Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rugby471 (talk | contribs) at 16:42, 16 January 2008 (→‎HERE'S the trouble: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/header

Main page getting cluttered up

(moved from main page == Done World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts==)

Part of me says keep posting images to clean up, part of me says wait until old ones are archived, this page is filling up too much. Chris (クリス) (talk) 08:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should put a bunch of them up. Perhaps the "timer" on the automatic archiver should be changed. Sagredo⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄ 17:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
done putting a bunch of them up, shall we mark done some of the neglected oldies? Chris (クリス) (talk) 20:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A number of projects have stalled out. Some probably never were feasible, some may just be people taking a Wikibreak. It doesn't seem appropriate that they be marked as done. But perhaps, after some period of inactivity, they should be moved to an archive. If it's done by a bot, then a bot message to those who have signed somewhere in the section would be appropriate. Others have been on this page a lot longer than I have probably been dealing with this in the past and probably have some thoughts. Sagredo⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄ 21:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both the Texan Navy and the Coastguard requests are done and can be filed. .by KG(D)B is already marked as done, the papal coat of arms one could probably be removed since someone seems to be saying that we already have a free-SVG of the image in question. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about moving:
  1. 2 Placeholder Images
  • 2.1 Placeholder suggestion for CD
  • 2.2 Placeholder suggestion for Battleships
  1. 3 Map service icons
  2. 9 "Ref" button on edit toolbar

To a new page, something like [[Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/ Inhouse Images to improve. I'm sure someone will come up with a better name. It would take these slow moving projects from the top of the page, and keep the "retail store" tidy. Sagredo⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄ 19:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Graphic Lab/Research and Development

What happened to..

The book placeholder?

Image:svg.svg

You people are the greatest thing ever. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 09:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Old unsatisfied requests should be archived

After 2 months, unsatisfied should be archived, if need in a /Archive/Unsatisfied request .

Other think : please don't create images for "Not picture available for this [boat/Speacies of Dog/etc.], if you can provide one, please clic on this image". The standard image "Not picture available, if you can provide one, please clic on this image" already do EXACTLY the same job. Moreover, the Graphic Lab cannot create one such image for each category of object, vehicules, animals, women/men, on wikipedia. Yug 18:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Help

Could someone please do some images. I have had an image on the page for 3 months (London Midand PDF) and it has yet to be done! Meanwhile, loads of others have been done. Dewarw (talk) 18:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could also post them at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Graphic_Lab/Images_to_improve Chris (クリス) (talk) 03:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You may have better success at Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps, which is geared toward your type of request. Chris (クリス) (talk) 04:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing recent activity !

Has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Graphic Lab/Research and Development

So...

Can I just add this to my userpage, or does some kind of hazing await me? ;) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, to both. ;) Yes to the first part, no to the second. Chris (クリス) (talk) 01:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Consider yourself hazed. Now get to work!  ; )
And welcome to the nicest place in all Wikidom. Sagredo⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄ 07:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One of these days when I've not got tons of work to do I'm gonna (actually do stuff here again and)make a list of quotes people have said about the graphic lab. I like the one above :) --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 16:08, 10 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Opinion needed from a graphic person

View the following please:

I'm currently in a small dispute over the preceding desaturated images (note, the original color image can be found at [1], but I cannot post it or even wikilink to it because it has been overwritten by the editor with whom I am in the dispute. but that's another story). I believe the Exhibit B has noticeable JPEG artifacts. It's like there is a halo of artifacts around the fetus. I also believe Exhibit B is way too contrasty. The user with whom I am in dispute thinks Exhibit A is too light, and less "sharp" than Exhibit B (please note that Exhibit A is darker than a raw, desaturated image of the original color image).

So there are two issues: 1) JPEG artifacts. Are they there and are they problematic? and 2) Contrast. How dark and contrasty should the image be? Hopefully it is not out of line to solicit the opinions of the graphics lab, and perhaps a 3rd image may need to be created to address both of our concerns (a darker, less artifacted image). I, however, am not requesting graphic work at this time, so that is why I have posted on the talk page. I figure that you folk know a thing or two about contrast and artifacts, and should have your monitors properly calibrated to identify those things. You may even want to open the original color image in photoshop/gimp and desaturate it yourself, playing around with various settings. Thanks for your time and your opinions.-Andrew c [talk] 04:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We're always glad when images come in. I'm not sure what the halo of squares is, but they could be erased in about two minutes. I put the original into Photoshop, used the autocontrast feature which looks much like Exhibit B. Saving the image as a jpeg, and reopening did not reproduce the halo. However, there is another problem besides the appearance of the image. Please reread the page with the image generator. [2] It plainly states that "You are allowed to resize the image, but you are not allowed to apply other changes to the image." Desaturation or contrast adjustment are clearly not allowed in using this image. If you able to reach a concensus on using the image in its original form, I would suggest enlarging it a bit at the bottom and adding the text link so that we conform to the terms of usage. After spending some time on some of the global warming pages, I know how frustrating edit wars can be. And I expect this article touches areas where emotions are far stronger. You are certainly welcome to post a request for a new image on the graphics lab page. I suggest post a message on the article's talk page that the image is a copyright vio, and marking the image as a copyright violation. You may also post this to the project page, where the activity is and ask for a second opinion. Sagredo⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄ 07:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The other user has been in contact with the company and they have approved of the black and white image. I guess we'd need an OTRS to verify that. So you don't think that the B image is too dark/contrasty? I could live with an image that was a bit darker than A, but B just seems over the top. Thanks for your response and imput!-Andrew c [talk] 12:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some standards of our own

Has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Graphic Lab/Research and Development

Other solution : Website making SVG pie charts !

Has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Graphic Lab/Research and Development

HERE'S the trouble

According to User:Shadowbot3, the bot is currently "blocked for malfunctions"! This explains why we aren't getting any backups. Should we contract out to a new bot in the interim? The page looks like it's getting excessively long. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 14:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like User:MiszaBot II is the only running Wikipedia: namespace archiver bot. I suggest we use it in the interim untill our usuall archiverbot is running again. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 18:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Shadowbot3 hasn't had a contrib since the 13th. The page was growing large. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with how that archiver works. Does is not archive unless done=true in the template in the section header? So, rather than changing the bot, which I'll leave to others, I manually archived the completed requests. This should only be a temporary solution.↔NMajdantalk 15:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure that transcluding the <!--werdnabot-archive--> tag works, but don't quote me on that. But if Shadowbot3 isn't running it wouldn't work anyway. Time3000 (talk) 16:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason it is not automatically archiving is becuase a while ago, we decided that because you cannot transclude <!--werdnabot-archive-->, we would have to sacrifice the auto-archiving for the new request template. It should have happened that when you set done=true, <!--werdnabot-archive--> will be transcluded, but unfortunately the archiving did not work. > Rugby471 talk 16:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]