User talk:Pelikana

English: Peli: Welcome, please take notice that I can only keep an eye on a limited watchlist.
Welcome to notify me of any mistakes or issues.
This page is cleaned up and archived by a bot on regular basis to

Category:Reproduction_prints has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at [[{{{2}}}|its entry]].

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ македонски ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ไทย ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 吴语 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Adamant1 (talk) 16:21, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On your TP I had hoped you could see the difference between a photo repro of art, and a photo capture of a rl image. Out of 30K albumen prints in RMA only 10% (3K) applies as a reproduction print, also not all repro prints are albumen but show a wide diversity of printing techniques.

A painting in reproduction (a derrivative work) will have a secundary cat : Reproduction prints in the RMA. Ok?
B Real life scene (re-print of an original photogravure) will be categorized as 19th-century photograph in the RMA. Right?
Reproductie van een prent naar een tekening

Peli (talk) 23:37, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Calling this a 'photograph of a sculpture'1 is not very helpful. It is an off topic statement and an obvious error since the description tells us clearly that it is a photograph of a painting. These kinds of errors make it very hard to reach an agreement about the essence. Peli (talk) 11:19, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]