[WikiEN-l] OT photocruft (was Re: Technical solution to bad fair use)

[Andrew Gray]

On 01/08/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/1/06, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
> > Heh, my productivity machine is botanical gardens. Photo of label,
> > whole plant, closeups of leaves/flowers, three steps to the left,
> > repeat. :-) UC Berkeley botanical garden sez they have 12,000 taxa
> > for instance, I've only racked up about 300 of them so far...
>
> Bastard! I do European castles. I don't have a car. You have any idea how
> long it takes to take those "three steps to the left"?
>
> Actually the real problem is getting to the article after visiting the
> place, and discovering that someone has already taken a (better) photo of
> it.
>
> Amusing case in point:
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rock_of_Cashel_inside_cathedral.jpg
> (my image)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rock_of_Cashel-castle_interior.jpg
> (existing image)

They're actually quite interesting in comparison. Most of the foliage
in your version is more grown - look at the top of the main arch - but
there are some patches where yours is denuded and the earlier one has
growth. What, if anything, that indicates I don't know, but it's
something.

There's rarely anything to be *lost* by the duplicate, though I agree
it's annoying to find you've been pre-empted. (I should go round the
Ashmolean one of these days, do all the obscure portraits of minor
nobility, little chance of duplicating effort there...)

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk