Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates/Japanese river boat
More precision
[edit]Sorry, I was not aware of the nomination until now:
This photograph comes from a familly album. The full album can also be seen here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/styeb/sets/72157606263190363/ (I can't use PD on flickr, so the licence is CCBY, anyway I am french, I am not allowed to release in public domain, technically speaking.) All of the content of this album is also present on Commons, maybe I should add a sub category to farsari cat.
About the original photograph
[edit]Those are painted photographs, probably by Farsari (or his workers). There is a note dated from 1886 on the first page of the album, with other various notes illustrating when the album was passed down in my familly.
Scans or photographs
[edit]Those are photographs, not scans.
The procedure to make these images (from what I remember) was the following :
For each images, 3 photographs (+1 EV 0 EV -1EV) taken with a tripod using my panasonic fz-18.
I used Picturenaut, with adaptive logarithmic tone mapping orerator, and adapted each image to what was seemt to be rendering properly to my eyes.
The image were redressed with gimp; saved as tiff.
I did the final cut with picasa and conversion to jpeg using picasa for commodity reasons.
No restoration was performed on those images.
(I did it at my father place, so I don't know if I have the original jpeg here or not, I'll check that tonight.)
Conflicting licence, huh?
[edit]As I said here: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Esby&diff=18117987&oldid=18084271
Here my rationale: I did not release under PD, because I am french and that by the law I ain't allowed to release it to PD technically speaking. I also can't deny my attribution right. The french law considers attribution a moral right, which means it cannot expire, so if my attribution is mentionned, the attribution of Farsari has to be mentionned, even if the photographs are PD.
I originally used GFDL + CCBY on commons as this is what I usually uses for my photographs. Since there might be a threshold of originality (due to the HDR tone mapping and the fact the colors have probably been altered with time) I kept the licence. There are also 48 other images in those album, so they should have the same licences too.
I had noticed the licence change, but I was not even aware of the nomination.