User talk:JJ Harrison/Archive2

Hey Noodle, just wanted to get your opinion on this picture. Specifically, do you think it has any chance of being a Featured Picture? Unfortunately, it was a handheld shot, and I didn't get great sharpness on it. I've already downsampled and sharpened as much as I'm comfortable with, and it's not perfect, but it's not bad either. Obviously, the aesthetics of it are the mitigating factor. But do you think it has enough wow factor to overcome the lower resolution and less than perfect sharpness? Feel free to be brutally honest. I'd rather avoid the humiliation of a pile-on at FPC :P Kaldari (talk) 00:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

BTW, I know the stalks don't line up, but I swear that's how it actually looked (don't ask me how). It's a straight, unstacked, undoctored photo. Kaldari (talk) 00:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for the advise. It is very helpful! Kaldari (talk) 14:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for moving the "little wattlebird" picture to the Western Wattlebird page. I noticed this problem the other day but hadn't gotten around to fixing it. I had a sabbatical in Australia for 6 months and enjoyed all the flora and fauna there. My next trip will be to Tanzania, hopefully to see the migration.

DGER talk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dger (talk • contribs) 16:32, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Crested Tern Tasmania.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 5, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-05-05. howcheng {chat} 05:28, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi again,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Bench Grinder Brush 1.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 6, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-05-06. howcheng {chat} 18:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, I whipped up http://www.noodlesnacks.com/article.flowerphotography.php in about half an hour. Would you add anything to it? Noodle snacks (talk) 13:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

• Wow, very nice. Lots of helpful tricks! BTW, I finally tried my first real focus stack project. I tried using both Helicon Focus and CombineZM. Helicon Focus gave horrible results, probably because I don't know how to set it up properly, while CombineZM was better but left lots of halos and jagged edges. I ended up using the basic outlines created by CombineZM, and then filling in much of the details by hand. Here's the end result. Not perfect, but I'm satisfied with it. Kaldari (talk) 15:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
  • There is a new version of combineZM about, combineZP. Has a bunch of algorithms to pick from, some pretty good and some that are not. Automated stacking is usually pretty sensitive to movement though. I've had better luck with stacking when there is some movement by doing it manually in photoshop (only good to a couple of frames though). I often have to clean up artefacts after a stack though. Noodle snacks (talk)

On the main page, the featured picture... normal, but then it says NOODLE SNACKS under it. Thats just hiiliarous!!! Old Al (talk) 21:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I'm working on a magazine - and searching for such great pictures as you have here in your portfolio. am i allowed to use one or two of your photographies for the magazine? it's a private project, but to retrieve the money i have to spend on the printing - the magazine will cost something, so it's kind of commercial. the articles and other pictures for the magazine are all send in free, because the authors want them to be published. it's a magazine about lust for life. sorry for my bad english. i 'd like to know if it's alright with you, when i publish your pics in my booklet? for more information look here: Magazin für Lebenslust. You can answer me per email if you want! (There is also contactform on the website!) best regards, hope you answer --Mondamo (talk) 11:22, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Gordon Dam.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 20, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-05-20. howcheng {chat} 00:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Seems small Richard Bartz (talk) 01:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Cortinarius archeri.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 06:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Keep up the excellent work! Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 06:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, but no thanks... I really got fed up with all the seemingly pointelss bickering on FPC (proved by the same on the poll page - which I only skimmed), and from the few times I've lurked on FPC since, it seems to go on. I think FPC has lost its main objective, which is improving the encyclopedia. I continue with that in my own way, by keeping an eye on my watchlist. Best regards, and good luck with the project! --Janke | Talk 19:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Noodle,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Eurasian Coot.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 28, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-05-28. howcheng {chat} 04:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

Just to tell you i agree you could remove the point-based table. I also did it. However, PLW isn't satisfied with that and removed his name from the list saying (in his edit resume) that this merge didn't address his concern so he wanted no part in it. I tried to contact him on his talk page and understand what is his concern, but he didn't answer.

Regards, Ksempac (talk) 06:29, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

• Yeah. I merged them because of equivalency. Having two tables with two separate groups each equivalent is redundant and would only serve to confuse matters. I've had maths arguments with PLW before today, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Not worth starting a fight over. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Noodle snacks, Just wanted to let you know, I love your photography... All those fungi, I forget their scientific names, the purple coloured mushroom, the yellow wormlike fungus... If there's a barnstar for photography, I would love to give you one!Lilaac (talk) 17:20, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Mount Pleasant Radio Telescope.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 3, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-06-03. howcheng {chat} 04:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

You are very good. I hate to imagine the patience you had to put into some of those animal pictures. And you have a curious ability to make very mundane artifacts and geographical images look interesting. Any hope of your starting a blog? You don't have to write anything, just post an occasional picture. Then I could subscribe to the blog's RSS feed and enjoy your latest work whenever you care to share it. 192.18.43.225 (talk) 16:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Noodle snacks, I hope you don't mind my jumping in. (Please delete this if you want to.) Your pictures are very impressive and I was brought here because of the POTD. In reply to 192.18.43.225, the gallery tool has an RSS feed which you can subscribe to for each user. Enter the user's name and choose commons.wikimedia.org for the project. All the images they've uploaded onto WikiCommons will appear. As they upload more then these will appear in the feed. Hope this helps. Mehmet Karatay (talk) 21:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I didn't know about it. No RSS, but since I use commonist to upload things generally new stuff also appears at commons:User:Noodle_snacks/gallery too. Thanks for the compliments, 192.18.43.225. Noodle snacks (talk) 23:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually almost everything on here has RSS. If you go to the history of any page then under the toolbox on the left an RSS link appears. It only gives you the diff of the page so you'll only see the new filenames using it for your gallery. Each category also has an RSS feed, which on commons sends outs photos you can view in your feedreader, if you want to monitor new content in a category. Well done with your photos again. Mehmet Karatay (talk) 08:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi again,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Tasmanian Native-hen.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 12, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-06-12. howcheng {chat} 23:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Hiya, just wanted to let you know that your moth will appear on the main page today as a DYK, 11:30 UTC (or somewhere around 21:30 for you?). Cheers, Maedin\^talk 07:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, I will look into those options. I'm currently working on Tomb of Hafez which I started yesterday, so I've got 4 more days before I'm out of time! I did notice two red links in the A. latipennis article and I was thinking of turning them blue. Do you have any idea if the Weld Valley in Tasmania is big/significant/notable? Do you have any pictures of the Weld Valley? Maedin\^talk 12:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I don't use my pseudonym on facebook, :-) I'll pop you an email tonight. I did a quick search on the Weld Valley and it looked like the most recent protests were 2005, and it seems to have dropped off the radar after that. I'll look into it further though. Thanks for your help! Maedin\^talk 14:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Please see my reply at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Apple mango and cross section.jpg. Kaldari (talk) 16:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

• Yeah, I used a slow shutter speed and the flash to capture the drop, as I don't have remote triggers quite yet. I have a D60, but I'm using an older flash. A Minolta Auto 118x... The F-stop was low enough that the 5 second exposure (I shortened it on more recent shots, 5 secs is a little unnecessary) didn't capture any light at all, I shot in really low lighting other than the flash. I might need to revise and get some better eqiupment/a better setup before I continue to try these. I've got a few images like the dolphin etc, but like you said, sharpness does lack a little. What do you think of this image? By the way, I'm humbled by your shots. Kudos. Ard0 ^{(Talk - Contribs)} 22:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to valued picture status Your image, File:Richea pandanifolia.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! wadester16 16:58, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry it took so long... busy week. wadester16 16:58, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey, The fly is of the family Anthomyiidae. Good lighting, was wondering, don't the insects fly away when you set up the umbrellas or do you have some other technique? noodlesnacks.com and I would benefit from a step by step tutorial on setting up the radio triggered flash. --Muhammad(talk) 21:37, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks --Muhammad(talk) 19:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Off-topic, but you used this picture for a discussion on scale bar in WP:FPC talk page and then didn't reply to comments made about it. I'm not sure whether you didn't see them (since WP:FPC Talk page is a bit overcrowded) or didn't have anything more to say ? Ksempac (talk) 07:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

I noticed several of your pictures are under the "GFPL 1.2 only license". I was wondering why you choose such a license ? I first i thought it was because you oppose the move to GFPL 1.3 (and subsequent move to CC currently under way in WP) but then i saw that most of your pictures have a CC license. Therefore i don't understand how you choose which license for each picture, and what is the differences for you make between theses 2 licenses. Note that I'm only asking out of curiosity, I'm not trying to promote one license or the other. The thing is, since I work as a software developer I do like to study the different licensing schemes, but I don't know much about how all theses licenses are perceived and used by photographers. Ksempac (talk) 12:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I understand your concern about the commercial misuse. I also tends to agree about the "or later" clause (even though i understand why it's here, and in which case it can be useful). However, if you feel weak protected by the CC-BY-SA, why some of your shots (such as this one) are under this license ? Did someone asked you to change the license ? Ksempac (talk) 12:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S : To clarify what i said : I wasn't asking for advice on software licensing, I know that field quite well. I only said I didn't have much clue about license when applied to picture/artwork.

By the way, having this page on my watchlist, I couldn't help but get involved. I'm not sure if you're correct (Noodle Snacks) that CC-BY-SA licensing only says you should provide the license 'if possible'. It's possible that I've missed it buried deep within the full legal text, but I've never seen anything to suggest that. It says "You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for, this License with every copy of the Work You Distribute or Publicly Perform.". The word "MUST" certainly doesn't seem similar to "IF POSSIBLE" to me... Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 15:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

You may be right, I was going by Wikipedia:Comparison of GFDL and CC-BY-SA. this talks about "reasonable to the medium" in section 4c, which is wide open to interpretation. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey NS, I came across this and your reply on Ksempacs talkpage - thought you might like to know about this, particularly the last bullet point. Good luck with your exams :) --Fir0002 02:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Question: I'm following the steps listed here, but it's not working in Photoshop CS4 (I'm in the process of learning). Do you use both programs/know what does work? wadester16 23:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

• Not CS4, but photoshop. I have used the method described there as the tutorial described. Where are you having problems? Opening the file? You might be better off talking to Diliff if I can't help you. He has stitched an order of magnitude or two more panoramas than I have. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:41, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Creating the psd file isn't a problem, nor is opening the file. I shift-click to determine the layer I want "erased", then shift-click again to go back to the way it was when I opened. Then I get a white paintbrush going, paint on the layer of the image I want "erased", then flatten the image. No luck. Am I missing something? wadester16 00:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Sounds like you might not have selected the layer mask or have selected the wrong layer. I'd create a new document with two layers, each a different colour. I'd then create a layer mask for the top layer (button with white circle iirc). I'd then play around with black and white pens and see what happens. Black will hide the layer. White will show it. You should be able to see what is going on. There isn't really a need to merge visible before saving to jpg in most cases. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
      • This page is slightly more in depth than the Ptgui one. It's the same process though. Noodle Snacks is right that basically you just select the layer mask and paint white over where you'd like to remove. The trick is to select the correct layer that contains the detail you want to mess with. It should immediately be replaced by whatever is underneith it so there's no need to flatten the layers to see the result either. What exactly is the problem with the image you're trying to fix? In a lot of cases, blending with Smartblend instead of the default blender in Ptgui will fix the problem, unless it's a major misalignment, or duplication of people or something like that. It's worth giving it a go. I always use Smartblend by default. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 21:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
        • Smartblend is Windows-only if I remember correctly; when I paint with the white brush, it adds... white. I'll take a look at that in a bit then test it out. The image I'm having problems with is this (look at the top of the spire); I'd also like to reattach the people right of center in this. Thanks to both of you for your help. Still getting the hang of all this... wadester16 21:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
          • Yeah I guess it is windows-only. Forgot there are parts of the world that don't use it. ;-) The availability of numerous little tools like that is the fundamental reason why I'd not consider using OSX or Linux. Everything I need is on Windows and I'm prepared to put up with the issues in Windows to use what I need. As for painting white, it really shouldn't as you're painting the MASK, not the image itself. You could probably rescue that image with a bit of clone stamping and patching up around it, rather than messing with layers. It does look a bit of a mess though as usually it will give you more of a clean seam line and you can clone stamp the correction, whereas with yours it's all a bit muddled up at the top of the spire. The filesize is a bit excessive in that second image.. 27mb!? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 21:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
            • That's the size PTGui outputs, but I've found that if I Select All in Preview and crop (so, crop nothing), it will condense it; simpler/quicker than downsampling in Photoshop. That image was made before I discovered that. I may fix it someday in the future. And I'll spare you a Mac-PC debate, for the sake of everyone's eyes. :-) wadester16 21:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
              • http://www.tweakbits.com/Smartblend/smartblend.html suggests it's possible to get it going with wine. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
                • Smartblend works; thanks! wadester16 00:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied to your comment about weak copyleft. Wanted to let you know in case it got lost in the middle of the thread. Kaldari (talk) 16:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Forgot to sign... ZooFari 04:30, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar and also for your many great pictures. Photos such as those of Leptecophylla juniperina and Richea pandanifolia are valuable contributions for Australian flora articles . Melburnian (talk) 03:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Most photos of bush flora in flower/fruit will be useful, in Tasmania the alpine flora really stands out.[1][2] Melburnian (talk) 04:35, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Good point on Tasmanian Oak, I found that we have a disambiguation page on it, I'll add a bit more to make it into a stub article and crosslink to E. regnans. Melburnian (talk) 12:22, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Thanks for the vote on the Gov Davey's pic at FPC. Just thinking, the one I saw in real life (at least I think it was the genuine article and not a repro, it's a few years ago now) was at TMAG in Hobart. Can't remember what their photography rules are, but perhaps could be worth you making a trip there and taking a photo yourself if this one doesn't get through, and if they're photographer friendly (though having said which, I seem to vaguely remember that they're not...). --jjron (talk) 15:30, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

• I haven't been there for a few years. But iirc they do allow cameras, but no tripods and no flash. Combined with being in the dark it'd be a bit difficult to get super image quality. I'll take a look some time. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

• Yep, sure. Cheers. --jjron (talk) 09:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm sheer genius when it comes to realistic mockups....

You know what would be really cool?—If you could get a third picture of that same B. marginata flower spike, from the same angle, after the follicles have come up. Just an idea. (But of course, until you look, there's no way to know whether that spike even set any follicles; and if so, whether they come up okay from that particular angle) Hesperian 12:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

• Seems a reasonable idea. I took a look the other day and the inflorescence has gone brown (I'd take it that it's not worth it at this stage), but I think its too early for any follicles right now. I think it would be quite possible given a bit more time. I'll keep an eye on it and snap another photo when they form. Noodle snacks (talk) 13:09, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Oh, I have a bunch of collected seeds if you'd like a photo of them too. Noodle snacks (talk) 13:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Wow, are you able to get good shots of stuff that small? I've had a few cracks at it—e.g File:Banksia prionotes leaf.jpg—but without a macro lens or a copystand, and without any brains, there isn't much hope for me. I have a long list of anatomical concepts that I would love to see illustrated, but lack the ability. For example, note how the follicles on the left spike of File:Two Banksia cones.jpg open along three seams, leaving a "beak"; whereas the follicles on the right spike open along a single seam. This is a basic taxonomic diagnostic for the genus. It would be great to have a really good photo to illustrate the difference. Another example would be to cut individual flowers out of a flower spike, both pre- and post- anthesis, and photograph them alongside each other, to illustrate the horrid prose at Proteaceae#Flower. If you're into this kind of studio macro stuff, I could give you many more examples. So—short answer—yes, it would be great to get a photo of the seeds. Hesperian 13:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
      • My current equipment limits me to about 10mm accross the frame (~2.5:1) with good quality (50mm lens reversed with tubes). This is more than adequate for B. Marginata seeds. I'll take a photo of them in the near future. Not enough for Callistemon seeds or things of that scale though. With the B. prionotes leaf you'd have to make a choice as far as getting the whole leaf in, or getting greater detail on a small section. Things like the beak example and individual Banksia flower are readily achievable, if I can find the samples to work with. The individual flower will probably have to wait until next year though. By the way, for things like leaves, apparently throwing them in a document scanner can give pretty good results. Noodle snacks (talk) 02:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Noodle,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Domestic Goose.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 24, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-06-24. howcheng {chat} 16:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Hiya, I completely forgot to tell you that I nominated one of your images at Commons for FP, here. Hope you don't mind—perhaps I should have asked first. Maedin\^talk 09:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

• No problems. Noodle snacks (talk) 09:29, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Noodle,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Cercophonius squama.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 26, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-06-26. howcheng {chat} 04:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, as an apparent photo expert, might you have a view that you would like to express in the discussion at [3] and [4] as to the quality of the Judy Garland main image? Feel free, if so, to leave your thoughts there, whatever they may be. Tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

• Quality is obviously bad. The real question is if a better alternative is availible. This is where energy should be spent. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

• Tx. Other pictures appear on the article page, though not as the main picture. But at least one of the editors seems to believe that that picture is just fine as-is, and hasn't agreed that the quality is bad. Feel free to comment on the discussion page (or not).--Epeefleche (talk) 20:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Noodle snacks,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Bridgewater Causeway Crop.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 3, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-07-03. wadester16 07:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

Just a belated note of thanks for the awesome seed photo.

Hesperian 01:15, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS - could you have a look here --Fir0002 09:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Noodle,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Blasting frankfurt.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 10, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-07-10. howcheng {chat} 04:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied to your question at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Oncometopia orbona. Kaldari (talk) 18:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Australian Pelicans.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 12, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-07-12. howcheng {chat} 04:13, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Geastrum saccatum.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Cinabar on Dolomite.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Congrats!

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		While I've seen your wonderful images so far on FPC, your latest photo that captures Leptecophylla juniperina so vividly is not only mouthwatering, but also delightful to see it. I may pile on barnstars that you've received, but you deserve this again!.Caspian blue 04:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you. I have heard that the Leptecophylla juniperina is edible and tastes like lemon. I haven't tried it though. Noodle snacks (talk)

Hi,

I've reverted your move of this page as I can't find any discussion of the move and the move appears in contravention of WP:RETAIN

Also, a changed title should be to a common name WP:COMMONNAME not a scientific one.

If you feel that the page should be renamed, please discuss it on the article's talk page. Kiore (talk) 06:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• WP:RETAIN is irrelevant and only refers to the form of english used for the article. Per WP:COMMONNAME the article should be called Purple Swamp Hen, as Pukeko is unused through most of the birds range. This would conflict with the existing purple swamp hen article and will propose a merge. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi as much as you might think there is a need to show off your camera details - they show up on the lower part of the commons page anyways - my understanding is there is no reason why you should put them in the description at all- it is for the place and details of the view - not the camera! - surely a link to commons categories or the correct usage of description would help a non tasmanian know where the hell the places are - cheers SatuSuro 01:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Thank you for the attack. Most of landscape/architecture and many other images should be geocoded. They all have descriptions and the vast majority are categorised. EXIF doesn't always reflect what is going on (stacking, panoramas, exposure blends, taped teleconverters), or give information about lighting. The technical information is useful for some people interested in photography. At any rate recent uploads don't have the data anyway. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Camera data

   * Camera Canon EOS 400D   * Lens Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS

   * Focal length 55 mm   * Aperture f/8   * Exposure time 1/40, 1/160, 1/640 s   * Sensivity ISO 100

Is not appropriate in the description - links to the park or the locality or the weather or whatever - SatuSuro 01:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

And do you really think Liffey is really 3 waterfall shots? It is going over the top - thunk about commons galleries rather than mainspace for that sort of over-doing it all SatuSuro 01:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

• No, it isn't, but it is what 99.9% of people visiting liffey visit it for (usually passing straight through). Some pictures are better than none at all. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Attack - ahha you must have some icy winds off mt wellington at the mo - nah you surely misread? - where's your tasmanian sense of humour - I would have said something like well done for populating the tasmanian project with piccies - I see nothing in general practice in commons that says camera data is part of the description? The general process surely would be to add it further down - the actual description is not to general standard for a start - oh well ill leave you to your eccentrc practice - enjoy the ice - cheers SatuSuro 01:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

• The eccentric practise has been discontinued per above as of about a week ago. I would have placed it further down, but the upload tool I use (commonist) doesn't allow that easily. Weather is freezing. I went down to the tasman peninsula for a while in my uni mid-year break and got hailed on quite a lot. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Tell me about commonist mate - It brings me out in hives - I was very very disturbed by the number of tassie road fatalities in the week - the ice comment is indeed a very mixed ironic comment - keep your great uploads - just take care of any red messages in commons about your descriptions - (dont worry I never got em right for over a year) - and I am about to have a break from wiki - when I was your age (a very long time ago) - I used to work not far from - http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDT60801/IDT60801.95952.shtml - wish I had had something more than the pentax clunkers I had at the time SatuSuro 01:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Pictures File:Richmond Bridge Panorama Restitch.jpg and File:Anthurium scherzerianum 2.jpg are due to make appearances as Picture of the Day on July 18 and July 19, 2009, respectively. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the captions at Template:POTD/2009-07-18 and Template:POTD/2009-07-19. howcheng {chat} 03:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Grevillea rosmarinifolia.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Corymbia ficifolia Flowers.jpg.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Crassula ovata RTBG.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Arr! Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Leptecophylla juniperina 2.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! wadester16 06:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

• Cheers. I've been keeping you busy :P Noodle snacks (talk) 07:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Gallinula mortierii 1.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! wadester16 03:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Microcarbo melanoleucos Austins Ferry 3.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! wadester16 03:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm getting tired... :-P wadester16 03:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Black Mulberry Female Flowers.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 29, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-07-29. howcheng {chat} 00:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Carpobrotus rossii.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 16:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Abutilon ×hybridum Patrick Synge.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 16:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks. Noodle snacks (talk) 04:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Austins Ferry and Derwent River from Poimenna Reserve.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 8, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-08-08. howcheng {chat} 03:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I did some experiments and found out that when shooting at greater than 1:1 magnification, I still get diffraction effects at f/11 and even f/9. Is that normal, or do I have a crappy lens? (I'm just using a macro lens and extension tube). Kaldari (talk) 14:43, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I did some research and found this page: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Apparently the aperture at which a camera becomes diffraction limited is defined solely by the size of the image sensor and the number of megapixels (it's just easier to notice at higher magnifications). Since my camera has an APS-size sensor and is 12.2 megapixels, it becomes diffraction limited between f/8 and f/9. So in other words, if I want to make sure my macro images have no diffraction softening whatsoever, I have to always shoot below f/9 :( Unfortunately, that gives me a pretty terrible DOF, so I think I'm still going be shooting most shots at f/10 or higher and then downsampling. Kaldari (talk) 16:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I found out that the level of extension affects things as well since it changes the effective f-stop (which is what really matters in this case). Kaldari (talk) 16:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Normal, all lenses have to obey the laws of physics. The effective aperture does get narrower as you go up in magnification. At 2:1 (with tubes) I'm down to f7.1 or so to get sharp results (example). The formula ${\displaystyle f'=f(M+1)}$ is around, where f' is the effective f-number, f is the f number at infinity and M is the magnification. It is easier, and probably more accurate, to determine the best aperture by trial and error. The thing above is correct in terms of the diffraction limited aperture, but you have to use the effective f-number. Noodle snacks (talk) 23:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi- I was just taking a look at some of your pictures (specifically, File:Mycena sp.jpg) and comparing them to some of my own (for instance, this one). I notice that your images are actually a lower resolution than mine and so, as a result, a lot sharper. Have you just set your camera to snap them at a lower resolution, or do you use software to downsize them? Is this something you'd recommend? Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question- I enjoy photography a lot, I'm just a little clueless. J Milburn (talk) 19:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and could you please reply on my talkpage, or at least drop me a talkback notice. Thanks :) J Milburn (talk) 19:15, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your hints. I'll certainly consider them for next time I head out. I'm going to need to reacquaint myself with some of that terminology, but it's stuff I have known in the past and just forgotten... J Milburn (talk) 11:34, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Strepera fuliginosa 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 184 FCs served 01:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Mycena sp.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 184 FCs served 01:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Armillaria sp Marriott.jpg , gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 184 FCs served 01:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Congrats! Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 184 FCs served} 01:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Just added both to the Australian Landmarks page, Also nice to meet you at GLAM-WIKI. Bidgee (talk) 11:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I love this image - are there signs of where it was chipped out on the back, or is it a roughly ball-shaped mass of crystal like it looks to be?

Would ask on the FPC, but if I ask there, I need to vote, and if I vote, the image gets shunted off into the hell of "someone else has to close this nomination". And, frankly, I end up having to close ones I've voted on (due to noone else getting to it for days after) too often as it is. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 188 FCs served} 12:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Picea Pungens Young Cones.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 13, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-08-13. howcheng {chat} 22:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Clavulinopsis corallinorosacea.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 188 FCs served 13:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! Keep up the good work: You have whole categories of Featured pictures which you're the only real contributor to =) Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 188 FCs served} 13:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey NS,You probably have some experience and I though I could ask you. My Sigma 70-300mm is left in my cupboard unused and I was thinking of selling it and buying a Canon 50mm instead. I asked a salesman here in Bangalore, and he offered me around 80 USD for the lens which I had purchased for 160 and is currently in very good condition. Is such a depreciation normal? How much should I expect? --Muhammad(talk) 17:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

• Most of my stuff currently sells for more second hand than what I paid for it, since the Australian dollar has been all over the place. Relative to the USD price typical depreciation is tiny (5-10%). I can't speak for depreciation in India, but you may be able to find better. It could be that the lens isn't particularly desirable, and there are too many people selling. Have a look on ebay to get some idea of it's value. You might consider selling internationally, but you'd have to establish your identity (as a legitimate photographer, rather than a scammer). Noodle snacks (talk) 22:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks --Muhammad(talk) 16:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there any reason File:Quartz var. Smokey from Morella, Victoria.jpg isn't in the article Smoky quartz? Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 192 FCs served} 20:27, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, it is, justa s a gallery. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 192 FCs served} 20:29, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Quartz var. Smokey from Morella, Victoria.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 192 FCs served 20:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Azurite, Burra Mine, South Australia.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 192 FCs served 20:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I did these a teensy bit early, because I'll be busy most of tomorrow. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 192 FCs served} 20:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

• Cheers, I doubt it'd affect the outcome. Noodle snacks (talk) 02:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Asiatic hybrid lilium stereogram flipped.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 21, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-08-21. howcheng {chat} 04:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS, I'm working on Myrmecia esuriens. As soon as I can think of a hook, I'll try to get it on the main page. Just wondering if you actually have the Wings book that you added a source for? I can't find any previews of it on the 'net, and I wanted to see what else Dr. Daley had to say about these ants. Thanks! Maedin\^talk 08:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• Hi, I've sent you (by email) the info I have. I can't help much with references. I may be able to put you in contact with some local entomologists, but I you'd miss the 5 days turn around probably. Noodle snacks (talk) 08:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

That's just what I needed, thank you! I've found quite a few references, but they all mention different things, so it's hard to build a complete picture. The "rocky" habitat in particular hasn't been mentioned elsewhere, so I'm very pleased to see it. Thank you! Maedin\^talk 09:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't know if you're interested or not, but I've nominated it at DYK with a hook about a surgeon for James Cook, [5]. I noticed that it's hard to tell there's an ant in the picture when it's thumb-nailed so small, so they might not include it. I did think that it could do with being cropped though, especially at the bottom where there is an out of focus "ledge". Just an idea. Maedin\^talk 14:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Creedite 3.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 08:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Is that 2 more for the century? You better pick something special! (BTW Juvenile is spelt with an 'e' - that annoyed me for that whole nom and I noticed it was still misspelt on your user page.) --jjron (talk) 08:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, quite right on the spelling. I'll be over a century if all current nominations pass. So perhaps I should have thought about it a little more. Noodle snacks (talk) 08:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Egretta novaehollandiae Tasmania 3.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 27, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-08-27. howcheng {chat} 04:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I think your panorama of Canberra is probably FP worthy. It may not be of perfect quality, but it is extremely illustrative, showing approx 80% of the city in some way. Any comments? Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:05, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

• I was planning to nominate it at some point. It is a bit dark on one side but that is how it was (not an exposure blend). Are there any specific quality issues you were refering to? I still have to get around to restitching the image of parliament house, though the chances of success may be a little reduced by jjron's image. I think the canberra pano has lots of enc since most of the canberra landmarks that I can think of are in the shot. Noodle snacks (talk) 02:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
  • No specific quality issues, I just know that the bar for FPs keeps moving, and there seems to be an expectation of perfect crispness, even in huge panoramas. Good luck with it, you'll have my support when you do! Mostlyharmless (talk) 03:33, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		Congratulations on the century - I think 100 Featured Pictures probably entitles you to one of these :-). jjron (talk) 14:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you. Somehow about half a dozen messages skipped my attention. I hadn't realised! Noodle snacks (talk) 11:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Gazania rigens var. rigens.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 29, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-08-29. howcheng {chat} 00:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

...hoping for this to be FL someday... and your pics look great on it! Thanks Sasata (talk) 09:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

• Cheers. File:Unidentified Fungus 5972.jpg, File:Unidentified Fungus 5934.jpg, File:Unidentified Fungi 5969.jpg are a few others that I think are in Armillaria. Noodle snacks (talk) 11:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi I don't understand what causes the blue colour, or the colour striations in your image mentioned at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#Surface_tension_image_-_comment

Could you explain please - ie was the glass blue or something? Thanks.83.100.250.79 (talk) 17:00, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

• G'day. I've replied there. Noodle snacks (talk) 03:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Port Arthur Panorama.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 4, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-09-04. howcheng {chat} 20:15, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Gawthorpe new.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Gawthorpe new.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Gawthorpe new.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Luculia gratissima.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 08:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

You should have got this a month ago, but someone botched the closings. Anyway, better late than never... --jjron (talk) 08:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, wouldn't have known it had passed actually. Noodle snacks (talk) 05:36, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi NS,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Hypericum calycinum Tasmania.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 9, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-09-09. howcheng {chat} 23:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I just checked your picture, hoping there would be a full-body shot for somebody who is familiar with the spiders of the area to work from, and there it was.

One of the things that people often do is take one wonderful picture of a spider -- but one that leaves off many of the details that would make it easier to identify. A picture that shows the underside of the spider, its spinnerets, etc. would be very helpful for purposes of identification even if it happened not to be beautiful.

A few years back I was trying to identify a jumping spider that I had purchased from a dealer, but the dealer was not entirely sure of what it was. I wrote the the big expert on the genus in Florida, and he said he could not tell without looking at the epigynum. I had to make a microphotograph to clinch the identification.

Another useful thing to do is to measure the size. I often herd a spider onto a piece of 1/5" graph paper and photograph it on that background. Then I always have a good record of its size.

I'm guessing that the spider you photographed was one of the friendly kind that are as interested in the photographer as the photographer is interested in them. Both photographs are beautiful. P0M (talk) 00:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

• Hi, I'm assuming you found the full body shot. Size reference is not a problem. I can work from a known magnification and my camera sensor size to get that pretty accurately. Getting pictures of the underside etc is not always so practical when dealing with live subjects. Those stacks and a few others are about all I got before it scurried off into the foliage. I've thought about collecting what I photograph, but it is fairly time consuming. Are you able to list any useful detail shots for spiders that Wikipedia lacks that I could take? Noodle snacks (talk) 01:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

• • Has been identified now. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:40, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Is your website down? :Apolloae (talk) 02:54, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

• Yep, I'm told it is down because of a routing error. Was there something specific you wanted from there? Noodle snacks (talk) 03:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

• • Mostly just wanted to check out the content you had there... at some point I visited the site, but it was probably last year. You're quite an inspiration. :Apolloae (talk) 03:47, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

• • • Thank you sir. The content probably has not changed since you looked at it last year. I put a bit of a tute for the lighting of plants and fungi there shortly after it went up. I do intend to put more stuff there, but I just haven't had time due to university. The site should be back up in the next day or so. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:39, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey. Would it be ok with you if you could have a special category at commons for images taken with MP-E? --Muhammad(talk) 00:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

• Hi, if you like. My MP-E contributions are from August 21st up at [[6]] if you wanted to add it. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Cape Raoul from Lookout.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 07:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks, Should have spammed about half a dozen after this for 2000. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)