosaurus: @Frank Schulenburg and Jkadavoor: . Thanks for your nice comments. I am tempted by your proposal Basotxerri, and I have tried toying around with it. It does not quite work for me. I also tried to upload a new version with saturation/vibrance set to -7 instead of -15 and lowered clarity, but it just looked too vivid/vibrant and artificial, so I have reverted back to -15 on those values, but lowered the clarity a little. I think I will keep it there as most reviewers don't mind the change. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:40, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Alhambra_evening_panorama_Mirador_San_Nicolas

Dear Slaunger, I am a Prof. in Architecture and I am currently redacting a book titled “History of Interior Design and Furniture” and it will be published in Turkish edition. I would like to use your image from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alhambra_evening_panorama_Mirador_San_Nicolas_sRGB-1.jpg. At the end of the book, the name of the beholder of the image is noted in ‘Picture Credits.’ Do you prefer us to use your nick name in Wikipedia, or we can use your proper name if you prefer. Best regards, Mustafa Demirkan mustafaemindemirkan@gmail.com hippofish 14:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serhatakbak (talk • contribs) 14:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Email send. And let's just thank Jebulon again for borrowing me his tripod on this particularly magic evening for this shot! -- Slaunger (talk) 19:18, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

You are welcome, again. As you can maybe see, I'm trying slowly to be back in these pages. 'Need to breathe the air from Commons a little !!--Jebulon (talk) 15:33, 7 June 2017 (UTC)