765,429
edits
User talk:Bbll22: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m
No, you don't have new messages. Sorry for the false alarm.
No edit summary |
m (No, you don't have new messages. Sorry for the false alarm.) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Please do not create articles for characters who have not yet appeared. Articles should only be created once the episode airs. No matter if the next time trailer shows or names them, or they are confirmed to appear, they shouldn't have articles created. Thanks for understanding. [[User:The Thirteenth Doctor|The Thirteenth Doctor]] 20:12, June 6, 2010 (UTC) | Please do not create articles for characters who have not yet appeared. Articles should only be created once the episode airs. No matter if the next time trailer shows or names them, or they are confirmed to appear, they shouldn't have articles created. Thanks for understanding. [[User:The Thirteenth Doctor|The Thirteenth Doctor]] 20:12, June 6, 2010 (UTC) | ||
{{Please see|Can we disable visual editor please?}} <br> {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | {{Please see|Can we disable visual editor please?}} <br> {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}03:56: Tue 20 Dec 2011 </span> | ||
{{Please see|Can we disable visual editor please?}} <br> {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | {{Please see|Can we disable visual editor please?}} <br> {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}17:58: Thu 22 Dec 2011 </span> | ||
== Lily Arwell pictures == | == Lily Arwell pictures == | ||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
Also, I think your picture is quite obviously "darker" than the current one. You're probably looking at these two pictures at their full size and thinking there's not much difference between them. And that's true. At full size, the lighting differences aren't terribly problematic. But you must always '''primarily''' consider how they look at 250px. And contrast is an awfully important thing at that size. Some ''great'' pictures look ''terrible'' at 250px, because they are drawn from low-light or oddly-lit scenes. Yours is ''definitely'' from an oddly lit scene, because it's a location shot looking into an actual house, naturally top-lit from the interior, ''and'' artificially front-lit from outside. That means ''natural'' shadows on whoever's inside the house. | Also, I think your picture is quite obviously "darker" than the current one. You're probably looking at these two pictures at their full size and thinking there's not much difference between them. And that's true. At full size, the lighting differences aren't terribly problematic. But you must always '''primarily''' consider how they look at 250px. And contrast is an awfully important thing at that size. Some ''great'' pictures look ''terrible'' at 250px, because they are drawn from low-light or oddly-lit scenes. Yours is ''definitely'' from an oddly lit scene, because it's a location shot looking into an actual house, naturally top-lit from the interior, ''and'' artificially front-lit from outside. That means ''natural'' shadows on whoever's inside the house. | ||
So, having said all that, I hope you understand MM was certainly not personally attacking you, but judging the ''picture itself'' by a number of metrics we've established over the years. His removal of your image doesn't mean that we don't appreciate your work or your effort to improve things. Perhaps now that you understand our rules a little better, you might be able to find another picture to replace the one currently in the infobox. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | So, having said all that, I hope you understand MM was certainly not personally attacking you, but judging the ''picture itself'' by a number of metrics we've established over the years. His removal of your image doesn't mean that we don't appreciate your work or your effort to improve things. Perhaps now that you understand our rules a little better, you might be able to find another picture to replace the one currently in the infobox. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}17:01: Wed 07 Mar 2012 </span> | ||
