Hello Brianna,

Here is some feedback regarding the Greenspun project, as seen by graphists from fr.wikipedia (which I will call fr.graphists in this email). I C/C this email to the Greenspun mailing-list, I guess other people could be interested.

Regarding the way illustrations would be done :

* The images should have a very high quality: they should be reviewed both by good graphists and by people who know the topic. Images should be assessed both regarding their accuracy, their use of colours, their possible internationalisation, etc. : fr.graphists said that payment should be done after quality has been acknowledged.
High quality means using good sources: these sources should be sought beforehand and approved by people involved (zoologists for animal diagrams, for instance). This is a key point for making good diagrams. The source(s) should be quoted/acknowledged on the image description page.

* For each illustration, there should be a version with numbered labels and a blank version, on top of versions with English or other localised labels. The numbered version allows easy reuse on small Wikipedias (without graphists), the blank version allows interactive diagrams using ImageMap for instance.

* Each illustration should be translated in as many languages as possible. This part can be done by volunteers, but the image has to be advertised to them.

* Free software should be used if possible. By free software, they mean of course Inkscape. There are several reasons: first, it is free :-) so in the same spirit as Wikimedia projects; this software can be used by anyone without the need to buy a license; it produces better SVG code than OOo or Illustrator if you don't have the good plugin. Fr.graphists said that this may be a problem with professional graphists, who tend to use more professional tools.

* Maybe it goes without saying, but all illustrations should be in SVG format. PNG is much harder to translate / adapt. ANother good reason to use Inkscape.

* The selection process may be private (ie not open to anyone) as competition for money should be avoided. When images are produced, they should be made available to everybody for review, criticism, and inspiration !

* Some fr.graphists were anxious about a possible "en.wikipedia-centrism", meaning that some illustrations would be useful to the en.wikipedia project but maybe not to others. This can work the other way around too (Wikipedia vs. Wikibooks, etc.). This also means that they should be easy to translate (maybe problematic when jargon or technical language is used). Maybe illustrations for "core topics" should have higher priority as well...

Finally, they also said that it would have much more impact to teach graphists to use their tools (Inkscape / GIMP / etc.), to create tutorials, etc. than to pay for a few hundred pictures. This would be much more in the spirit of Wikimedia projects. People could be paid to teach new graphists, to write well-illustrated tutorials, etc., which should also potentially generate less frustration between paid and volunteer graphists.
Another way of avoiding this "frustration" is to make sure the diagrams produced in the Greenspun project have a really high quality.

The graphists had some general suggestions for the project (which may or may not fit into the objectives) :

* create commonly accepted standards or recommandations for maps and diagrams. The French Graphic Lab already uses cartographic standards extensively (see [1])

* help User:Sting to finish his cartographic tutorials, and translate them (see [2])

* Make work together a macro-photographer and a graphist, to produce good quality diagrams of insects and this sort of stuff (see [3] for instance)

* Get programmers to create a cartographic software for Wikipedia, including standards, etc.

* Help the development of Inkscape, and the SVG rendering software in MediaWiki (patterns, masks, some issues with arrows, support for animated SVG...)

That's it, I think. You may read the full comments on [4].
Cheers,
Rémi Kaupp
User:Korrigan

[1] http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aide:Cartographie#Conventions
[2] http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Sting/Brouillon/Carte_topographique_vectorielle and other pages from http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Sting/Brouillon
[3] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Sch%C3%A9ma_abeille-tag.svg
[4] http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_Wikip%C3%A9dia:Atelier_graphique/Images_%C3%A0_am%C3%A9liorer