This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello. At WP:WPTC we use some custom software to generate hurricane track maps that could be useful for you. The software used is Jdorje's track map generator, and uses Image:Whole world - land and oceans.jpg as the background. However, for world maps, you could also use any of the NASA Blue Marble maps, particularly the Blue Marble Next Generation backgrounds. I'm not really sure if that helps or not, but you may be interested in knowing... Titoxd^(?!?) 05:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

This page is only for maintenance, showing the skeleton of this Graphic project.

Wikipedia:Graphic Lab	=> Main Page
Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Maps	=> Coming soon. Place to ask maps creation or improvement	=> Sous-pages spécifiques aux demandes de travaux
Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Images to improve	=> Coming soon. Place to ask Images creation or improvement
Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Images to improve/Proposition	=> Coming soon. Template to request improvement.
Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Images à améliorer/Archives etc.	=> Archives
Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Protocoles Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Graphic Village Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Softwares	=> Helps pages
Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Project map	=> This page
Common Graphic Village Pump	=> Place where all the graphist teams talk about graphism.
((Cleanup-image))	=> Template that adds image to Category:Images for cleanup	=> used templates
((Redraw))	=> Template that adds image to Category:Images for redraw
((Graphic_Lab))	=> To use on commons. Template stamping improved images
((Wikigraphist)) ((User Wikigraphist))	=> Template / User box for Wikigraphists :]
((Wikigraphism))	=> Basics helps
((Did)) & ((Thank))	=>  Done /  Thanks

fr:Wikipedia:Atelier graphique/Arborescence

I named the workshop "Graphic Lab", but several other name could be better

Name :

• French : Atelier Graphique

Proposed English names :

• Graphics Workshop : [add your signature here to vote]
• Graphics Lab : Yug, YK Times
• Graphics Desktop :
• Graphics Studio : Man vyi, Bastiq▼e, Wgsimon

Please vote, and feel free to rename the 3 pages ( Main | Maps | Images ). Yug (talk) 10:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

What is the protocol for addressing fair use images (such as logos)? The image can't be used outside article namespace so posting the image here would violate WP:FUC. I have a university seal that I want the background removed so its on a transparent background.--NMajdan•talk 14:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

We can clean up it, but it will stay on wiki-en. We are not allow to share it with others wikis. Yug (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I realize that, but logos are not permitted anywhere outside of the article. I'll just post a link to the file. Thanks.--NMajdan•talk 18:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'd like to help out with the Graphic Lab. Is there anything specific I should do to join? —Larry V (talk | contribs) 03:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Nope, just put /Images to improve and maybe /Maps on your watchlist, and help out whenever you get the urge, that's it.

Since the Lab is having growing pains, when there's only one or two images left to work on, it may also be helpful to try to find one of the more encyclopedic/useful images from Category:Images for cleanup or commons:Category:Images for cleanup or Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Requested and orphan maps or elsewhere, and throw it up on the queue. --Interiot 05:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Cool, thanks =) —Larry V (talk | contribs) 07:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

You can add your name in the list of graphist ( there : Wikipedia:Graphic Lab), that just a symbol of our involment :] Yug (talk) 19:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I recently discovered this image Image:Smoked gruyere.gif which contains some vandalism of sorts. It is now listed at Images for Deletion. User:BigDT said they have seen this done before. Is there a way that an animated gif/image can be checked to see what the coding for it is? MY thought is that someone could download/save the image, load it into a program and see what the loops contain. Are GIFs the only file format that can do animation? Once it was determined the file wasn't an animated GIF, or the animation doesn't display anything bad, it could be tagged by the checker that it was animation free, or animation-safe. Someone could put a delay of like 30 seconds, or 60, or 300 and so most people may not see it, but it would showup in the article (if used) which would be bad. Any thoughts or ideas of how to check these files is appreciated. Thanks. --MECU≈talk 15:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Just open the image in the GIMP, Photoshop or any other image editor; in most programs the animation frames will show up as layers. And yes, of the image formats allowed on Wikipedia, only GIF files can be animated like this. Ogg files can of course also contain animation, but they don't even pretend to be "just images". —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 18:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Whenever possible, it would be nice to make a language-neutral version of the diagrams. Using labels with numbers or letters, the pictures can be easily used on all Wiki. This informal guideline is more or less followed on the :fr version of the graphic lab (at least I try to encourage people to do so). For example :

Thanks for reading this, Dake 10:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

The page is getting exceedingly large (1.64 MB right now). We should start archiving some of the older, fulfilled requests. — Kieff 18:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I really like the fact that the page gives many examples of what the people involved have the skill and willingness to help out with. I think it helps invite people to use the Graphic Lab more. So if practical concerns are important, hopefully sections won't be archived too quickly, and hopefully the archive can be prominently linked to. --Interiot 18:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Your project is taking cruddy images [1] and making them not only worse [2] but totally unsuitable for Wikipedia. The 'improved' image is a factually inaccurate fabrication (it misrepresents the shape of the right side of the camera). The same 'Wikigraphist' has made many other unacceptable changes as a part of your project. Please stop. Such edits are a nuisance to check and clean up. --Gmaxwell 04:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. WikiProject Albums has run across an excessive number of redundant placeholder 'no image available' graphics, and we have already started the deletion process for many of them. I'm personally dealing with the ones that are not relevant to the albums project — in fact, there are a great deal that run at cross-purposes — and I've decided to consult some people in order to decide which to delete and which to keep.

Seems that there's a need to decide on a book cover placeholder, a DVD cover placeholder, and a generic placeholder with width=height. The ones that aren't deleted can get categorized properly at Category:Wikipedia image placeholders. –Unint 20:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I finished off the redraw template, ((Redraw)). It is now available to use, and all images that it is placed on add the image to Category:Images for redraw. Any other requests/comments/questions can be redirected to my talk page. -YK Times 01:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I found something such this in wikipedia fr. I think that can be interesting to try this way. On the french Graphic lab, we tryed it but that wasn't conclusive. You may try something, but If that become confusing for new user, harder to understand and to use, then forget this way.

This will need huge wiki knowledge and tests. Yug (talk) 19:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

What about using the new section creation with the template init such as what we have on :fr ? Dake 10:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Personnaly, I never find out how you did it on the french Lab. Yug (talk)] 00:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I have made one that works and placed it on the request page. Pages must be moved manually from Category:Image requests to be listed to the request page though. If it isn't working properly, please notify me. -YK Times 03:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

input box below:

I like your pictures and i find your work very usefull. Thank You very much! Karmela^talk 10:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering if any of the WikiGraphists on here monitored Category:Images which should be in SVG format. Seems there are quite a few images there that could be converted, moved to Commons, and deleted here. Just a suggestion.↔NMajdan•talk 18:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, there's a lot of images there. I will post a message at that Category linking to the Graphic Lab, as well as start bringing some of them into the request for improvement page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by YK Times (talk • contribs) 01:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/New Proposals is considering a new Barnstar to be given to people who make great combined contributions to Wikipedia articles and the Commons free-use image collection. Please come by and state your views. Thanks, Johntex\^talk 15:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, a request has been made for the image to be improved. Could someone here please take a look and see if you could produce a similar image that is higher in quality? Thanks very much. Johntex\^talk 19:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that the request titled "Translation from french of a diagram" was archived by Werdnabot; before I archive this page to the correct month, I was wondering if it is a fulfilled request, or still in progress? If it is, I will move it back ASAP. Thx. -YK Times 01:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

My request for this image has been done. You may delete the request. LittlePete 20:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, all. I just made a request, and I'm not sure if I'm supposed to do anything else. The request isn't appearing on the main page, for example. It's here: Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve/request/Image:Traditional doctor sign in Tatum.jpg. Sorry if I did something wrong. — Brian (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay Brian. You didn't do anything wrong, its just me; for requests submitted through the input box, they need to be manually moved to the main request page. You can keep checking there to see the progress on your image. Thanks for using the Graphic Lab, and sorry for the inconvenience. -YK Times 23:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem, thanks. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing an important step or something. Thanks again. — Brian (talk) 05:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I think the old and archaic system of Copy/Past the "Request form" is more : 1/ convenient ; 2/ easely understandable, that the current submition system. I think the test show its complexity, but not its efficiency or conveniency. I encourage go back to the old, archaic, but simple and efficient as well system (see here). Yug (talk) 21:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. There is a moderate backlog, stretching over several days. Why is a request queue necessary, instead of requesters simply putting their items onto the list a la featured content nominations?--ragesoss 20:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, this was partially my idea, following up on this one. I think it can be filed under the category of "seemed like a good idea at the time". The backlog usually isn't too bad, but it does pile up some days, is a bit of a pain. I sort of modeled the system after another request system (from somewhere else in Wikipedia, I think it was for blocks or something), but you're right, it is very complex. If no one is against it, I think we should removed to submission form from the request page. -YK Times 17:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if you had seen Wikipedia:Requested pictures? Neither of you seem to mention the other, so perhaps it got missed. Both seem to cover the same ground, so I'd strongly suggest a merge. :) --Quiddity 20:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I had no idea there was such a project! While I don't think the projects should be merged, as one deals with acquiring images, while the other deals with improving + vectorizing them, I think it would be a great idea to include links across the two project. Thanks for bringing this to our attention! -YK Times 23:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. The only reason I know of it, is the mention 5 down at Wikipedia:Community Portal#Things to do. The only other mentions I can find of it are at Wikipedia:Finding images tutorial 3/4 way down, and at Wikipedia:Images 1/2 way down. I've now added both to Help:Contents/Images and media.

A merge of effort at least, to reduce any redundant information/instruction, and make everything as clear and simple as possible for the end-users. Some sort of relationship, something along the lines of a sister or child project, would be good. Whether in name or instruction-set or page-hierarchy or whatever! I'll mention this thread at their talk page. Good luck with it all :) --Quiddity 03:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the Graphic Lab have a more friendly looking : everybody can see just here what wikigraphists do. The graphic Lab is also a "graphic Forum", I think this is a more funny way. Obviously, I encourage collaboration between the both project, and merge the both may be a solution. --Yug (talk) 20:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Whatever we find as a solution, be it merging or closer collaboration, I'll be on board the whole way; I can modify some of the templates I have created for the Graphics Lab (see my "tools"). Actually, merging seems like the option that would benefit the Wikipedia community the most, so I propose that we start laying to groundwork for a merge. I noticed on the Wikipedia:Requested pictures page that there was also a category with overlapping requests, and a few other, separate groups; perhaps we could merge some of these projects together to create a wider-reaching project that could bring together some of the other Photo- or Graphics-related project out there. Just a suggestion. If you have any specific questions or anything else, you can also reach me at my talk page. -YK Times 21:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

If need, I also think merging the both will be the " the option that would benefit the Wikipedia community the most ". But, the Wikipedia:Requested pictures page seem more use to request "please may you take a photograph of [topic]". Take a picture is not the same that improve a picture, and we can "specialize" the Requested pictures page on photography, and the graphic lab on improving pics. Yug (talk) 20:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

After exploring this issue fairly deeply, I think the ideal solution would be to integrate (merge) a limited version of the Graphics Lab into Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration, perhaps as a child project. Here are my reasons:

1. WikiProject Illustration is more mature. It already has plenty of talented workers (listed under "Participants"), and links to the project already appear across Wikipedia. It also has several child projects, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps that the Graphics Lab, if established separately, could disrupt.
2. Wikipedia already has the necessary tools for image cleanup. As you have noticed, there is already a Wikipedia:Requested_pictures page to request new images. To request image cleanup, there are dozens of tags like (({Cleanup-image))}, (({ShouldBeSVG))}, etc. that automatically categorize the tagged images. Changing the system dramatically is likely to cause confusion among those who have used these tags for years.
3. Ease of use. It is far simpler for a Wikipedian who finds an image needing cleanup to tag it with (({ifc))} or (({imagewatermark))} than it is to navigate to the Graphics Lab, write a cleanup proposal, and submit it. Furthermore, these tags make it easy for image improvers to do their jobs -- for example, I only need to navigate to Category:Images with watermarks to find several dozen images with the same problem to fix.

In summary, Wikipedia's image cleanup templates have already been established as the primary way of submitting images for cleanup. There is, however, a possible use for the Graphics Lab. Though it does not make sense to submit all images needing cleanup to the Graphics Lab, the Lab could instead be used as a "specialized image cleanup" group. Here, users could submit images with special cleanup needs (i.e. very complicated instructions) or for rapid cleanup. In this form, the Graphics Lab could become a child project (edit: or perhaps a task force) of Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration. Let me know what you think. MithrandirMage 00:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I mainly agree with this wish to merge, or affiliate the both project. But I keep some clear ideas :

• make the merge will require : leadership, knowledge on the both project, and lot of wikiclic/time. Who
• the strategy of an open Lab is more attractive for visitors and friendly for the wikigraphist. That's why, this way of work have to be keep.
• the Graphic lab is for visitor too and so should be widely visible. Rename it into WP:Wikiproject illustration/Graphic Lab/image to improve means to kill the GLab. So I encourage to keep an own place, even if it become a Wikiproject illustration sub-project.

After what, I encourage to reinforce the link between the both project, and to make more advertisements about the Graphic Lab. The [WP:Wikiproject illustration page] being a semi-professional page, it need less advertisement. Moreover, the "Wikigraphist list" and your "Wikipedian who may help in graphism" have to be merge, keep them divide is a non-sense.

Most important, we need someone able to do that (see 1st point), and if this person doesn't like I wish, if no so bad. Just thank to him/her. ;] Yug (talk) 17:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC) <the 2 project have to be join >

This is going to take a lot of work; if we do end up going ahead with it (hopefully we do, because it makes sense), I can help out in whatever capacity you need me for. I agree that the two projects should be kept somewhat separate, like a task force, as each one has their own pros and cons. I still support doing a wider reaching merge, such as with the projects previously listed below by Yug. -YK Times 18:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Organizing merging / specialisation

Page which have, in part, the same use :

• Wikipedia:Requested_pictures - page with many photo request. Contribute need a camera.
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration - Page with a list of graphists proposing their help. Contribute need a graphic soft.
• Wikipedia:Graphic Lab - page which directly work on picture's improvements, by wikigraphist. Contribute need a graphic soft.
• other pages to merge / specialised ?

For chemistry images, all requests should be forwarded to Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry/Image Request, where expert chemists will collaborate to make sure images are accurate and conform to WP:CHEMS's style guidlines.

Ben 13:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I was just looking at this talk page, and realized that its getting a little cluttered; we already archive requests from the request page so that it doesn't get cluttered. I was thinking that maybe we could start archiving the talk page too? Just a suggestion. -YK Times 18:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I also encourage it. Some section may need to be keep here. Yug (talk) 01:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

It might not be much use, but I have created a template to go on an Image Page, to say that it is or was processed by the Graphics Lab. it looks like this:

...and it can be implemented like this: ((User:DTR/Graphics Lab|how the image is being improved|improved image))

For the moment it is in my User Space. The Template displays a preview of the 'new' image (see Image:HRWalkway-01.jpg for a demonstration) if the template is used in the Image Namespace. Is it useful (at all)? --Dave the Rave (DTR) 18:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Update: There is also a template to use with no new image preview (e.g. if an image is under fair use) : ((User:DTR/Graphics Lab No Preview|how the image is being improved|improved image))

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		I, Valentinian, hereby award the Graphical Designer Barnstar to the contributors of Wikipedia:Graphic Lab for their tireless work in improving the quality of Wikipedia's images. Keep up the excellent work. Valentinian T / C 19:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to copy this barnstar to your user pages. Valentinian ^{T / C} 19:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		I, Valentinian, hereby award the Graphical Designer Barnstar to the contributors of Wikipedia:Graphic Lab for their tireless work in improving the quality of Wikipedia's images. Keep up the excellent work. Valentinian T / C 19:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to copy this barnstar to your user pages. Valentinian ^{T / C} 19:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

-for superb and dedicated support in preserving and improving Scouting images.Rlevse 12:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

-for superb and dedicated support in preserving and improving Scouting images.Rlevse 12:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

We don't seem to have a protocols in place for wikigraphists. Do we have a plan to put some in place?--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 01:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I haven't seen any moves in that direction. The Graphics Lab is pretty informal and people just work on the things that interest them. While that isn't particularly reassuring to people looking for help, it probably helps keep the volunteers from burning out and leaving out of frustration. Mike Dillon 23:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

We don't seem to have a protocols in place for wikigraphists. Do we have a plan to put some in place?--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 01:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I haven't seen any moves in that direction. The Graphics Lab is pretty informal and people just work on the things that interest them. While that isn't particularly reassuring to people looking for help, it probably helps keep the volunteers from burning out and leaving out of frustration. Mike Dillon 23:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... well, should we rid ourselves of that ugly redlink on the project page then?--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 21:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Probably not a bad idea. I doubt anyone will be creating a "Conseils" page any time soon either. To be honest, I've never really looked at any page except for "Images to improve". Mike Dillon 03:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, since we are the wikigraphists I think our project page should look good, right? :) I will add it to my to do.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 04:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Just found you folks here, and am looking to get going on some graphic design work. I downloaded the SVG program, looks pretty straight forward. I'm up for converting images, but I would also like to help improve this project. Any direction is appreciated, just let me know if there's anything I can do for you. --BsayUSD [Talk] [contribs] 15:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

When you say 'The SVG program do you mean Inkscape? --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 15:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure do. --BsayUSD [Talk] [contribs] 01:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Type svg into commons and practice your skills there for now. We have completed almost all of the formal requests as of right now but watch it and pitch in as needed--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 03:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Inkscape: Good. I personally think Inkscape is brilliant and better than other non-free Vector packages (whoops, that's not NPOV). If there aren't any requests on Images to Improve, you could nominate images to be improved or try out Inkscape by helping out at Category:Images that should be in SVG format. Just be careful of licensing as it is debatable as whether fair-use images should be in SVG format, and some of the images in that category are fair-use. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 20:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Dave. As of right now, I'm only converting images that are under the GNU, creative commons, or public domain. I will release the SVGs under the same license to avoid any conflict of licensing. When I get a bit of time, I think I'll start on that 3-point altimeter, since it's used in several articles. --BsayUSD [Talk] [contribs] 20:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Releasing under the same license is a very good idea (they could be argued as derivative works). --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 20:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I stumbled upon Category:Graphic Tool- is this used? And if so, can someone add a proper higher category to it as it's "unknown" at the moment. If it's not use - can it be deleted? Thanks! Deadstar 10:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

External link is [3] as it doesn't seem to link properly? Deadstar 10:33, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The category in question is on Commons, not the English Wikipedia. An easier way to link there is commons:Category:Graphic Tool. Just remember that Commons doesn't accept fair use images. Valentinian ^{T / C} 10:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed a few problems with images that are being worked on being deleted. I have created a template to possibly resolve this issue. ((glhangon))

Hope it comes in useful. --BsayUSD [Talk] [contribs] 20:16, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

We have a lot of amateur photographs of article subjects taken under less-than-ideal circumstances, and with somewhat distracting backgrounds (that are not relevant to the topic). Would it be a good idea to just remove the distracting backgrounds from these portraits (i.e. blank them out)? Would this page be a good place to make requests for this?--Pharos 21:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, but the place for requests is Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve. --81.104.127.170 10:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Please also notice that the Graphic Labs encourage photographers to "Photograph your objects on monochromatic backgrounds". Yug 03:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The difficulty of such removal can also vary quite widely: the major problem is all that annoying hair people tend to have growing out of their heads. If the portrait happens to have a strongly colored background showing through part of the subject's hair, there may be no way to remove the background without either getting visible color fringing or giving the subject a new virtual haircut.

There are tricks that can sometimes help with that, and I've used them myself, but many of them tend to take quite a bit of technical skill, and even so aren't too reliable. One that does often work in difficult cases is to just blur the background instead of trying to remove it: that makes the background a bit less conspicuous, as if it were out of focus, while still keeping its color approximately the same. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 14:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Actual portraits of people are fairly scarce here. The main problem with this sort of thing is that subjects generally aren't shot specifically to be clipped out, so you have bits missing, shadows can be hard to carry through to a new b/g, transparent subjects, etc. I'd suggest a good protocol for difficult-to-remove b/gs is to mask them and change their gamma (lighten or darken or change opacity) so that the subject stands out more, isn't so distracted or simply becomes the subject as intended. Selective blurring is rarely any better than a completely removed b/g in terms of looking convincing or natural. I personally prefer "obviously-altered but effective" ways of accentuating a subject to unconvincing attempts at a new "reality" which always just looks like a deception is being perpetrated.
Is this clear as mud? mikaul^talk 16:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Someone snagged a vector imaged out of a copyrighted PDF from a countries government and now it's all over the place. Could I still request someone to create a free SVG of said coat of arms so we don't have to run around with this annoying SVG that can't actually be used anywhere since it's an SVG? 68.39.174.238 00:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Please be specific. Which image are you talking about? Valentinian ^{T / C} 07:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I mean generally, could that be done without leading to accusations that one SVG was a derivative of the other? 68.39.174.238 21:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

If an image used on Wikipedia is in fact a copyvio but mistagged as a free image? By all means. Btw, you might wish to check my list of places where official heraldic images are in fact PD. There aren't many of these nations, but a number of nations actually have such laws. But if the image you're thinking about isn't on this list of positives, please bring the matter up here. Valentinian ^{T / C} 21:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

No it's not on there, it's the Maldives. Check the page Coat of arms of the Maldives — that image is an SVG, but it's copyrighted! End result: All the "Politics of the Maldives" templates use the flag of the country instead of the coat of arms, because the CoA is, infact, non-free. 68.39.174.238 16:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Even though I am not a practitioner of the style, I have gone to great lengths to improve the Northern Praying Mantis (martial art) page. There was a request on the talk page asking for a picture of the unique "mantis hook" fist that the practitioners use in combat. I have merged two photos together, which shows a side-by-side comparison of an actual Mantis' hook and a person playing the mantis fist. The top photo is actually an altered version of Image:MantisLegGBMNH.jpg from wikicommons. The bottom one is copyrighted and the owner has not given me permission to use it yet. I wrote them a while ago and I don't think they will ever reply. Would it be possible/legal to create an svg outline of the bottom pic? The top photo doesn't need to be traced or altered at all. --Ghostexorcist 18:49, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd wait til you get another opinion here, but I'd say that constituted "derivative works" and might infringe the copyright. It depends on the license it has already, if any. mikaul^talk 23:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

This is where I found the bottom pic. --Ghostexorcist 00:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, not helpful, there's no license there. I'm not sure it's such a big deal, to be honest, which is why I'd seek another opinion. Certainly look at m:Avoid Copyright Paranoia – you probably have a good fair use argument. mikaul^talk 00:18, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

In this case I don't think that an SVG would be as good the actual image itself, and I'd have to say that such an SVG would be a derivative work. However, I certainly think it would be brilliant having this sort of image in the article. I'd advise you to upload as fair use, as I also think there is a good fair use argument.

I checked with WP:FAIR, which says that "Some copyrighted images may be used on Wikipedia [...including...] paintings and other works of visual art: For critical commentary, including images illustrative of a particular technique or school." Furthermore, one of the Non-free content criteria is "Significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." I think that both criteria apply here.

The only thing that might cause trouble is criterion 1 of WP:FAIR: "1. No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available or could be created that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. If non-free content can be transformed into free material, this is done instead of using a fair-use defense." It could be argued that another free photo could be easily created. You might need to think of a counter-argument for this (perhaps that such a photo would require expert or specialist knowledge in its creation?).

Overall though, I think applying a fair-use argument would be the best option. I'd be interested in the thoughts of anyone else.--Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 21:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I have a couple of images over on the Polyurethane page, both in .png format. I downloaded Inkscape and converted them to .svg format.

I tried to upload one here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Polyurethanepolymer.svg, but nothing shows up; although if I click on the image box, I can get the .svg image to show up!

What am I doing wrong, and how do I get the .svg into the Wikimedia Commons so I can use it in place of the .png?

Cheers,

P Cottontail 00:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Answered on talk page. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 08:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Would it be appropriate to have Template:Cleanup-image explicitly reference this, or something similar? 68.39.174.238 19:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

If by 'this' you mean the Graphics Lab, I think it would certainly be appropriate. There is precedent, to: CAT:SVG has a mention of the GL, as does the Template ((SVG)). --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 20:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Seemed quite logical, so I did it. vlad§inger ^tlk 01:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I recently made some improvements to the face of Image:Zhou Tong GR.svg using inkscape, but the changes are not rendering at all. If you click on the picture, the changes appear. How do you fix this? I notice the very same thing happened the first time when the graphics lab took on the job of making a vector drawing of the original painting. --Ghostexorcist 22:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Answered on talk page. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 08:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I originally created Image:IPA chart 2005.png in Word, converted to PDF, then converted to PNG. But I'd prefer SVG. I downloaded Inkscape (which BTW looks like a nice program), but it won't open PDF; Acrobat and Illustrator won't export to SVG. How do I get around this? (Please answer on my talk page.) Thanks, kwami 18:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[[:I created a copy of the World Series Cricket logo using Inkscape and uploaded as Image:World Series Cricket logo.svg (right) (previously a very poor quality scan Image:WSCLogo.jpg - left).

The three words of text at the bottom is supposed to be justified to the left & right margins. In Inkscape it displays OK, and if I view the image on Wikipedia in full size its OK also, but as a thumbnail it always displays with left-justified text. What am I doing wrong?

I exported a png version of same Image:wsc-logo.png and that displays fine. deleted

Any help for a Inkscape newbie is appreciated. PS is this the right place to asks this type of question? —Moondyne 07:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Probably the best place would be the images to improve page, but i'll answer it here anyway. Because you saved the SVG with text in it, MediaWiki (the software Wikpedia runs on) displays it by redraw it as letters not as an 'image' (if you get what i mean, so it is redrawing the word 'cricket' not the shape of the word 'cricket'), if you click on the text in inkscape and press Ctrl+Shift+C, it will save it as a path (shape), you won't be able to edit the text as text anymore, but you will be preserving how it look when on Wikipedia. Hope that answers your question :-) > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 16:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

That's the best thing to do for any text where the font style is important. You can see Image:Fonts.svg for a list of fonts supported by mediawiki. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 16:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, this is just a minor thing, but the stroke around the cricket ball is white, should it be like that or should it be transparent?

BTW I hope all of the NOEDITSECTION stuff is sorted now, Rugby.--Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 16:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks guys. I can't work out how to outline the red circle. —Moondyne 04:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Make a black larger circle and put it behind the red one. This circumvents a mediawiki bug involving circle borders in inkscape—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC).

Thanks again. I'm starting to get the basics happening. —Moondyne 15:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Why convert the image in the first place? The original logo remains under copyright and the new file is a derived image and its copyright consequently belongs to the owners of the original logo. I've updated the file information page accordingly. Moondyne is the author of the file, but its content is the legal property of somebody else. Valentinian ^{T / C} 16:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Converted because the original scan was very low quality and I have been unable to find another one to download. I agree it is copyright, but believe it can be used under fair use provisions. —Moondyne 09:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[unident] If there is a problem with it being a fair use SVG, then All you need to do is rasterise it and use that instead. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 09:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't follow you. Is there a problem with it being fair use SVG? —Moondyne 14:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

As I understand it, (and correct me if I'm wrong), one of the criteria for an image being used as fair-use is that it is a low resolution image. SVG, being a vector format, is infinitely scaleable, and thus is potentially of an infinitely high resolution. Some perceive this to be a breach of fair use criteria. As far as I know, there is no official policy on the matter.--Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 15:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I deliberately remained silent on that in my rationale - IMO low-res is desirable but not a hard and fast requirement. I suppose its up to someone to dispute it, but I do see there's a few other svg's in Category:Non-free Logos. For example Image:1995 World Championships in Athletics logo.svg. A high profile logo Image:007.svg exists which is in a good article. I'm sure I'd find heaps of reasonably high-res fair use jpg's if I looked also. —Moondyne 15:41, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, are you sure your rendition of the logo is correct? In particular, are the corners of the black bars really supposed to be rounded, or is that just a result of tracing a low-resolution raster image? I tried googling for a higher-resolution version of the logo, but the best I could find was this, which looks as if the corners should be sharp but is not really big enough to say for sure. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I thought they were rounded per Image:WSCLogo.jpg and Dennis Lillee's t-shirt, but now I'm not so sure. —Moondyne 17:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi all,

I recently brought a graph (Image:History_of_laser_intensity.svg) over here for advice on exact positioning of text for equations. Rugby471 fixed it very nicely by changing the text to paths, but hereby hangs a cautionary tale: The new file was 391 KB! Fortunately, he had also uploaded an intermediate version where he had just fixed the arrowheads (another problem that I had had).

I felt that the precision gained by the change was not really worth the increase in file size, so instead I broke up each equation into individual letters and sections of text. I also solved some of my original problems by using ² and ³ where necessary. Now the file is only 48 KB, and is more easily searchable.

I hope this tip can be of some use to somebody at some time. --Slashme 16:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

There are some huge SVG files on the Wiki, e.g. Image:BlankMap-World6.svg is 1.56MB. Once MediaWiki rasterises the image, though, it's the filesize of the resulting PNG that counts. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 19:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

That's true in the short term, but in the longer term, browser support for svg is going to become widespread enough that it will be worthwhile to do content negotiation, and then Wikipedia will be serving more and more unrasterised svgs. --Slashme 05:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

...is awful. You click on the section edit link and get a MW error about trying to edit section 1! 68.39.174.238 15:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I've dropped a message to Rugby's talk page. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 15:57, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I tried all possible angles, but it didn't work, we'll just have to go with the previous method. Oh and by the way User:68.39.174.238, it's not the nicest thing for someone to call something you spent a lot of time on and created to make that someone's life a bit easier awful. Saying things like that makes me think twice about experimenting in my own time like this. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 17:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hold on there, I think I may have a solution. See User:DTR/Sandbox2 and User:DTR/Sandbox3. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 17:02, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm when I tried that, it didn't seem to work. You can go on and implement that. (I've had enough of templates for today) Remember you'll need to change Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Images_to_improve Template:Request_Title Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Images_to_improve/top. However i just tweaked the template in your sandbox to fit with the previous template. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 17:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

It all works now !! > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 18:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

New Template and Archiving

User:Ilmari Karonen suggested that we should have the template incorporate more than just "done" or "not done". Working on this, I had a go at an edited template that has five outcomes. See User:DTR/Sandbox2 and User:DTR/Sandbox3.

Oh, and by the way, the current template didn't add <!-- werdnabot-archive -->, but it should be fixed now. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 19:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I like the idea, but the template parameters (eg done, stop etc.) need to be slightly clearer > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 15:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, is the new template archiving properly? Maybe it would need to be subst: -ed. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 16:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I think we can safely say that archiving is not working. ((subst:-ing didn't work either. any thoughts? -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by DTR (talk • contribs) 16:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I have an idea, but I need to confirm something first, how exactly did putting <!-- werdnabot-archive -->. Make it archive, i can't find anything on Werdnabot's page or Shadowbot for that matter. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 17:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Shadowbot3 just checks for any pages that transclude ((User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere)), and checks for <!-- werdnabot-archive --> in it, then archives those sections. It was in the werdnabot wiki, when that was working (I can't seem to access it today). BTW, I don't think that transcluding the tag from another page works - none of the sections on Images to Improve have been archived. I'll put a note on Shadow1's talk page asking about it. Time3000 17:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I think I'll start manually archiving some of the requests, since it's clearly not working. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 16:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I've just noticed lots of werdnabot-archives mid archiving - were they put in manually? --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 18:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Languages

To allow other language to set up a graphic lab quicker

Hello, I think it's need to keep in a clear place this link : Last fully programmed Graphic Lab page. This will enable foreigners to "copy/paste/translate" and to get a graphic lab. Please can you get a place to "keep/archive" this link, ok keep in mind that the Commons' Graphic Lab is still fully programmed. Yug 06:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Newsletter/Announcements

see User:DTR/Sandbox2 --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 19:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I changed the colours slightly and added an image > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 18:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Description

This would be a complement to the Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve, specifically in the creation of maps for the undermapped articles, listed by the hundreds at Category:Wikipedia requested maps

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

1. Chris 06:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• See Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps -- John Broughton (♫♫) 13:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Rock on! Thank you! Do I archive this discussion or just remove it? Chris 21:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd remove it, myself, as you indicate there already exists a project dealing with the subject area. John Carter 15:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

And perhaps mention the other project in the Talk pages of each as a suggestion that they might be of interest to each other...or of interest to someone looking for the right project for a task. (SEWilco 15:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC))

Would Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Requested and orphan maps be the best link?--Pharos 18:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed that there isn't much activity with respect to requests. Instead of waiting for people to figure out that they can come here and figure out how to post a request and actually post it, why don't we go out and look for the images ourselves? —Preceding unsigned comment added by XcepticZP (talk • contribs) 16:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I have uploaded a file - Image:WikiBasics.svg - created by Illustrator 10.0 and saved as SVG (UTF-8). But, it's not showing up. I have used the web color palette of Illustrator. What is the problem? Can anyone help? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 14:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I don't use Illustrator, I use Inkscape. I have just opened it in Inkscape and saved it as an SVG and now it displays. However on my Ubuntu Linux system, it wouldn't display a thumbnail of it, and when I tried to open it with an image viewing program, it never loaded. How exactly did you save it ? > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 14:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

As I understand it, Illustrator generates the SVG with embedded .ai (illustrator) code, and this causes problems. Inkscape cleans-up the code or something, I think, when it's re-saved. Also, I wouldn't worry too much about the pallette of colours. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 16:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, rugby471. I guess I'll need an Inkscape to work out this kind of problems. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 01:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I've never had any problems with Illustrator. CS2 and CS3 both have excellent support for both versions of svg. Make sure you pick svg 1.1 when saving as svg. Don't go export or anything. ""Inkscape's implementation of SVG and CSS standards is incomplete; most notably, it does not support SVG filter effects..."". Proprietary software always beats the free stuff, hands down :p XcepticZP (talk • contribs) 14:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Careful, or there'll be a fight :P. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 19:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I've just seen Stanford's VectorMagic image tracing website [4], which provides tracing as an online service. It claims to produce higher-quality vector output from bitmaps than other algorithms, including well-known commercial graphics packages. Its demo images at [5] appear to have dramatically higher quality than the competition. Has anyone tried this service? -- The Anome 11:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Well I just had a go with an image I vectorized two weeks ago, here is the screenshot of what happened and as you can see, the results unfortunately are not as fantastic as they said they would be. Plus the resulting vector is not very efficient, as there are lots of little shapes, where one large one could be used. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 17:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

And we probably wouldn't be completely happy anyway unless we traced it ourselves :-) --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 20:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

However, according to a post on one of the RSS feeds i read, it seems to be working well on some types of images.

> Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 16:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

...and a better coordination between Photographers and Wikigraphists. It may be need to make adversing in this following way (to improve) :

We lack of good photographies and photographers to illustrate the Wikipedia's articles. You can help us by uploading some free photographies, especialy anatomic macro images such display (right; left). We also have a Graphic Lab where graphists are volunteers to give the last clean up to Your images.

Yug - 12:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

We do need to coax more quality stuff out of our Wikipedian photographers but I'm not sure appealing to them is the first step. That's not to say it's a bad idea, just that asking for pictures immediately begs the question, "of what?". Wikipedia:Requested pictures would be the place to point them, if it was full of requests. As someone pointed out above, it's an under-used service. I think there are already plenty of willing contributors & the thing to advertise is Requested Pictures, encouraging active editors to "order" original photographs as & when they see the need. Except I'm really not sure how to go about it without spamming the entire community.. --mikaul^talk 21:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, ok, I've just realised where I am.. I guess this is probably the wrong discussion but isn't it time that the whole picture administration side of things was more organised, or centralised, or anything but the dysfunctional state it's currently in? The difference, from an editor's POV, is an always-there, smart, full service digital bureau and photo studio with in-house retouching and editing, or a virtual shoebox with several million unprocessed, poorly catalogued, placeholder snaps with takie-it-or-leave-it functionality.. thing is, I think Graphic Lab could provide that service if we set about it the right way. --mikaul^talk 21:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi all,

My university offers its crest as a freehand or corel file for those who want high quality. Which will be easier to convert to svg on linux? --Slashme 19:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

If by Corel File, you mean WPG, then Corel file it is > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 17:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether they intend to give me a cdr or a wpg file. I've so far gotten a cc of an email saying "Sue, can you please take care of this". If I don't get a response, I might have to apply my 1337 tracing skillz (which in our case we have not got) to make myself an svg and a postscript file, which I will then of course share with the rest of the university LaTeX community. --Slashme 06:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)