Done I am assuming you wanted the image to be square (it is not 300x300). If you wanted the medal to be distorted—or undistorted, as the case may be—I can do that, too. Just let me know.
There's a weird shadow that looks like a spot between her left eye (on our right) and her nose. Is it okay to lighten it? If so, please also crop image so it can potentially go at the top of the article. Thanks. We're having some difficulty picking a stable image for the top of this article, so any suggestions would also be welcome. This person is a candidate for the U.S. presidency.-- Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:53, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s)
It looks like a natural, permanent 'blemish' that can be seen in other photos of Mrs Fiorina. I would strongly recommend against removing it. And as this isn't a particularly nice image I'd recommend using this one for the infobox. nagualdesign06:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cropped for infobox and the shadow/blemish/whatever reduced. I looked at a number of high resolution photos on the web and the dark spot was in some, and not in others. Whether this is rampant photoshopping, make-up, or just a trick of the light on her features, I don't know. If you like this version better feel free to use it in the InfoBox. I think it is a slightly better photo overall. Carl Henderson (talk) 05:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How about that? A little saturation, a little sharpness, a little contrast. It's actually a very nice image to begin with, so there isn't much room for improvement. As always, revert if necessary. MjolnirPantsTell me all about it.20:10, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is the only free image currently available of Republican presidential candidate Jack Fellure. It is somewhat dark and blurry. I am hoping it can be lightened and enhanced. I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this matter. -- William S. Saturn (talk) 07:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s)
Done Sort of. I lightened sections of the image, and applied an auto-contrast and unsharp mask filters. I think this new version is an mild improvement, but please note that with blurred image (especially a low resolution one) there is very little that can be done to make it less blurred. Carl Henderson (talk) 22:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done - @Nyttend: How is this? Rotated so the base of the building is level and removed the power line and sign post. Offnfopt(talk) 16:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC) Edit: I uploaded a new revision, check which one you prefer and revert if needed. The first upload I rotated to align the base of the building with the base of the image, the second revision I rotated without using the base of the building. Offnfopt(talk)16:22, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks; I'm quite satisfied (but for some reason the ping didn't work), so I've uploaded it on top of the original photo. Nyttend (talk) 20:28, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that the original resolution was "fake" in that a highly compressed file has apparently been blown up, leading to a lot of compression artifacts visible in the photo.
The original is from a 20-year-old New York library scan that I took a screenshot of, so you were working with total junk. Sorry about that, but it looks much better now. Thank you, Carl! RO(talk)23:29, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
HMS Amphion 1904 football match against a Peruvian team
Please remove the watermark ("El Comercio") from the middle of the images. The second image has additional watermark in the right-hand corner (please remove that one as well). Also, if possible, any restoration work for these images would be appreciated. Thanks!--MarshalN20Talk06:55, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s)
Done I removed the watermarks. However the original images are so degraded that there was very little I could to improve them, other than some clean-up of stray dots, remove some bleedthrough, and apply an unsharp mask. Carl Henderson (talk) 18:53, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had been working on these independently and uploaded my versions to the new PNG commons pages. They are a cleaner crop and have been slightly rotated to bring all the coins in line with the horizontal. Carl Henderson (talk) 06:14, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This photographic portrait was copied from the below source and needs to have the printing and scan patterns smoothed out. Please feel free to amend this image as necessary, as it does need some work. I leave it in the capable hands of the graphists! -- West Virginian (talk)23:50, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I need help on having the first edition (1861) of the novel uploaded. However, there is a background. I need someone who can turn the background into white. Or perhaps create a PNG image and JPEG image? Here's the link to the first edition: [1] -- George Ho (talk) 05:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Graphist opinion(s)
Are you intending this to be a fair use photo? Because while it would be easy to take out the background, the composition of the original photo at the link is probably such that this would probably not pass on Wikipedia. My opinion. Carl Henderson (talk) 06:49, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The book is out of copyright. The author died for more than 100 years, and the first edition was published in 1861. is So it should be considered public domain. Here's proof that the book is the first edition: [2]. Of course, there is another edition from 1874 ([3]); it's easy to upload. George Ho (talk) 07:04, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the book is clearly out of copyright. However, the photo of the book that you linked above is copyrighted. While photos of public domain images that are "slavish copies" of the original are not granted copyright protection under US law (see Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.), images that contain original composition elements are copyrightable (and copyrighted). This is especially true of images of three-dimensional objects (as is the case with the photo of the book you linked). See Wikipedia:Public_domain#Non-creative_works for more information. On the other hand, if you had a flat, face-on photo of just the cover of the 1st edition, that would be okay to reproduce here. Carl Henderson (talk) 05:05, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All right, let's treat it as fair use then until I find the flat image of book cover. But the edition is rare, so finding it and scanning it have rare chances. In the meantime, the current fair use book cover is replaceable by first edition. --George Ho (talk) 05:43, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please remove the watermarks from the images. Image 1 has watermarks in the middle and down right and Image 2 has the watermark in the middle right. Jaqeli11:56, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it can be done. Removing large multi-colored watermarks from an image is usually a matter of cloning similar image areas and outright redrawing in photoshop. That's not really possible with a handwritten document. Your best bet is to try to find a copy of the document from another source online, or in a physical book. Carl Henderson (talk) 01:35, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]