PÃO DE ALHO EM CASA (CREME SIMPLES E RÁPIDO)
5 years ago
Monday, December 29, 2008
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Biography Photo
The biography photograph should be the one that best illustrates the person in question. A creative commons attribution credit is completely in spirit with the CC movement. Sacredhands 09:00
There are two issues: 1. Is the best illustration of a model a head shot, or a full body shot, considering their body is central to their profession (indeed, we include their physical measurements in the infobox); and 2. If we have two high-quality photographs, one that is free-licensed without attribution, the other requiring attribution, should we use the one that is arguably self-promotional or the one that states simply who she is? The head shot is not clearly superior, and I believe it is inferior based upon these reasons. --David Shankbone 13:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
respectfully disagree. since when does a famous biographical photo show mostly the backside of a person with hardly any view of the person's face? and there's no reason both photos can't coexist. we can defer to a third party if necessary. Sacredhands 09:16
You can disagree, but in order to sway you should come up with compelling arguments. Since the infobox lists her measurements, a full-bodied shot showing the information in the info-box is preferred. Please stop edit-warring over the photo or we open this up to wider comment. --David Shankbone 13:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I also note that you are the photographer, putting in your own byline, and that is verboten. --David Shankbone 13:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I was just commended by a wikipedia editor who is gladly adding my credit and encouraged me to add more photos. Sacredhands
from the wikipedia editor: Thanks for licensing so many of your photos of NY Fashion Week under CC licenses. They have been included in the Wikipedia articles for Lauren Bush, Sarah Jessica Parker, Chanel Iman, Lily Donaldson, Emina Cunmulaj, Dylan Lauren, Barbara Walters, Katie Lee Joel, Suzy Menkes, Robert F Kennedy Jr., Donna Karan, Vera Wang, Tracee Ellis Ross, Gilles Bensimon, Ana Beatriz Barros, Carolina Herrera, Barry Diller, Diane von Furstenberg, Irina Lazareanu, Scott Schuman, Lisa Edelstein, Nikki Sixx, Julia Allison, Snejana Onopka, Fran Lebowitz, Bruna Tenorio, Julia Stegner, Carmen Kass, Rachel Zoe, Selita Ebanks, and Liya Kebede. A million thank yous for your awesome photos! The wikipedia community appreciates it.Sacredhands 09:24 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 13:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
That's all great, but I've also had quite a few kudos; you can check out my own User page to see my over 300 shots of notable people. And I don't include my byline. --David Shankbone 13:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
adding a credit under creative commons is not some awful thing. I'm giving up an image for no compensation except attribution. that's what the license means! attribution. How would the photo be attributed if the photographer's name did not appear below the photo? this seems more about which photo appears first. Yours shows her backside. hardly a decent portrait shot of the person regardless of the body argument. and it is the face the counts most in the end. there are a million great bodies but only one Ana. let's let a third party decide which photo better illustrates Ana. Sacredhands 09:37, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
The photo attribution is included in the photo file information, just like all my photography that I spend about 30 hours a week doing without compensation. An over-the-should shot is very common with models, and your shot is a bit unfocused. --David Shankbone 13:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to let a wiki editor decide. calliopejen1 Sacredhands 09:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Whether or not a photo looks "better" is frankly secondary to its license. One is posted at Commons and another has additions conditions. We have plenty of photos up here where a non-free one would look better, but that's not the most important thing. And Sacredhands, you are approaching both 3RR violations and both of you seem to have a conflict of interest here. Ignoring the two admin who have made their view, why not consider getting a third opinion? And yes, I messed up; thanks for catching that Sacredhands. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 15:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Photos of supermodels, hmmm. Well, there are a number of issues about both photographs. First, head shots are pretty standard for models, unless they're European runway models, where their full body shot would be more important in the infobox. Ana is not primarily a European runway model. However, the headshot, although a technically excellent photograph captures nothing of the quality of shine that supermodels exhibit in photo shoots. The full body shot it what I and every one else would call, while picking over shots for an ad or something, "hellaciously cute." On the other hand, it is a rear view (one hell of a rear view). But she has an own-the-universe, but could be your neighbor's kid sister expression on her face--what she gets paid 7 figures a year for. Overall, quality wise, it's a superb photo for the pose and expression.
So, what's better for Wikipedia? The free license, imo, trumps other considerations. Unless the non-free image is clearly superior in all ways, the free license gets extra points--it's very important to use as many free images as possible.
In model infoboxes, unless the model is a European runway model (and this is probably no longer true, but used to be for Milan, in particular), a head shot would be standard, and the full length shot should be elsewhere in the article. For this issue, head shot versus full body shot, I would pick a head shot for the info box, in general.
In this case, I think the full body shot is a much better picture because of the unsupermodel expression on Ana's face in the head shot. I don't think that, of the two pictures, she would prefer the head shot.
Also the full body shot is, again, simply hot as hell.
My opinion is not unbiased, as I'm a friend of David's. But he will listen, if you discuss the issue with him rationally.
KP Botany 04:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ana Beatriz
Brazilian racing driver Ana Beatriz Caselato Gomes de Figueiredo has recently begun racing in the United States under the name Ana Beatriz. That name currently redirects to Ms. Barros' page. I am not at all familiar with Ms. Barros. Is she commonly referred to as "Ana Beatriz"? If not I think it would be best to instead redirect Ana Beatriz to Ms. Figueiredo as she has begun using that name almost exclusively. -Drdisque (talk) 01:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Due to lack of any opposition, I am repointing the redirect to Ms. Figueiredo. -Drdisque (talk) 23:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
There are two issues: 1. Is the best illustration of a model a head shot, or a full body shot, considering their body is central to their profession (indeed, we include their physical measurements in the infobox); and 2. If we have two high-quality photographs, one that is free-licensed without attribution, the other requiring attribution, should we use the one that is arguably self-promotional or the one that states simply who she is? The head shot is not clearly superior, and I believe it is inferior based upon these reasons. --David Shankbone 13:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
respectfully disagree. since when does a famous biographical photo show mostly the backside of a person with hardly any view of the person's face? and there's no reason both photos can't coexist. we can defer to a third party if necessary. Sacredhands 09:16
You can disagree, but in order to sway you should come up with compelling arguments. Since the infobox lists her measurements, a full-bodied shot showing the information in the info-box is preferred. Please stop edit-warring over the photo or we open this up to wider comment. --David Shankbone 13:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I also note that you are the photographer, putting in your own byline, and that is verboten. --David Shankbone 13:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I was just commended by a wikipedia editor who is gladly adding my credit and encouraged me to add more photos. Sacredhands
from the wikipedia editor: Thanks for licensing so many of your photos of NY Fashion Week under CC licenses. They have been included in the Wikipedia articles for Lauren Bush, Sarah Jessica Parker, Chanel Iman, Lily Donaldson, Emina Cunmulaj, Dylan Lauren, Barbara Walters, Katie Lee Joel, Suzy Menkes, Robert F Kennedy Jr., Donna Karan, Vera Wang, Tracee Ellis Ross, Gilles Bensimon, Ana Beatriz Barros, Carolina Herrera, Barry Diller, Diane von Furstenberg, Irina Lazareanu, Scott Schuman, Lisa Edelstein, Nikki Sixx, Julia Allison, Snejana Onopka, Fran Lebowitz, Bruna Tenorio, Julia Stegner, Carmen Kass, Rachel Zoe, Selita Ebanks, and Liya Kebede. A million thank yous for your awesome photos! The wikipedia community appreciates it.Sacredhands 09:24 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 13:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
That's all great, but I've also had quite a few kudos; you can check out my own User page to see my over 300 shots of notable people. And I don't include my byline. --David Shankbone 13:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
adding a credit under creative commons is not some awful thing. I'm giving up an image for no compensation except attribution. that's what the license means! attribution. How would the photo be attributed if the photographer's name did not appear below the photo? this seems more about which photo appears first. Yours shows her backside. hardly a decent portrait shot of the person regardless of the body argument. and it is the face the counts most in the end. there are a million great bodies but only one Ana. let's let a third party decide which photo better illustrates Ana. Sacredhands 09:37, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
The photo attribution is included in the photo file information, just like all my photography that I spend about 30 hours a week doing without compensation. An over-the-should shot is very common with models, and your shot is a bit unfocused. --David Shankbone 13:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to let a wiki editor decide. calliopejen1 Sacredhands 09:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Whether or not a photo looks "better" is frankly secondary to its license. One is posted at Commons and another has additions conditions. We have plenty of photos up here where a non-free one would look better, but that's not the most important thing. And Sacredhands, you are approaching both 3RR violations and both of you seem to have a conflict of interest here. Ignoring the two admin who have made their view, why not consider getting a third opinion? And yes, I messed up; thanks for catching that Sacredhands. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 15:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Photos of supermodels, hmmm. Well, there are a number of issues about both photographs. First, head shots are pretty standard for models, unless they're European runway models, where their full body shot would be more important in the infobox. Ana is not primarily a European runway model. However, the headshot, although a technically excellent photograph captures nothing of the quality of shine that supermodels exhibit in photo shoots. The full body shot it what I and every one else would call, while picking over shots for an ad or something, "hellaciously cute." On the other hand, it is a rear view (one hell of a rear view). But she has an own-the-universe, but could be your neighbor's kid sister expression on her face--what she gets paid 7 figures a year for. Overall, quality wise, it's a superb photo for the pose and expression.
So, what's better for Wikipedia? The free license, imo, trumps other considerations. Unless the non-free image is clearly superior in all ways, the free license gets extra points--it's very important to use as many free images as possible.
In model infoboxes, unless the model is a European runway model (and this is probably no longer true, but used to be for Milan, in particular), a head shot would be standard, and the full length shot should be elsewhere in the article. For this issue, head shot versus full body shot, I would pick a head shot for the info box, in general.
In this case, I think the full body shot is a much better picture because of the unsupermodel expression on Ana's face in the head shot. I don't think that, of the two pictures, she would prefer the head shot.
Also the full body shot is, again, simply hot as hell.
My opinion is not unbiased, as I'm a friend of David's. But he will listen, if you discuss the issue with him rationally.
KP Botany 04:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ana Beatriz
Brazilian racing driver Ana Beatriz Caselato Gomes de Figueiredo has recently begun racing in the United States under the name Ana Beatriz. That name currently redirects to Ms. Barros' page. I am not at all familiar with Ms. Barros. Is she commonly referred to as "Ana Beatriz"? If not I think it would be best to instead redirect Ana Beatriz to Ms. Figueiredo as she has begun using that name almost exclusively. -Drdisque (talk) 01:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Due to lack of any opposition, I am repointing the redirect to Ms. Figueiredo. -Drdisque (talk) 23:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Ana Beatriz Barros Detailed Biography
Ana Beatriz Barros was born in Itabira, a tiny town in Brazil, on May 29, 1982. Ana was raised in the cosmopolitan Rio de Janeiro after her family moved there. The hazel-eyed statuesque beauty was discovered by the Director of Elite Model Management, while vacationing in Brazil. It didn't take much for him to see that she was absolute model material, and he encouraged her to enter the Elite Look of the Year contest. In 1996, Ana placed first in the Brazilian Elite Look of the Year, and second in the International level of the same contest, that same year. With a national Elite Look of the Year championship and a modeling contract with the agency, Ana was ready for the big leagues: in this case, Guess?. Once Paul Marciano (Co-chairman and Co-CEO of Guess?, responsible for the careers of Eva Herzigova, Kim Smith and Josie Maran) received Ana's impressive portfolio on behalf of Elite, he knew he had a new Guess? girl on his hands. Ana's beauty cannot only be seen in the Guess? Hawaii campaign (along with fellow Brazilian Alessandra Ambrosio), but also in international advertisements for Onyx (in Italy), Head & Shoulders and Chanel make-up. Ana has graced the covers of Capricho (Brazil), Nova and 20 Ans (France), and has appeared in magazines such as Elle (Brazil), Claudia (Brazil), Allure (US), Woman (Spain), and Audi (Brazil). Ana's love for diverse cultures and languages contributes to her desire to be a model, and that's a good thing since she is constantly living the jetsetter life of a runway and print model. The fashion shows in which Ana has appeared include Balmain, Christian Dior, Christian Lacroix, Jean Paul Gaultier, Paco Rabbane, Valentino, and Lolita Lempicka. Currently with Elite Model Management in Paris and Brazil, and IMG in New York, Ana will definitely get her chance to travel the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
