This page, part of the Graphics Lab Wikiproject, is an archive of requests for February 2011.
Please do not edit the contents of this page. You can submit new requests here.
Graphist opinion(s): Simple legends and captions should not be included in graphics. They should be moved to the image description pages and the captions in the articles. Kaldari (talk) 21:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: In light of independence per referendum, please vectorize. In the event of the referendum supporting separation from Sudan, Southern Sudan will become an independent country on 9 July 2011. [1]. Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 11:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: This is already an SVG, but it has issues. My concern is with the drawing at the bottom. I'm not even sure how to accurately describe what's wrong with it, but there are lines which seem to be extending randomly from the oxen and wagon and some color is missing. This image shows what the image should look like. –Fredddie™05:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s): Those are artifacts from auto-tracing. The signs will likely need some tender loving care (i.e., drawing from scratch), given the Nebraska state's highway collection doesn't include this figure. It would be of tremendous help if there are clean, high-resolution raster image of this - all the ones I could find on the web are quite low resolution. Jon C (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Once you delete the artifacts you'll find the stroked paths much cleaner than usual auto-tracing results. The file looks funny, but still salvageable, although it'd take some time to do. If tracing from scratch is not possible, here's what you can do: The black-filled areas and some rogue paths should be deleted, the stroked paths are for some weird reason divided into small segments, you can select segments that are supposed to be one path and use 'join' function to combine (obvious example would be the text), or you can lock them and trace above them (with smart guides on) with the picture linked above an additional reference. Regards, -- Orionist ★ talk19:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: Hi there, I need to get File:DYK Tutorial.pdf, which was created in PowerPoint using minimal graphic design skills, into the Scribus format. Basically, this document will be used as a template for future "Wikipedia Tutorials" for the US Public Policy Initiative, which is working with numerous college classes to include Wikipedia in their curriculum, so the students need quick, easy-to-read, and easy-on-the-eyes tutorial documents to help them out in their early days. So if this could be made in Scribus, that would be great.
Also, use your design judgment to make the document better if you'd like. I'll also need a 2nd page template (i.e., the pdf I linked before is only a one-page document; for multipage documents, I'll need a template page for those other pages, too). You've got a good amount of graphic freedom here, I'm just giving you a starting point. The ultimate goal is to have a recognizable format so that when a student sees one of these documents, they know it's from the same source as the rest of the documents we're handing out to them. If nobody here is familiar with Scribus, if you could point me where else I should try, that would be great. Thanks! upstateNYer (Ambassador) 01:14, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: Please recreate the following seals in SVG. They can be uploaded to the Commons under the same license as the Coat of Arms. The first seal, the Seal of Puerto Rico, takes most of it's elements from the Coat of Arms I have provided. Thanks very much to whoever takes this, I really appreciate it. Fry1989 (talk)
Request: Hi all, we have a File:Flag of the City of London.svg, but we don't have illustrations for the other three British capitals (Belfast for Northern Ireland; Cardiff for Wales; and Edinburgh for Scotland). SVG flags of these would be greatly appreciated. Please note, this request has also been made at the less active Wikimedia Commons Illustration Workshop too. 86.159.104.235 (talk) 12:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: I just made a little template for marking things as "new" (for highlighting new instructional screencasts on a page full of them). This was the only relevant icon I could find. It's good, but it looks bad at small sizes. I'm hoping someone can create a version that is simpler and looks better at 35px or even smaller. Thanks! Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 03:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s): Not sure which pages/dimensions you're doing this for, I quickly threw a couple together to get the conversation started. Is there any of them that you think would be a good lead for the final design? Jon C (talk) 03:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The page I want it for now is here, although I think it would be handy elsewhere too. I think it ought to be bright, contrasty, and solidly colorful, along the lines of the stereotypical "new" star/explosion icon, kinda like this, and also have more points than the stars you drafted, like at least 7. I think the current one would work well if the text was a solid without an outline, or something a little more optimized for small size. The size of your drafts are perfect, I'd say.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 03:49, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Take 2. I was going to insert one into your page to see how it works, but I'm not sure how to do that (template and all). Jon C (talk) 04:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. The red-on-gray is tough to read at the proper small size: Maybe if the text was horizontal and a little bit wider? And sorry to spring that gif on you. I looked for something closer to the archetype in my mind, but that was the best I found on a quick Google search.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 04:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Take 3. I've overwritten the last version with larger (but lighter) font - I think it's readable at the small size now (it wasn't before). I prefer the slanted text; the slant and the red will help catch attention on an otherwise horizontal and black/blue/white environment. Taken the liberty to change the template, and it looks sorta OK in the page you've mentioned. I'm not ready to make neon-green/party pink on Wikipedia :) Jon C (talk) 04:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done I was not sure of the background color so I searched for similar images, and all of them had black backgound, so I made it black. Regards, -- Orionist ★ talk10:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I tried my hands on this and gave up on the (irregular) feathers... did you manually pen Bezier curves for all of them, or is there a different way of going about this? Jon C (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. I also used only a few points to keep the curves smooth, and tried to make opposite curves of different feathers go somehow parallel to one another. Once I figured out the first couple, the rest became much easier. -- Orionist ★ talk19:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Fallschirmjäger. I've given this a stab, and included the file up there, but the logo is one of those cases that breaks upon opening/saving in Illustrator. I've tried running it through Quibik's gradient simplify python code, and it does not seem to affect the result in this case. An Inkscape editor may need to replace the globe, also linked. Hey, at least the type is in the right place! Jon C (talk) 04:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done - I've worked on your logo and used Inkscape which has to be used with troublesome SVGs made in it, although I prefer Illustrator, to sort out the globe and match the style of the text with the standard format for Wikipedia logos. Regards, Fallschirmjäger✉19:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: Hello! Please, remove the background of the picture to the left and make it translucid and upload it over the picture to the right. Thank you very much, Lecen (talk) 13:51, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s): Request taken by Fallschirmjäger. 19:10, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Great Pumpkin (are you the one Linus waits for every year?) - I took a further look at the images. Here at illustration workshop most of us work with vector graphics, whereas over at the photography workshop they are experts at raster manipulations. Given this is a clone out / paste kinda task, and no higher resolution is needed, you're more likely to find someone who can help you over there. Jon C (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: Please, remove the frame and background of all pictures and make it translucid. The first painting of Prince Afonso already has a .png version [2] as well as the one with Pedro II as an infant [3], so you may simply upload the new pictures over both. Thank you very much, Lecen (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: Add the elements beyond Rg (i.e. Cn, Uut, Uuq, Uup, Uuh, Uus, Uuo), with Cn and Uuq going into the 1950-1999 period and, I suppose, the rest going into a new "2000+" period. Lanthanum-138 (talk) 04:44, 2 February 2011 (UTC) (This seems to be one of the last un-updated periodic table images. If there are any more like this one, please fix them too! Lanthanum-138 (talk) 04:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Graphist opinion(s): I think a vector version is useful (the original is a screenshot), and added link to a SVG periodic table. But I recommend against adding the unconfirmed elements to the table. Jon C (talk) 05:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DoneLanthanum-138 did all the hard work. It looks great! Do you mind if I modify the colors to something that suggest a pattern (e.g., red->orange->green->blue)? The current colors as it is sorta random (looking through the code it seems the original author simply picked between "CC" "00" and "FF" ;) ). Also, I find the short template looks better than the one currently in article - the readers don't really need to know the extra details like group# within that context. Jon C (talk) 21:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See the following, using both the color-wheel and saturation as guidance (the newly discovered elements are "brighter/fresher" than the older ones):
Question: I've tried a variety of things, but don't seem to be able to get the dashed box to go away. Can someone versed in Wikitables help? Jon C (talk) 19:48, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: The contrast in the first two images for the indicated room is too low. I tried fixing the first one but got a file that was three times as large. Mangoe (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It would be preferable to have a separate locator diagram for each room given that most such diagrams exist, as it would be hard to get people to stop using them. I would suggest replacing existing diagrams (and adding any that may be missing) by taking the diagram you indicate (and the matching diagrams for the other floors) and blanking out all but the room in question. Mangoe (talk) 18:37, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s): Request taken by Makeemlighter.
Done I've uploaded versions with and without modifiable text. The non-modifiable version renders better, so it should be used in articles. The other version is good for translation and making corrections. If there are any errors or if you'd like anything changed, just let me know. Cheers, Makeemlighter (talk) 23:22, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
<sigh> changed font to Arial, because it scales properly on wikimedia sites. For other watching wikigraphists, this fixes most font scaling problems. gringer (talk) 12:21, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's pointless to change the font. It's far better to just create a version with text converted to paths and put that version in the articles. The modifiable version is then listed in other version and is available for translation, corrections, etc. Makeemlighter (talk) 18:58, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done Since this is used in many articles, and the source is small (192x192px), a vector version would be useful at some point. Jon C (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Free book cover needed"
Resolved
Current image
Take 1
Take 2
Article(s): All books (~0) found in Category:Wikipedia books (books without cover images)
Request: Wikipedia books currently have the "Picture Needed" plus when prompting users for a cover. However, many people just add fair use images, etc... and they have to be reverted, again and again... So I was thinking that designing a new image would go a long way. Something like a book with the "no copyright" sign as its cover, in SVG format. Perhaps with a question mark somewhere in there? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books}07:43, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The layout is awesome! Some tweaks: It really shouldn't be named [[File:Wikibooks-something.svg]], since Wikipedia books (collections of Wikipedia articles) are different from Wikibooks (books written from scratch). A better file name would be something like File:Wikipedia-books-missing-cover.svg or similar. Also the blue question mark with a white border has, IMO, a bad contrast with the darkgray book and the aliasing makes the white border looks crappy when the image is small (which is how it would be viewed most of the time). Maybe make the question mark a solid light gray, matching the lighter gray from the inside of the "no copyright" circle?
Uploaded a modified version under the proposed name - I didn't know that there's a Wikipedia Books. I replaced the black line with a gray one (I think it's easier to see now). I uploaded 2 version - a blue ? with buffed up outline, overwritten by a gray ? as you suggested (which I think looks nicer). If you like the former, simply revert it. Jon C (talk) 22:17, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The "wikipedia books" concept is a little strange to me... I think my concept of a book is one that reads coherently from front-to-back. Hmm... but it would make the "chemistry experiment" illustration effort more worthwhile. Jon C (talk) 19:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s): I'm not sure if this is doable. The bevel effect is difficult to reverse engineer, and I think it may have been a bitmap to begin with (the style of bevel reminds me of something in Photoshop rather than a vector drawing). Jon C (talk) 17:17, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: This should be an easy one. The image is already vectorized, but for some reason the subscripts are not showing up correctly in MediaWiki. Can you guys fix it? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff)01:50, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]