Wikipedia talk:Graphic Lab

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓

Skip to table of contents

↓

	This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Graphic Lab page.
	Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks Be welcoming
Archives: 1, 2

Archives
1, 2

Contents 1 The people v. SVG assorted trace function, et al. 1.1 Prevention of Trouble (SVGs ("Trace bitmap" function)) Act 2009, first reading 2 CfD nomination of Category:Images for redraw 3 New category added 4 GLNF within <gallery> 5 Can someone create a map for me? 6 Graphic Lab category threads

Note about Friendly IPs

An originality of the Graphic lab is that 2 friendly IP frequently contribute here :

• 68.39.174.238, IP from Newjersey : don't want an account.
  • Am now 76.117.247.55 (talk) 23:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
• 220.135.4.212 (new appart): IP from Taiwan, old wikigraphist, use IP because currently in strike and wikibreak -___-.

[edit] The people v. SVG assorted trace function, et al.

I prefer, to the Grand Jury, the charge of it being open to substantially more infringing than noninfringing use.

Evidences: Image:Coat of arms of Australia.svg v. Image:Australian Coat of Arms.png.

Charge(s): willfully confuzing the public, excessive use of space and bandwidth, and debauching a standard.

Penalty: Left to the discretion of the Judge and Jury. 76.117.247.55 (talk) 19:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

WOW. That is an absolute travesty. That file should be deleted. Ideally svgs should ALWAYS be smaller than the originals (maps can be quite complex admittedly, but their extra size is usually caused by them actually having more added detail than the original - exact copies should be smaller always, and even maps can probably be made small enough with care), but I'd say a reasonable enough measure would be to put a limit of say, 1.5x the original file-size on SVGs replacing PNGs.

Given that the example above is over 15 times the size, it should really be deleted post haste. That's my vote. It's also of significantly lower quality than the original PNG. _ɹəəpıɔnı 19:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

There any possibility of improving the SVG piecemeal, or is it just hopeless? 76.117.247.55 (talk) 15:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I had a go there. Could only get it down to about 5-6MB. Problem is, the original png was never suitable for vectorising in the first place. Whoever tagged it as {{svg}} evidently didn't understand what would be involved. It looks to be a scan of a painting or drawing, not a digitally created image. The iteration in the files history is an embedded raster!! Perhaps some cautions on usage of the {{svg}} template._ɹəəpıɔnı 09:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I know it can't be possible to get it to look like the scan, but can it be simplified (IE. Remove some shading that is both unofficial and artistic licence)? I know when the Chilian coat was done, the SVG had alot less shading than the JPG (For obvious reasons). 76.117.247.55 (talk) 23:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

A photo-realistic PNG can grow when you emulate it in SVG and I'm not sure what'll improve it. I think I already have some feel for which images should be converted and which shouldn't, but is there some clear guidance that we could signpost more boldly? Perhaps we could even a less formal essay: would anyone care to write WP:Don't vectorise the emus? Certes (talk) 11:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

If you start the page, I'll fill it in! One request, make it "Don't SVGify" so we avoid the "-ise"/"-ize" dispute. 76.117.247.55 (talk) 23:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Some guidance to attempt to prevent this sort of thing happening in future would be welcome, though how successful remains a question. However, as far as the quoted example (Australian coat of arms) is concerned, I second the proposal to delete it. The problem that leaves is what to do about the hundreds of pages which link to it. I have edited several pages, including the templates Template:Politics of Australia sidebar and Politics of Australia to point at the png version. As far as I can tell most of the "what links here" pages seem to link only indirectly through those templates, but the "what links here" page for the svg file has not updated, and still shows many (probably hundreds of) pages that link indirectly via the templates. Does anyone know of a way to check what really links here, short of checking each page manually? Alternatively does anyone know if we can expect the link page to update soon? JamesBWatson (talk) 14:47, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if the Commons find use tool traces through templates. I do know that changing the template uses will remove ~90+% of CoA uses. 76.117.247.55 (talk) 19:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

@Certes,76.117.247.55

I started the WP:Graphic Lab/Resources/Uploading standards page which is kind of related to this. Either drawing on that in an essay or expanding on it and then advertising it's existence would be good.

I'll have a look at the Chilean coat, but I really don't see the point of replacing a perfectly good PNG which serves it's purpose, with a simplified vector graphic. The shading here is quite nice. I suppose it's a subjective issue though, I don't know. _ɹəəpıɔnı 22:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Take a look @ the United States seal SVGs and tell me if they're better than the .JPG they replaced. It IS possible to make an artistical, good looking SVG replacement for rasters. Also, given that coats are officially usually described by blazon, I think there is a fair latitude in the colors, shadings, etc. and the guarantee that a well-executed SVG will never look pixelated (Which is shudderworthy for most people) should make up for the difference. 76.117.247.55 (talk) 19:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Referring to the Australian coat of arms, a user above said "could only get it down to about 5-6MB". OK, that is still not good, but it is better than the current 10.32MB: could we have a 5-6MB version uploaded? JamesBWatson (talk) 07:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey James, I was that user, but have since deleted the effort as it seemed a waste. To be honest my opinion is that the SVG should be (a) deleted as a raster format is more suitable for this particular image or (b) should be vectorised in the style of other coats - ignoring th original raster image and just following the design tenets of the coat of said country from scratch. I'll have a go at doing (b) later on, but I also think there was talk (either above or below) of keeping the 10MB one as an example of "what not to do". _ɹəəpıɔnı 14:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Good. On the whole I prefer (a), but certainly (b) would be much better than the present situation. I can see a case for keeping the present file as an example of what not to do, but if so I should give it a filename which clearly indicates it is not to be used. Or is that so obvious that you wonder why I am bothering to mention it? JamesBWatson (talk) 17:40, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I strongly suggest keeping it as a cautionary tale (Reuploaded by someone else, so as to not unduly embarrass the original author), but with a name like "BAD VERSION - Austrialian CoA.svg" or something similar and a note on the image page explaining why it shouldn't be deleted. Contributions/76.117.247.55 (talk) 20:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, thanx for trying to (re)do it correctly. Contributions/76.117.247.55 (talk) 20:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Prevention of Trouble (SVGs ("Trace bitmap" function)) Act 2009, first reading

I support the existence of 2 pages:

• The current Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Resources/Uploading standards for internal use
  • How do we advertize this to prevent ill-advised SVGifications?
• A page, like Wikipedia:Don't SVGify the emus, to generally explain this problem to the public and all users. You might want to retain part of that Austrialian CoA as a demonstration of what shouldn't be done (A different name would be preferable, EG. "Image:NEVER DO THIS.SVG").

76.117.247.55 (talk) 19:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've started User talk:76.117.247.55/SVG debauchery since I can't start pages in Wikipedia: space; anyone is free to edit it. Contributions/76.117.247.55 (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Images for redraw

I have nominated Category:Images for redraw (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. ZooFari 05:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] New category added

A new category, Category:SVGs for cleanup, has been added for efficiency and reducing backlog of Category:Images for cleanup. You can help transfer SVGs from IFC to SVGs for cleanup. The template for the new category is {{CleanSVG|1=reason}}. ZooFari 02:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ZooFari, that's a useful clarification. Is there an easy way to list SVGs in subcategories of IFC? It takes a while to search through the galleries, and we're likely to miss the one captioned "ExceedinglyLongName.sv..." Certes (talk) 09:05, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I was considering listing SVGs in IFC, but figured it is way better as a separate category. IFC has a huge backlog, and having SVGs in its own category allows us to place subcats like "SVGs with inappropriate dimensions" or "SVGs with inappropriate file names". It would work in IFC, but I think it is better organized like this. BTW, the cat uses lists, not gallery (if that's what you meant). ZooFari 04:09, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry; I expressed myself ambiguously. I meant to ask: "Is there an easy way to detect SVGs which someone else has classified into subcategories of IFC?" The category is displayed as a useful list, but the subcategories I've looked at are galleries. Certes (talk) 19:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we can filter, but the easiest way, I think, is by temporarily changing to list. You can do that by placing __NOGALLERY__ in the cat page. ZooFari 20:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I think something like this should help, but it would be nice if one could have the tree expand by default. _ɹəəpıɔnı 00:57, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that works. I just edit the category, add __NOGALLERY__, Show preview and ideally remember not to Save page. I see we have SVGs in Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request e.g. File:AVR_logo.SVG. I'm not sure what the SVG analogy of "file size reduction" is: are we supposed to remove half the points from the paths and add a filter with GaussianBlur? Maybe we should leave that section until last! Certes (talk) 22:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

For SVGs, I think it means "cut down the 'nominal' size so it doesn't look so darn big".

I would say size-reduction usually takes direct source editing and removing the bundles of redundant crap that Inkscape produces by default (Illustrator is not so bad in my experience) and generally making the source code more efficient. A good start however in most cases seems to be simple opening up the SVG in Inkscape and pressing Save as... Plain SVG - that format is functionally identical but far smaller than the default Inkscape format. _ɹəəpıɔnı 13:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] GLNF within <gallery>

I have attempted to replace the non-free images removed by BJBot with template GLNF. Unfortunately I can't get this to work within the <gallery> tag - see WP:Graphic Lab/Image_workshop#Millennium_'73. Do we know of a workaround for this? If so, should we suggest that BJBot replace non-free images with GLNF rather than its current behaviour? Certes (talk) 15:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Can someone create a map for me?

Hey, I'm working on this list called List of tallest buildings in Oklahoma City and one of the guys told me that I need a map and he told me to go here. I'm not really familiar with this, so I was wondering if someone could possibly create a map for this? Showtime2009 (talk) 23:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

You can request at the Map workshop... ZooFari 01:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Graphic Lab category threads

Alright, there has been many changes and new categories since the last backlog. Category:Images for redraw has been deleted per discussion, as the category was redundant to other categories. Its template is up for deletion as well (since the template was not specific at all). I have created Cat:SVGs for cleanup where SVGs tagged with {{CleanSVG|reason}} are in need for SVG tweaks. So far there are 2 subcategories: Category:SVGs needing revectorization which is for SVGs badly done and/or autotraced (along with a raster, if any), and Category:SVGs needing web-safe fonts which is for SVGs that contain non-websafe fonts. I will be creating Category:Non-free SVGs requiring file size reduction, and all non-free SVGs from Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request will be transferred to that category. Since SVGs are resizable, non-free images should be displayed no bigger than required in the file page. Many SVGs take the whole page which is not necessary. The template to tag those images is {{smallerSVG}}. Any cat suggestions or feedback are welcomed. ZooFari 19:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Just a curiosity about Category:SVGs needing web-safe fonts, who/what exactly is this targeted at? I'm aware that rsvg has some serious font rendering issues, so I've read in some places at least (this has some I think). Or is it aimed at SVG-enabled browsers? _ɹəəpıɔnı 13:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)