http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_takes_Amsterdam thats where the pictures can be found. The biggest problem are the narrow streets, but waiting 5 minutes wont make the streets larger, so taking a decision on an angle an do the best you can. The thing is that these monuments are monuments, but quite a lot of the same (there are 8000 monuments in Amsterdam, 7000 of the look like that). The idea is that we want to have a wide coverage, people should be able to see how the monument looks like. And that, with time, quality will improve. I think http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Rotterdam_(stad) is a good example of the maximum quality you can achieve. In Rotterdam one person made it a two year project to photograph all monuments with decent quality, for some parts he waited half a year for the sun to be in the right position. That is more the 10-60 minutes/monument approach. Offcourse we prefer the pictures in Rotterdam for their quality, they are simply better, but time is limited and with the goal to photograph all 60.000 monuments that approach simply takes 10 years, so why not, at first, take 40 pictures a bit faster in the time you could also make 1 very good picture (and offcourse there is talent, experience and material which makes one person able to make better pictures, but limits for example myself in which pictures I'm able to provide). So basicly I think the difference shows well between these two pictures: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rotterdam_voorhaven5.jpg which is part of the two year project and maybe took 3 times to go there (so lets say 20 minutes) and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amsterdam_-_Herengracht_384.JPG a 30 sec. picture which always will be a hard one because its 5 floors high and you either have an angle like this, or you have a tree in front of the house hiding it. For showing what the monument looks like both pictures will work, but off course we prefer the first picture, it simply has had more attention. On the other hand, in the same time that monument was illustrated 40 monuments got illustrated with a picture similar to the second one. Currently we've covered all big cities (there are no cities with more then 300 unphotograped monuments exept for Amsterdam), so giving people 300 monuments to photograph wont really work when 20 people show up. So giving each group 50 monuments could indeed be the idea. Another thing we are thinking about is trying to visit something like a castle, and make it a Wiki takes the castle, where basicly one monument (the governement has devided those into sometimes 20-70 different parts (e.g. the castle, the bridge, the vase, the other vase. etc.) is the subject. Mvg, Bas
From: strainu10@gmail.com Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:14:13 +0300 To: wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] How to choose where to do a Wiki Takes? (was: Where to do a Wiki Takes?)
2012/6/28 Bas vb basvb_wikipedia@live.nl:
Some participants in the past have completed these 250 monuments routes in ca. 2 ours, taking over 100 pictures an hour.
That sounds great for the WLM world record but horrible for the monuments themselves. In 30s there is no time to appreciate the monument, to see the efforts put into building it.
Wouldn't it make more sense to have different groups covering different parts of the street?
Just my 2c, Strainu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu