Dear Adrian Your picture of an Allard car is very nice, but it is incorrectly labelled. It is actually a P-type (also known as a P1) saloon. I edited the description, but was unable to change the title of the picture on the main Allard page. I am new to Wikipedia, so I hope that I haven't breached any etiquette by doing so. Kind regards, Marcus Allard

Marcus, you got it absolutely right (etiquette-wise) because you let me know the problem and what changes you had made. To change the pic caption (or make any other edit) in an article is easy, just go to the article, click on Edit page, make the change to the article, check it looks OK with Show preview, if OK click on Save page. Don't forget to say in the Edit summary what you did. Best Wishes, Adrian - Adrian Pingstone 08:50, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I was going to move some of your images to Wikimedia Commons (of Bristol, as it happens). I would, however, be credited as the uploader - though I would, of course, credit you as the photographer and original uploader to Wikipedia. For this reason, I am asking you whether you would prefer to reupload your pictures to Commons yourself? You being credited as the uploader would not be the only advantage - you could also upload high-resolution versions of images already uploaded as 750px. PLease give me any opinions/feedback. --Oldak Quill 17:55, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I have found Your image Image:New.severn.bridge.best.750pix.jpg as Commons:Image:New_severn_bridge_best_750pix.jpg, added the credit template there, changed the link in Severn Bridge and suggested it for deletion. Ikar.us 13:39, 2005 Jun 19 (UTC)

I have been removing the resize warnings you have been adding to some of your images. If the resize links are generated in error (they aren't for me) then this is a minor bug with MediaWiki, and something that should be taken up on http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org. As the image will be cached locally by the user's browser, clicking on the download link will not waste any of their time or wikipedia bandwidth, so all we are doing is setting up the task of having to remove all these messages at a later date! ed g2s • talk 15:30, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You mention that you compress to 300k on rhaworth's talk page to be kind to 56k users. Surely if they need the image at the giant size then it's acceptable to wait a bit longer? Probably doesn't matter really.

Oh, and are you using commons now? Not a plug, friendly curiosity from someone who's trying to take more photos :) --BesigedB ^(talk) 17:27, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Replied on own talk page at 22:17, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

From now on I will be uploading my pics to the Commons, as suggested by the three Wikipedians above. My only dislike of the Commons is that the reader has to do a mouse click to read the Image Description instead of reading the pic info directly under the pic. So I will be adding my Public Domain copyright notice and my image description straight under the pic i.e. no mouse click needed. You'll see what I mean from my first two pics on Commons at Nissan Primera and Nissan Skyline Will someone let me know if this direct adding of image data is unacceptable (or unwise) Cheers! - Adrian Pingstone 18:36, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It is prefectly acceptable to complement an image on Commons by image desciptions on the Wikipedias. Especially for other languages this possibility is essential.

However, the new software version automatically includes the description from commons, so it isn't wise to duplicate it any more.

--Ikar.us 2005-07-04 19:38:33 (UTC)

Please forgive my stupidity. Is the lightning the aircraft at the top of the picture? The caption isn't particularly clear. 62.252.32.13 22:58, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've altered the caption to make it clear that both aircraft are Lightnings - Adrian Pingstone 23:14, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I seem to be cocking this one up in every way. I'd seen this on other disambiguation pages, and thought I'd follow suit. It certainly looks tidier your way. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:18, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Bald.eagle.closeup.arp-sh.750pix.jpg is coming up for Pic of the Day again on the 17th Feb. I've reused the caption from last time, but you can make any corrections at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/February 17, 2005. -- Solipsist 06:53, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I would like to use Image:Crab.nebula.arp.750pix.jpg under the CC-By-SA-2 licence. Are you the copyright owner? Can you relicense this photo? I will use it on my site. Thanks, answer to my talk page. It's a great pic. NSK 02:35, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi again. I am not sure what is considered commercial use and what is considered non-commercial use. On my website I display advertisements (such as Google AdWords). That's the reason I specifically want photos to be licensed under the CC-By-SA-2 which explicitly allows commercial use, because I don't know whether advertisements displayed together with the pic which is licensed for non-commercial uses is considered a commercial use. Anyway, since you are not the copyright holder I would better send an email to the actual holders. Thanks, NSK 21:00, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian - there's a problem with the new gallery style, it doesn't support italics. For this reason I've restored the old trad thumbs style at Tortoise and Eucalyptus which you'd made into galleries. If galleries can be made to support italics in the future, I'll be happy for them to be put back - MPF 15:40, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I nominated this Image:Llanfair.750pix.jpg image for deletion because I moved it to commons commons:Image:Llanfair.750pix.jpg) under the same name/description. Do you agree? Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion#March15 Kotasik 14:50, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dear Adrian,

I'm looking for a picture of a Mirage III, do have one in your stock. Any ideas were to get one with a proper license (or PD)? I need it for the german wikipedia..... -- 20:53, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm very sorry, but I have not photographed any military aircraft, and it's much too big a job to write down all my pic sources. Put Mirage 3 into Googles Image Search and you might be lucky. The tedious part is trying to decide if the image is OK for WP - Adrian Pingstone 21:42, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes, i tried. I contacted Dassault but they didn't gave me an answer (although there are some Mirage III for press uses). I keep trying... -- Stahlkocher 14:54, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian

I'm quite puzzled too! I think a brain fart occured on my behalf; I was hunting URL spam, and in the process came across that article -- the specific URL in question is www.africaspotter.at.tt. I seem to remember seeing an edit history of you removing the picture Image:B737-800SouthAfricanAirwaysZS-SJL01.jpg with a comment relating to the copyright status, although I cannot for the life of me find it now!

But I do think I realise what has happened now; the copyright notice was originally added for Image:southafrican.arp.750pix.jpg, but subsequently modified by User:Fluglotse2000 to extend the statement to the image he added. I've removed the B737-800 image again, seeing as there is a possible copyvio involved. Also, the copyright notice section isn't really appropriate in the main article; rather keep it on the image page, where anyone with an interest in a higher resolution image can plainly see it.

I hope this rather incoherent explanation makes things clearer!

Dewet 21:53, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian

I am searching for a photo for the German Wikipedia article "Flugpost" (Air mail). I need a picture from airplane of FedEx or UPS (or another private parcle service) and your picture would be great. Are you the copyright owner? Can you relicense this photo? Thanks, 62.47.146.42 19:07, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) (Peterwuttke - in the German Wikipedia)

Hi Peter, from Adrian (in Bristol, England). I'm not clever enough to understand licences or copyright and unfortunately the picture is not public domain. However I'm sure you can use the picture if you put the following on the pictures Image Description Page:
Loading an Airbus A300-600 aircraft of Federal Express.
Reproduced with the permission of Airbus UK.
Picture prepared for the English Wikipedia by Adrian Pingstone, March 2003.
This work is copyright Airbus UK and used with their permission. The picture cannot be adapted or altered in any material way.
I've no idea which of Wikis copyrights this is. Sorry to be so uncertain on all this, Best Wishes, Adrian - Adrian Pingstone 19:56, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian.

I just thought I'd let you know that I have lightened and adjusted some of your excellent aircraft/aero-engine pictures and hope you don't mind. It seems that every time I find a picture of something (usually an aircraft) that interests me it turns-out to be one of yours - nothing personal!!

Hopefully I've improved them, but if you think I've made them look worse then just revert the image file and let me know and I'll leave them alone in future.

Actually I would have contacted you sooner, but I'm still trying to work-out this Wikipedia communicating-between-users thing, so no discourtesy intended!

Regards,

Ian Dunster 15:25, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian.

Sorry to hear about my 'improvements'! - I'll leave yours alone from now-on then, but thanks for at least letting me know what was wrong with them.

Regards,

Ian Dunster 17:36, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello, For images as Image:Optical.greysquares.arp.jpg you should use PNG instead of JPG. JPG creates specific artefacts in the image that make the quality of the image worse. JPG should be used for photographies, but not for bitmaps. Best regards Stern 20:18, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with what you say but as I have no idea how to create or use PNG I think it better to do something (ie put the pic on as a JPG) rather than do nothing! I assume Wikipedia values that pic, even if not in the ideal format. Why not change it yourself? Best Wishes, Adrian Adrian Pingstone 20:27, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Of course you did a great job! But, as David mentions, it is impossible to improve an image that was compressed lossy with JPG, since it is hard to remove the JPG squares. Stern 20:52, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, once compression artifacts are introduced, they cannot be removed. Without being technical, JPEG is a "lossy" compression format — it removes information from the image. This information removal is designed for photographic images — it removes certain small details that a human eye would not usually see (though compression artifacts may be visible if the compression ratio is too small). The thing is, it was not designed for images such as snapshots of computer displays, precise computer-generated images, black-and-white drawings, etc., where there are sharp transitions between colors.

In comparison, PNG (which all current image software know how to save) is lossless. Note, however, that it is pointless to load an image encoded in JPEG and save it as PNG to regain quality — the loss of information was done and cannot be undone (at least, cannot be undone simply).

In this case, the image was obviously produced with a ray-tracing or other 3D imagery program. Of course, one could produce another one, but I don't think this would be worth the hassle: I don't see JPEG artifacts in that image. David.Monniaux 11:19, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Would you have a non-reduced version of Image:Eiffel.cdmars.250pix.smaller.jpg? I like this picture and I think that now that we have server-side automatic resizing, it would be nice to have the large version on commons. Thanks. David.Monniaux 11:19, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your PNG info above. Thanks also for your request for a larger Champs de Mars view fron the Eiffel Tower. I'll upload the full res version (which will be 1350 by 3026 instead of the current 250 by 588) in a few hours onto Commons. Then I'll change the filename wherever that pic appears to make the bigger one available - Adrian Pingstone 14:05, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've always seen it written "Champ de Mars". Thanks for the pictures! David.Monniaux 21:21, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Howdy, Just curious as to the origins of the B-24 Liberator photo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Liberator.750pix.jpg) ... is this photoshopped or otherwise altered? I ask because the B-24 was removed from RCAF service in 1948 -- The Maple Leaf flag on the tail was not introduced as Canada's national flag until 1965. Just curious. Knave

No, the pic has not been altered in any way by me. I was looking around the Canadian Air Force site for aircraft pictures, found that one and put it on the page. PS I live in England. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 08:29, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I am trying to get the Red Arrows article up to featured quality, and noticed you contributed those great pictures, just wondering if by any chance you had any more? thanks Bluemoose 16:04, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your nice comment, yes I did take more, I'll put a couple on in the next few hours - Adrian Pingstone 16:07, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK, three added. I hope you like the alternation I've done - Adrian Pingstone 17:15, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, those pictures are really great, I still need to add more text I think, so they may get moved around a bit, but I can see this article approaching featured status soon. Bluemoose 07:18, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I want to use "the art of precision flying logo" from this page: http://www.redarrows.com/home.html do you think I can use it as fair use, or public domain? also the 22 Hunters on this page http://www.raf.mod.uk/reds/teamhist2.html would be awesome (and Yellow Jacks on the next), do you think I can use that under fair use/pd as well, it is from 1958, 47 years ago, so maybe the copyright has expired? Sorry to ask you but I have no idea how this copyright stuff works. Thanks Bluemoose 10:01, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, BlueMoose, but I have no clue on Copyright either which is why I only use my own photos (which I always declare as PD). Perhaps you could ask the same question on the Help Desk? I have just put a pic of a 16-Hunter formation on Black Arrows. - Adrian Pingstone 14:01, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That Black Arrows pic is quite astonishing, you must have been about my age when you took it (22), can i ask how you get clear pictures of something moving so quickly? my sony p100 digi camera shutter speed goes down to 1/1000 sec, would that be good enough for moving planes? (just thinking about next Duxford display.) thanks - Bluemoose 08:04, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to be so slow in replying. The Black Arrows picture was taken at around one thousandth of a second on a Pentax non-digital (of course!) SLR camera but not an expensive one. The secrets of success for photographing high-speed aircraft are:

a) find how to lock the camera at its highest speed and let the camera choose just the aperture.

b) find how to lock the focus at infinity (for ground to air pictures where the aircraft is far enough away to call its distance infinity) so that the autofocus doesn't have to waste time hunting for focus. I can lock speed and focus on the menus in the camera I now use (Olympus digital C750UZ).

c) try to photograph in sunny weather so that using a thousandth (or whatever your camera's max speed is) will still give a decent aperture (like f8) for some depth of field.

d) exactly follow the motion of the aircraft i.e pan with it.

e) most important of all, throw away the failures and only show or use the successes so that people think you're a really good photographer!

Hope this is of interest. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 19:11, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips - point e) sounds like my kind of thing! - Bluemoose 14:23, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just got a high-res version, and the image is public domain. Please support the high-res version. --brian0918™ 17:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've already supported the pic, hi-res or otherwise (second person on the list). Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 17:20, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi!

I added Image:Fedex.a300-600.750pix.jpg to Images for Deletion, because it's not free. I replaced it in FedEx and Cargo airline with a free image. Thanks. :) kmccoy (talk) 05:55, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for letting me know - Adrian Pingstone 12:08, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure. In fact, running across your user page via this picture caused me to take a look at many of your pictures, which are really fantastic. It was a good happenstance for me. kmccoy (talk) 20:34, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi, thanks a lot for your advice. Actually, I discovered your way of dealing with your own PD pictures some time ago and have been copying it ever since (although I have uploaded far fewer photos than you). So this, it seems, is a belated thanks. And by the way, whether it's cows, aircraft, hotels, cityscapes or whatever, I always enjoy your pics. All the best, <KF> 22:50, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

Hi there, I reckon you have an ample quantity of works of art in your photo collections (such as Image:Rubens.adoration.650pix.jpg). Would it be possible for your to upload the full-res versions to commons?

Thanks Regards, David.Monniaux 17:42, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this is a 380SL, is it not? Ted Wilkes

Thanks Adrian, I flagged the Mallard stuff up, but didn't move it myself because I wanted to be sure I had support, especially as I'd deleted that section earlier! jimfbleak 04:48, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

==Newbury== I'm sorry to see that you've removed my picture of Newbury Library. I thought it added a bit of colour to the page and contrasted nicely with the picture of the canal. Whether or not the picture was 'trivial' is a matter of opinion, surely, but I won't bother to re-instate it as I'm sure you'll just cut it out again.

It was completely brainless of me not to sort out the thumbnail/enlarged picture. Thanks for letting me know where I'm going wrong on this.

Do feel free to drop into the libary the next time you are passing - it is rather magnificent and is certainly one of the highlights of Newbury Town Centre Cheers Jerry

No problem, I have put the picture back. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 16:22, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a picture of the control tower.

• No it really isn't. I have reverted your revert. Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 08:54, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • Ah, don't worry, I have done it too. Cheers. Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 12:07, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:Stata Center2.proc.jpg. Its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. Please leave a note on the image page about the source of the image. Thank you.

This pic was just an attempt by me to improve a Featured Pic candidate. It can be deleted - Adrian Pingstone 15:54, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Just a thanks, and you know why :)- --Oblivious 22:38, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi there. The picture of a calculator on this page is nice, but has a very annoying shadow in it. Any chance it could be updated? --Malcohol 10:43, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You mean like this? I'd appreciate if Mr Pingstone would okay this image. I did some other minor cleanups and colour corrections too. Apologies for my sense of humour. --Kodabar

Looks great. --Malcohol 08:52, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fine by me, thanks for your work on the image. The only change I've made is to put back the fact that I took the photo, and I've used a template for the PD message - Adrian Pingstone 08:57, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Glad you like it. I only uploaded it so it could be displayed here. The whole copyright nonsense was just to satisfy the the upload page. I claim no rights to this image whatsoever. I didn't take it and any reworking I did was purely a little enhancement in Photoshop and in no way shall I use that to make a claim of ownership. Everything I put on the internet I regards as public domain anyway and claim no credit or ownership.

Hope you don't mind the small alteration to the displayed number.

I hope you enjoyed your trip to London. We capital-dwellers are always happy to welcome visitors who actually speak English. I live in Wimbledon and with the tennis starting on Monday, there's barely a person on the street speaking English.--Kodabar 06:50, 18 Jun 2005 (GMT+1)

According to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Image_copyrights, the Image:Mig19.schem.300pix.png image may be deleted - please consider changing the tag. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:35, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for letting me know - Adrian Pingstone 15:21, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian.

I know it doesn't matter about the registration, but my to satisfy my curiosity I've established that the "Waves of the City" livery was only applied to two 747-400s, G-BNLV and G-BNLX. Mark 18:54, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi! I removed your pics from the pages. I now agree with you, that its a good idea to leave them up there along with the night pic just in case. It couldn't hurt.

I just pulled it because it was so damn dreary, makes me want to cry, and makes the Louvre look an ugly grey. Perhaps the next time you visit, the clouds will go, and you can publish a nicer pic! Muchosucko 09:53, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hello. I looked at a beautiful photo of Image:Avro.504k.642pix.jpg, and the tag says: This image is copyrighted, and used with permission. The terms of the permission do not include third party use. It is not licensed under the GFDL and that it might be deleted. Since it is you, who contacted the author: was the permission really limited like this? Or could you possible obtain permission compatible with Wiki?.. It would be pity to lose such photo. The same thing is with Image:Blenheim.550pix.jpg Pibwl 10:38, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Can you upload the nice picture to [1]. Thank you in advance. --Uwe Gille 13:09, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Adrian, my most sincere apologies. Chalk one up to inexperience! I was just looking through your pictures and stuff and whoops! I must have slipped my mouse. I was exploring Wiki. I didn't know you could store multiple versions of a pic and I was just poking around. I think you're pictures fabulous. Whatever revisions I made are accidents. It won't happen again. Muchosucko 28 June 2005 16:44 (UTC)

Hi, just to let you know that the list of UK participants at the UK notice board was getting rather long, so I have replaced it with the above category which I have added to your user page. -- Francs2000 | Talk File:Uk flag large.png 30 June 2005 18:44 (UTC)

Random question..

Was just poking at the new stub article Battle of Britain Memorial Flight, and trying to find an image to go with it. There's one of their Lancaster on Avro Lancaster, but it's marked as liable for deletion so I'd prefer not to use it... looking around on Commons, I found Image:Spitfire.planform.arp.jpg, which looks likely to be one of their planes (based on the date, if nothing else), and it struck me I keep seeing your name around these articles. So, thought I'd ask directly.

1/ Do you know of any photos tucked away that would go well? The one linked above is a nice enough photo, but doesn't seem right for the article somehow...

2/ Whilst I'm at it - do you know what a De Havilland Devon is/was? The Flight apparently used to have one, but the De Havilland page seems to draw a blank here.

Thanks. Shimgray 4 July 2005 18:01 (UTC)

I ended up using the planform photo anyway - it then made it to the main page as a DYK illustration! Don't know if you noticed, but thought you might like to know. Shimgray 6 July 2005 22:52 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I wibbled a bit and decided it was probably AB910 - the colours matched, and there wouldn't have been that many early Spitfires still flying painted that way. Nice to have it confirmed, though. Shimgray 22:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I have uploaded your image to commons, hope you dont mind DiamondDave 00:32, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian,

I just wanted to remind you of Wikipedia:Don't bite the newcomers. Whilst I don't disagree with what you said on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bouillon, Belgium, it might have been phrased a little more gently.

Ultimately the point of FPC is to encourage people to contribute more pictures, and with Pic Of the Day making a guest appearance on the Main Page we can expect a flurry interest from editors who aren't so familiar with the usual voting patterns on nominations.

In general though, thanks for your many votes and comments on FPC. We need people who are visually literate to keep the place running smoothly. -- Solipsist 11:40, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I understand your concerns about my remarks on the pic but I was really annoyed to see such nonsense (there I go again!) put forward for a Featured Pic. So I said what I thought and then tempered it with "Better luck next time". So I half accept what you say. Perhaps I'm wrong and everyone else will love it! - 82.33.101.120 13:23, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It gets to us all at some time or another. I often try to take a different perspective and assume the fault is not with the user nominating, but rather with a lack of clarity in our instructions at the head of the page. I've been thinking about writing a guide for new FPC nominators expanding a little on what to expect in terms of critism and trying to highlight an upside even if their picture doesn't get promoted. -- Solipsist 13:38, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A voice from beyond the grave writes:
Adrian, your country needs you!
These two articles:

Morris_Oxford

Hindustan_Ambassador

are crying out for photos. I know of no-one better to whom I would entrust this dangerous task (and the generous fee associated with it of course <grin>). Go to it!
Your ever,
Ex-user (anon) :)

Dear Ex-User from Beyond the Grave:
Sadly I've never photographed an Oxford (and certainly not a Hindustan) even though I've got 700 car pics taken with my trusty Olympus cheapo digital. I feel sad about my failure and will contemplate how this defect in my collection might be remedied. Best Wishes from Adrian (the generous fee will be spent on a better camera) - Adrian Pingstone 21:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply: it would be brilliant if you could. I just sort-of assumed that you probably already had such images. Ah well, another idol with feet of clay! :) Regards, Voice from etc etc.

Sir, I wonder if you might crop off the black bar on the far right of the AWACS Sentry image? If not, perhaps you wouldn't mind if I did so? Certainly appreciate all your hard work on illustrations here.Randyoo 09:10, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll do it soon. Thanks for letting me know and sorry to be so long in replying - Adrian Pingstone 19:28, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Dear Adrian, could not believe I was seeing my aircraft G-ARWS. Lovely photo. It is a 175C with a constant speed prop. All still original. It is a remarkable aeroplane with very short take off and landing capabilities and a true 4 seater with 5 hours of fuel."
Thanks for the nice comment on my pic of your Cessna 175. I'd hoped that one day someone would see their own aircraft on Wikipedia! Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 19:28, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more than fully aware that the SR20 and SR22 look nearly identical, but the fact that the photo is captioned SR22 and sitting in the SR20 article is enough to make me remove it. There is not yet an SR22 article, but that doesn't mean we should start combining the two aircraft. Putting the photo in the Cirrus Design article is great, though. -eric ✈ 17:41, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ! Are you able to add a Commons-compatible license to this image ? I'd like to have this image in the Commons but I need a PD, GFDL or CC-by-SA license for this. It's a nice image worth keeping. Thank you. --Denniss 21:27, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I have uploaded copied an image to Commons which you uploaded to the English Wikpiedia: . But then I found this one: Coscoroba coscoroba FWS.jpg. The uploader claims that it's from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. So who is right? --Head 12:28, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

It's very odd that someone is claiming they got the Coscoroba Swan pic from the USA. I've looked at the pic on my hard drive and I can assure you thats it's definitely my pic and it's Public Domain. I took it at Slimbridge Wilfdfowl and Wetlands Centre, England (about 40km from where I live) on 29th March 2004 and the EXIF data tells me I used 1/800th of a second at f3.2. Thanks for letting me know - Adrian Pingstone 15:17, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This template must be substituted. Replace {{Template for discussion ...}} with {{subst:Template for discussion ...}}.

My name is Gwen and I work for Renewable films on a feature documentary. I LOVE your picture of the Concord and would like to use it in the documentary. I have read that you allowed the picture into public domain, but in order to be able to use it, I need something in writing confirming that. Could you please send me and e-mail saying that it is in public domain? The best address is y_marianna@re-voir.com. Also, would you have a high res copy of that? Thank you!

I have sent you an email giving permission, thanks for asking. The highest res I can give you is got by clicking on the pics themselves. I don't have any higher res than that. Sorry! - Adrian Pingstone 08:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adrian, I really love this picture. Can you maybe upload it to commons in a higher resolution? Thanks in advance and greetings from the Black Forest, --Flominator 20:55, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the pic is a clip from a small area of a much larger pic so only the larger pic is high res (2048 by 1536). I'll upload the larger pic in the next few hours. Greetings from Bristol, England - Adrian Pingstone 08:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Job done,the high res is on WP at African penguin in the gallery, on Commons at Penguin and also on Commons at Albinos - Adrian Pingstone 09:51, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for that! --Flominator 13:12, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arpingstone, it seems you have quite a lot of unused images on Wikipedia... 263, to be exact. You can see a listing of them at User:TheCoffee/Orphan_images/1#User:Arpingstone_.28263.29. Most of them seem to be really old uploads, predating the MediaWiki feature that allowed automatic resizing. Since they're unneeded I'm going to list them at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion, but I want to confirm with you first that they really are unused. I don't want to delete potentially useful files.

Thanks. Coffee 05:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian, the above user is deleting all images without formal tags, even if they are clearly labelled as personal images released to Wikipedia. He is not prepared to warn the uploaders concerned, despite entreaties. I've already lost some of my personal images, so just a warning about this kid's apparently condoned pseudo-vandalism. jimfbleak 06:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is a 1.3 as described: the wheels, wing shield badge and lights are wrong. I modified the description before I knew about the talk feature: I suspect it's a 3.1 instead, but I'm not enough of an anorak to know for sure from the picture. Maybe you can see it on your original...?

Well spotted. I know nothing about cars but luckily I still have the full-resolution picture and I can read in the windscreen that it's a 3.0. So I've modified the pic and its Image Description Page accordingly. Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone 13:17, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This picture was taken from [2], if I'm not mistaken, but it's blurrier and larger than the original picture, so I'm guessing you upsized and stretched it. Wouldn't you be better off just using the original picture in a straight conversion to jpeg, cropped if necessary? The upsizing seems to have hurt the image quality significantly. Night Gyr 10:11, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See your User Page [3] for reply - Adrian Pingstone 10:35, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Something you might be interested in taking a look at.

You don't by any chance have any other railway photographs? Even rather rubbish black and white ones; see commons:category:Historical British steam locomotives for what I'm working with. Oh and if you know what the date is then you can win your own compeition ;) Cheers, Dunc|☺ 10:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi from Adrian! Sorry, I have no idea of the date and no way of finding it out. Sadly I only took that one steam pic ever. I 've only ever been an aircraft person. Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone 10:35, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The sheng player playing "water music" on the Thames looks an awful lot like Guo Yi of the Guo Brothers, resident in England for many years now. Do you know if this is correct? If so, I could add that in the photo caption. Best, Badagnani 08:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have no way of finding who the player was in Sheng (instrument). I've looked at an enlarged photo but there are no clues visible to his identity. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 14:37, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It does look an awful lot like him (he's the brother on the right). [4] Badagnani 17:59, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it's the same person. If I was you, I would take a chance and insert the fact. There's no harm done and if you are wrong then someone will one day correct it - Adrian Pingstone 18:24, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've done so...I met the guy when the Guo Brothers played at the WOMAD festival in Columbus, Ohio in around 1993 or 1994. I play the sheng too so brought mine along to his workshop to play for him. He tried to sell me a sheng but lost interest once I told him I already had one. He seemed rather business oriented of a person. I can't find a website for his group so I'd wondered what he had been up to in the intervening years. (Now I know--he plays on the Thames!) Badagnani 18:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adrian, the images you have linked with the performance art page (of Performance artists in Jubilee Gardens, London, England and in the Montmartre district of Paris) would probably be better suited to the Living statue article in the Performing Arts. I am really new to Wikipedia, so I havn't exactly figured out how to do this as yet, so maybe you can change the links. I know it sounds slightly like splitting hairs, but what you describe in the images is not really classed as performance art, and like juggling and mime, falls under the remit of Performing Arts. All the Best,rachel

Hi Rachel, thanks for your comments (by the way, please don't put new chat at the top of my Talk Page, it makes reading the flow of peoples messages backwards. So I've put your comments down here, in the proper place).

I'm afraid I can't help you in any way with the changes simply because I have no clue on text or link work. I've specialised in image work only, since I started with Wikipedia in January 2003. That means that all the writing I do is picture captions and occasional editing of badly-written articles. Try putting your comments into the Talk Page for the relevant articles. Just click on "Discuss this page" at the bottom of the article and start typing. Hopefully someone will notice, and help you. - Adrian Pingstone

It is true that the district of South Gloucestershire is not in the non-metropolitan county of Gloucestershire. However, it is in the ceremonial county of the same name, and that's the system we generally use for lists of places, stub classification, and suchforth, because all these non-metropolitan counties are quite numerous and twiddly. If you want to revert, fine, I don't care. But there is no need to observe this distinction in article titles, as long as we make the factual situation in article text clear. Which we do. I'm not trying to promote atavism here, and frankly, I wouldn't mind if people wanted to use "Avon" in article names - that does have the advantage of being even shorter. :) If you look back at my edit history you'll probably see me moving stuff like "Foo, Calderdale" to "Foo, West Yorkshire" at the same time, which should demonstrate that point. Morwen - Talk 10:03, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice pic, and what an interesting angle. Well done. -- Solipsist 19:29, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not wishing to rock any boats too much at this stage, just a gentle question. I think (and will check next time I'm there) that, much to the frustration of photographers like you and me, photography is forbidden at The Mall, Cribbs Causeway. I wonder whether that fact affects the status of your photograph of The Mall. You have released it into the public domain, but if (as I believe, but am happy to be corrected) you weren't supposed to take it in the first place, presumably the copyright status is rather suspect. --SMeeds 21:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let me be honest with you - I understand nothing and wish to know nothing about copyright because it's a minefield. So I take the simple route: I take my pics, I put them on WP and if they are not acceptable someone deletes them. Since I have about 1500 pics (yes, that's one thousand five hundred) on WP the loss of a few doesn't worry me. A lazy answer, I know, but that's how I am. So if you decide they are unacceptable, then I am happy for you to delete:) Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone 22:05, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice cleanup. It looks much better now. Joyous (talk) 15:33, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adrian.

You write/ask:

Chris, I've reverted all your 180px pics on the River Thames article back to 250px. I don't why you made them so small, they don't look right so tiny (I have a 1024 by 768 screen) and 250px is a "standard" now for pics. In my view your picture size almost forces the reader to open the big pic, which can be a very slow business! I guess they'd look even tinier on a higher res screen than mine. Let me know why you like 180px on my talk page please. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 17:47, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Before my change, it seemed like every thumbnail in the article had a different size, which looked messy, and this was my principal motivation for the change.

However you are wrong to say thay I set the thumbnail image size to 180px. What I did was remove the fixed size in the image markup, so as to allow thumbnail images to be shown at whatever size the user has set in his/her preferences. I'm guessing you are seeing the images at 180px because that is what your preferences say (under the file tab).

I think there are two conflicting issues here. I accept that probably most Wikipedia users don't realise they can control this setting (I only discovered it a few weeks ago), and therefore to them not setting a size is the same thing as setting it to 180px (or whatever the default preference is). On the other hand, it is surely better to allow users to control how they like to see thumbnails. I quite like 180px, but for a partially blind person 250px might be too small.

As my principal motivation for changing (consistent size) is still satisfied by your change to 250px, I'm not going to make any further changes to the photographic images.

However I do think you were wrong to make the map a thumbnail. Hard edged maps are not the same as photographic images, and as in this case often do not scale well. I hope you don't mind me reverting this to its original, unscaled form.

Hope that answers you. -- Chris j wood 19:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you get this image from, I am merely curious about the identity of these people. --Cool Cat ^Talk 04:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

These people are definitely in my family, on my side (not my wife's side). The picture was with a bundle of family photos left to me a few years ago by an aunt when she died. I scanned it into my computer. I think its a lovely pic, shame I'll probably never find out exactly who they were. Moral: always write the persons name on the back of a photo (the only thing on the back was the date). Thanks for your question - Adrian Pingstone 12:37, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see, I hate unresolved misteries, its like a novel that doesn't conclude. It indeed is a lovely pic. Another reason to construct a family tree :) --Cool Cat ^Talk 18:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am looking for good quality gemstone images to use in my website. I will make sure you get credit for the image by mentioning your name, and will link to your home page if you have one. Please reply to me at marksteve(underscore)74atyahoo(dot)com Thanks.

Hi! I've replied by email but, for the record, here's the answer as well:

You are welcome to use any of my pictures from Wikipedia no matter what the subject is. Most have arp somewhere in the filename but all have my name on the Image Description Page (the page you get when you click on the photo).

I've made them all Public Domain, which means anyone can use them in any way or even alter them. You don't even have to mention my name but it would be nice if you did. Please let me know the URL of any web page you use them on.

Incidentally it's not a good idea to publish your email address so openly on Wikipedia, spam harvesters will love you! So I've made your address unreadable to harvesters by spelling it out. Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone 09:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- Thanks for making your photo of the swimmer available! I've used it as an illustration of Newton's third law in an online physics textbook, http://www.lightandmatter.com/area1book1.html (near the beginning of ch. 5). You are credited in the photo credits section in the back of the book.--Bcrowell 20:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian, there's no need to apolgise for a better picture. Mine was taken quite early in the winter morning when I was there to see my brother off onto a train north, when the light is behind the station when looking at the main facade shown in both our pictures. It was better than nothing, which is what was there before. --rbrwr^± 23:16, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]