Minimum resolution image for Commons

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Minimum resolution image for Commons

Flor Méchain
Hello!

I am in touch with a museum that is thinking of uploading images to
Commons. They are a bit uncertain about uploading high resolution, but I
told them the resolution they need to upload just needs to be good
enough for illustrating articles without being pixellated. The thing is,
I am unsure about the minimum size of such an image. I tried poking
around the instructions but didn't find a direct answer.

Do you know which size is "the minimum" that can be accepted on Commons?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Warm wishes,

--
Flor MECHAIN
Wikimedia CH
E: [hidden email]
M: +41 78 746 86 25
W: Flor WMCH

Wikimedia CH is a swiss non profit organisation which supports Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Michael Maggs
There's no official minimum but I'd say that to be useful they should be no less than 2000x1000 pixels. They should be highest quality jpg (i.e. not degraded quality, as that introduces artefacts).

Michael

> On 21 May 2017, at 12:38, Flor Méchain <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> I am in touch with a museum that is thinking of uploading images to Commons. They are a bit uncertain about uploading high resolution, but I told them the resolution they need to upload just needs to be good enough for illustrating articles without being pixellated. The thing is, I am unsure about the minimum size of such an image. I tried poking around the instructions but didn't find a direct answer.
>
> Do you know which size is "the minimum" that can be accepted on Commons?
>
> Thanks a lot for your help!
>
> Warm wishes,
>
> --
> Flor MECHAIN
> Wikimedia CH
> E: [hidden email]
> M: +41 78 746 86 25
> W: Flor WMCH
>
> Wikimedia CH is a swiss non profit organisation which supports Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Nkansah Rexford
In reply to this post by Flor Méchain
You might wanna consider the recommended guidelines for here too:

Although the guidelines apply to quality and featured images, I think the underlying reasons check.

At least, a 2MP resolution can be considered the minimum. I don't know if any image below that threshold will look good enough these days on screens.

rex

On Sunday, May 21, 2017, Flor Méchain <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello!

I am in touch with a museum that is thinking of uploading images to Commons. They are a bit uncertain about uploading high resolution, but I told them the resolution they need to upload just needs to be good enough for illustrating articles without being pixellated. The thing is, I am unsure about the minimum size of such an image. I tried poking around the instructions but didn't find a direct answer.

Do you know which size is "the minimum" that can be accepted on Commons?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Warm wishes,

--
Flor MECHAIN
Wikimedia CH
E: [hidden email]
M: +41 78 746 86 25
W: Flor WMCH

Wikimedia CH is a swiss non profit organisation which supports Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Estermann Beat
In reply to this post by Flor Méchain
Dear Flor,

We usually ask Swiss heritage institutions to upload the highest resolution they have. There is a number of precedents you may refer to:

- Swiss Federal Archives
- Swiss National Library
- Historical Museum Basel
- Zentralbibliothek Solothurn
- Zentralbibliothek Zürich
- ...

Should we shortly discuss this off list?

Cheers,
Beat


_____________________________________________________
 
Beat Estermann
Coordinator OpenGLAM CH Working Group
http://openglam.ch
Berne University of Applied Sciences
E-Government Institute
Brückenstrasse 73
CH-3005 Bern
[hidden email]

Phone +41 31 848 34 38


Swiss Open Cultural Data Hackathon, Lausanne, 15-16 September 2017 – Save the date! (workshops starting already the day before)



-----Original Message-----
From: Commons-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Flor Méchain
Sent: Sonntag, 21. Mai 2017 13:39
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Commons-l] Minimum resolution image for Commons

Hello!

I am in touch with a museum that is thinking of uploading images to Commons. They are a bit uncertain about uploading high resolution, but I told them the resolution they need to upload just needs to be good enough for illustrating articles without being pixellated. The thing is, I am unsure about the minimum size of such an image. I tried poking around the instructions but didn't find a direct answer.

Do you know which size is "the minimum" that can be accepted on Commons?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Warm wishes,

--
Flor MECHAIN
Wikimedia CH
E: [hidden email]
M: +41 78 746 86 25
W: Flor WMCH

Wikimedia CH is a swiss non profit organisation which supports Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Michael Maggs
In reply to this post by Michael Maggs
When you convert an image to jpg format, or re-save an image in that format, you are normally asked (depending on the program you are using) to specify both a pixel count and a figure called 'quality' or something like that.  You should enter the highest possible 'quality' figure, normally 100. The 'quality' figure is separate from the pixel count (eg 2000x1000) that you also need to enter when saving.

Michael

21 May 2017 at 2:45 pm
Hello!

Thanks a lot for your reply... But I guess I'm a bit lost at this, still. What is degraded quality? Is it a high quality file that's somehow been shrunk?

Thanks again...

Flor MECHAIN
Wikimedia CH
E: [hidden email]
M: +41 78 746 86 25
W: Flor WMCH

Wikimedia CH is a swiss non profit organisation which supports Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia





_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

geni
In reply to this post by Flor Méchain
On 21 May 2017 at 12:38, Flor Méchain <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello!
>
> I am in touch with a museum that is thinking of uploading images to Commons.
> They are a bit uncertain about uploading high resolution, but I told them
> the resolution they need to upload just needs to be good enough for
> illustrating articles without being pixellated. The thing is, I am unsure
> about the minimum size of such an image. I tried poking around the
> instructions but didn't find a direct answer.
>
> Do you know which size is "the minimum" that can be accepted on Commons?
>
> Thanks a lot for your help!
>
> Warm wishes,


geograph's 640 × 480 is the lowest widely used resolution.


--
geni

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by Flor Méchain
Hi all,
I would add a point to the question of Flor.

Is there a minimum resolution in Commons to consider an image eligible
for the cancellation?

The images which are part of this project are important for their
descriptive aspects and can be useful to document some articles.

The question is important to know if there should be an additional step
to rescan all images, or if we can reuse those already scanned for the
website.

Kind regards

On 21/05/2017 13:38, Flor Méchain wrote:

> Hello!
>
> I am in touch with a museum that is thinking of uploading images to
> Commons. They are a bit uncertain about uploading high resolution, but
> I told them the resolution they need to upload just needs to be good
> enough for illustrating articles without being pixellated. The thing
> is, I am unsure about the minimum size of such an image. I tried
> poking around the instructions but didn't find a direct answer.
>
> Do you know which size is "the minimum" that can be accepted on Commons?
>
> Thanks a lot for your help!
>
> Warm wishes,
>

--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch


---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Pine W
You're not obligated to do additional work of re-scanning images, but the bigger and higher quality the better. (: If an image is too tiny to be useful it may be deleted, but that is unlikely. However, larger and higher quality images are more likely to be designated as Quality Images or Featured Pictures. While even small images may be adequate for thumbnails in Wikipedia articles, the biggest and highest quality images would be preferable.

If your available time and/or money constrains you from providing the highest quality and largest possible images, I wouldn't worry about this, but if you have the time and money to scan the images at very high quality and resolution, that would be preferable.

Pine


On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,
I would add a point to the question of Flor.

Is there a minimum resolution in Commons to consider an image eligible for the cancellation?

The images which are part of this project are important for their descriptive aspects and can be useful to document some articles.

The question is important to know if there should be an additional step to rescan all images, or if we can reuse those already scanned for the website.

Kind regards

On 21/05/2017 13:38, Flor Méchain wrote:
Hello!

I am in touch with a museum that is thinking of uploading images to Commons. They are a bit uncertain about uploading high resolution, but I told them the resolution they need to upload just needs to be good enough for illustrating articles without being pixellated. The thing is, I am unsure about the minimum size of such an image. I tried poking around the instructions but didn't find a direct answer.

Do you know which size is "the minimum" that can be accepted on Commons?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Warm wishes,


--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Tel: <a href="tel:%2B41764821371" value="+41764821371" target="_blank">+41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch


---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Yann Forget-3
In reply to this post by geni
Hi,

2017-05-21 18:51 GMT+02:00 geni <[hidden email]>:
On 21 May 2017 at 12:38, Flor Méchain <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am in touch with a museum that is thinking of uploading images to Commons.
> They are a bit uncertain about uploading high resolution, but I told them
> the resolution they need to upload just needs to be good enough for
> illustrating articles without being pixellated. The thing is, I am unsure
> about the minimum size of such an image. I tried poking around the
> instructions but didn't find a direct answer.
>
> Do you know which size is "the minimum" that can be accepted on Commons?
>
> Thanks a lot for your help!
>
> Warm wishes,

As others say, 2 Mpixels should be the minimum resolution, although it is a bit small to do any work (i.e. restoration).
That's the minimum requirement for quality and featured images on Commons.

For doing restoration, it is quite comfortable around 12 Mpixels (4000 x 3000).
That's what most cameras offer today.

> geograph's 640 × 480 is the lowest widely used resolution.

Any that small resolution should be refused nowadays.

Regards,

Yann

>
> --
> geni

 

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

geni
On 22 May 2017 at 20:03, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> geograph's 640 × 480 is the lowest widely used resolution.
>
> Any that small resolution should be refused nowadays.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann


Common's highest resolution image of a Partula turgida shell is 469 ×
361. It was uploaded in december 2016. Are you going to try and delete
that?



--
geni

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
The two images of a Partula turgida shell are really bad. They do not show enough detail to be certain that the image is about what it says it is. I delete nothing but it is poor value.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 22 May 2017 at 22:07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 22 May 2017 at 20:03, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> geograph's 640 × 480 is the lowest widely used resolution.
>
> Any that small resolution should be refused nowadays.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann


Common's highest resolution image of a Partula turgida shell is 469 ×
361. It was uploaded in december 2016. Are you going to try and delete
that?



--
geni

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

geni
On 22 May 2017 at 21:10, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hoi,
> The two images of a Partula turgida shell are really bad. They do not show
> enough detail to be certain that the image is about what it says it is. I
> delete nothing but it is poor value.
> Thanks,
>       GerardM

I didn't claim they were good. I said there were below Yann's
resolution standard.


--
geni

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

ankry.wiki
In reply to this post by Flor Méchain
Few digital libraries offer high quality scans that allow paper structure and ink layer thickness analysis.
 
But, is it worth to use them create a few GB PDF/DjVu if books are mainly intended for reading and not for scintific reserch on printing technology?
 
We should not reject any usable resolution.
 
Ankry
 
W dniu 2017-05-22 21:03:37 użytkownik Yann Forget <[hidden email]> napisał:
As others say, 2 Mpixels should be the minimum resolution, although it is a bit small to do any work (i.e. restoration).
That's the minimum requirement for quality and featured images on Commons.
 
For doing restoration, it is quite comfortable around 12 Mpixels (4000 x 3000).
That's what most cameras offer today.
 
 

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Yann Forget-3
In reply to this post by geni
Hi,

2017-05-22 22:07 GMT+02:00 geni <[hidden email]>:
On 22 May 2017 at 20:03, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> geograph's 640 × 480 is the lowest widely used resolution.
>
> Any that small resolution should be refused nowadays.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann

Common's highest resolution image of a Partula turgida shell is 469 ×
361. It was uploaded in december 2016. Are you going to try and delete
that?

There is a difference between accepting new images and deleting old images which were uploaded years ago.

Regards,

Yann

--
geni

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Jean-Philippe Béland

It is common practice for GLAMs to not want to upload their highest resolution. For example, Wikimedia Canada has a GLAM partner that donated pictures they were holding that were in the public domain, in a resolution "good enough" to illustrate Wikipedia articles. But the GLAM partner retained the highest resolutions so they can still copies and generate revenue for them, even though those are in the public domain and as soon as they sell one you could use it on Commons in theory. Sometimes we need to meet in the middle if we want to achieve our mission when there are conflicting interests.

Thanks,
Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada


On Tue, May 23, 2017, 05:15 Yann Forget, <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

2017-05-22 22:07 GMT+02:00 geni <[hidden email]>:
On 22 May 2017 at 20:03, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> geograph's 640 × 480 is the lowest widely used resolution.
>
> Any that small resolution should be refused nowadays.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann

Common's highest resolution image of a Partula turgida shell is 469 ×
361. It was uploaded in december 2016. Are you going to try and delete
that?

There is a difference between accepting new images and deleting old images which were uploaded years ago.

Regards,

Yann

--
geni
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Jean-Philippe Béland

They can still sell copies**

Missing word. sorry.

JP


On Tue, May 23, 2017, 08:39 Jean-Philippe Béland, <[hidden email]> wrote:

It is common practice for GLAMs to not want to upload their highest resolution. For example, Wikimedia Canada has a GLAM partner that donated pictures they were holding that were in the public domain, in a resolution "good enough" to illustrate Wikipedia articles. But the GLAM partner retained the highest resolutions so they can still copies and generate revenue for them, even though those are in the public domain and as soon as they sell one you could use it on Commons in theory. Sometimes we need to meet in the middle if we want to achieve our mission when there are conflicting interests.

Thanks,
Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada


On Tue, May 23, 2017, 05:15 Yann Forget, <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

2017-05-22 22:07 GMT+02:00 geni <[hidden email]>:
On 22 May 2017 at 20:03, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> geograph's 640 × 480 is the lowest widely used resolution.
>
> Any that small resolution should be refused nowadays.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann

Common's highest resolution image of a Partula turgida shell is 469 ×
361. It was uploaded in december 2016. Are you going to try and delete
that?

There is a difference between accepting new images and deleting old images which were uploaded years ago.

Regards,

Yann

--
geni
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Jean-Frédéric
In reply to this post by Flor Méchain
Hello,

There is an essay on Wikimedia Commons discussing this topic :


Hope that helps,
--
Jean-Frédéric

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Fæ
Wikimedians rarely get excited about volunteering to help GLAMs that
want to lock up high resolution media behind a paywall. It's fine to
charge correctly and openly for reprographic fees, but as we commonly
see, when the GLAM relies on misunderstanding of copyright so that
teachers and academics part with hard-won funding to be able to use or
republish the public domain images or texts, then we are straying into
supporting unethical behaviour.

I would rather see Wikimedia affiliates helping to educate those
institutions with case studies and advice on how to encourage
attribution as the best quality source, along with persistence of
metadata, rather than offering our volunteer time and charitable money
to help them continue to lock up the best information, and often
public assets, behind arbitrary paywalls.

If an institution is putting you in that position, make the case
clear, but be fully prepared to simply walk away if their corporate
objectives remain in conflict with our open knowledge and free access
values.

Thanks,
Fae

On 23 May 2017 at 13:46, Jean-Frédéric <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> There is an essay on Wikimedia Commons discussing this topic :
>
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Why_we_need_high_resolution_media>
>
> Hope that helps,
> --
> Jean-Frédéric
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

geni
In reply to this post by Yann Forget-3
On 23 May 2017 at 10:15, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> 2017-05-22 22:07 GMT+02:00 geni <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> On 22 May 2017 at 20:03, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> geograph's 640 × 480 is the lowest widely used resolution.
>> >
>> > Any that small resolution should be refused nowadays.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Yann
>>
>> Common's highest resolution image of a Partula turgida shell is 469 ×
>> 361. It was uploaded in december 2016. Are you going to try and delete
>> that?
>
>
> There is a difference between accepting new images and deleting old images
> which were uploaded years ago.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann
>


December 2016 is years ago?


--
geni

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Minimum resolution image for Commons

Flor Méchain
In reply to this post by Fæ
Hello,

I wanted to thank the group for your answers. I now have a lot more
arguments and examples for the library-museum that approached me. I
think we'll manage to do something good, or at least, find an acceptable
middle-ground.

Warm wishes,

Flor MECHAIN
Wikimedia CH
E: [hidden email]
M: +41 78 746 86 25
W: Flor WMCH

Wikimedia CH is a swiss non profit organisation which supports Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia



_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
12