text:
List of largest photographs

Negative
The largest seamless photograph made in a single exposure was made using a Southern California jet hangar transformed into a giant camera. The most recent claim to the largest image stitched together was by the Canadian Museum of Civilization.

On 3 August 2015, the longest photographic negative was measured 79.37 m wide. This negative was created by Esteban Pastorino Díaz (Spain) by driving 32.8 km on the 2nd Ring Road (Beijing). Esteban Pastorino Díaz also holds the previous record, a negative measured 39.54 m wide. He used a custom-built panoramic slit camera on 13 June 2010. The negative is a panorama of major streets in Buenos Aires, Argentina, captured by the slit camera while mounted on the roof of a moving car.

Largest seamless example

On July 12, 2006, six photographers (Jerry Burchfield, Mark Chamberlain, Jacques Garnier, Rob Johnson, Douglas McCulloh, and Clayton Spada) unveiled what is currently the world's largest camera and photograph.
 * Name of project/picture: The Great Picture
 * Claimed by: The Legacy Project; (Jerry Burchfield, Mark Chamberlain, Jacques Garnier, Rob Johnson, Douglas McCulloh, and Clayton Spada)
 * Photograph of: control tower and runways at the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, Orange County, California
 * Dimensions: 32 ft high × 111 ft wide (9.75h × 33.83w meters). Aspect ratio is 3.47:1.

The 3552 sqft photograph was made to mark the end of 165 years of film/chemistry-based photography and the start of the age of digital photography. It was taken using a decommissioned Marine Corps jet hangar (Building #115 at El Toro) transformed into the world's largest camera to make the world's largest picture. The hangar-turned-camera recorded a panoramic image of what was on the other side of the door using the centuries-old principle of "camera obscura" or pinhole camera. An image of the former El Toro Marine Corps Air Station appeared upside down and flipped left to right on film after being projected through the tiny hole in the hangar's metal door. The "film" is a 32 ft by 111 ft piece of white fabric covered in 20 gallons (75.71 liters) of light-sensitive emulsion as the "negative".

After exposing the fabric for 35 minutes the image was developed by 80 volunteers using a giant custom-made tray of vinyl pool liner. Development employed 600 gallons (2271 liters) of black-and-white developer solution and 1,200 gallons (4542 liters) of fixer pumped into the tray by ten high volume pumps. Print washing used fire hoses connected to two fire hydrants.

Largest example assembled from multiple pieces
The scene was originally produced on 6x6 cm transparency film shot with a Hasselblad 80mm lens in many overlapping sections. 80 rolls of film were used over several sites with this scene being finally chosen. The site is the estuary of Nasparti Bay at the base of the Brooks Peninsula on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Shot in 1987 or 1988 to be ready for the opening of the museum in 1989. The installation is actually two scrims of identical size, one behind the other in mirror image to give the viewers a 3-dimensional experience while walking beside the diorama.
 * Name of project/picture: Unknown (Grand Hall diorama background)
 * Claimed by: Canadian Museum of History
 * Photograph of: Canadian Aboriginal forest
 * Dimensions: 112 m (367 ft) (W) × 15 m (49 ft) (H)
 * Photographers: Rob d'Estrube assisted by Dirk Heydemann of Destrube Photography of Victoria, B.C., Canada

Within the Canadian Museum of History, one wall of the massive Grand Hall is composed of a scrim covered by a photo of a forest. The photo is about 100 by.

Digital photograph
The following are the digital photographs that have held the record for being the largest in terms of pixel count, beginning with the largest in chronological order (note: large digital images out of chronological order or lacking milestone significance are moved to acknowledgment section). Most instantes are digital image mosaics obtained via image stitching for interactive visualization (VR photos).

Kuala Lumpur 846 gigapixels (2014)
http://www.panaxity.com
 * Photograph of: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 * Year: photographed in 2014; published 2015
 * Achieved by: Tan Sri Dato' Sri Paduka Dr Lim Kok Wing and Limkokwing University of Creative Technology International
 * Photographed by: The Team at Centre for Content Creation Sdn Bhd
 * Pixels: 846,071,539,488
 * The final image was the result of combining over 31,000 individual images in a panorama.

Moon surface 681 gigapixels (2010-2013)
Full size zoomable image
 * Photograph of: The Moon's Northern polar region
 * Taken from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera
 * Year: taken over four years, from 2010 through 2013, published 2014
 * composed from 10,581 images

Prague from Old Town Square, 405 gigapixels (November 2018)
http://360gigapixels.com/prague_gigapixel_panorama_900K_2018/
 * Photograph of: Prague
 * Claimed by: Jeffrey Martin
 * Total images: 8 000
 * Year: photographed in 2018; published in November 2018

Calblanque, La Manga, Mar menor, and golf club 402 gigapixels (October 2015)
http://www.panoram.es/
 * Photograph of: Murcia Coast
 * Claimed by: Carlos Caravaca Escavy (hawlok)
 * taken from 336m Cabezo de la Fuente
 * Dimensions: 1,335,000px × 300,913px
 * Year: photographed in 2015; published in December 2015

Mont-Blanc 365 gigapixels (June 2015)
Full size zoomable image
 * Photograph of: Mont Blanc - Chamonix, France
 * Claimed by: Filippo Blengini, Alessandra Bacchilega, Guido Bethaz, Matteo La Torre, Roland Clauss
 * taken from 3500m up in the Vallee Blanche
 * Year: photographed in 2014; published in June 2015
 * composed from 70,000 images
 * captured over 35 hours with one Canon EOS 70D camera mounted on a CLAUSS RODEON piXpert panoramic head.

London 320 gigapixels (February 2013)
Full size zoomable image
 * Photograph of: London
 * Claimed by: Jeffrey Martin, Tom Mills, Holger Schulze
 * Taken from the BT Tower
 * Year: photographed in 2012; published in February 2013
 * Composed from 48,640 images
 * Captured over three days with four Canon EOS 7D cameras mounted on CLAUSS RODEON VR Head ST motorized mounts

Electron Micrograph of a Zebrafish Embryo 281 Gigapixels (August 2012)

 * Name of project/picture: Zebrafish Embryo 281 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Frank G.A. Faas, et al.
 * Photograph of: Zebrafish embryo
 * Total images: 26,434
 * Dimensions: 921,600px (W) × 380,928px (H). Each pixel represents 1.6 nm
 * Pixels: 351,063,244,800
 * Year: public availability: August 6, 2012

Full size zoomable image

Shanghai 272 Gigapixels (December 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Shanghai Skyline - Stitched From 12,000 Pictures
 * Claimed by: Alfred Zhao
 * Photograph of: Shanghai
 * Pixels: 272,312,102,608
 * Estimated optical pixels: 112 Gigapixels
 * Dimensions: 887276 (w) × 306908 (h)
 * Total images: 12000 (150 columns and 80 rows)
 * Size: 1,089,248,410,452 bytes (1.09 TB)
 * Year: shooting: May 25, 2010 / public availability: December 17, 2010

Full size zoomable image

Arcachon 228 Gigapixels (October 2015)

 * Name of project/picture: Arcachon 228 Gigapixels Party / 333 Easter Eggs
 * Claimed by: Ourco
 * Photograph of: Bassin d'Arcachon - FRANCE
 * Pixels: 228,511,957,990
 * Total images: 14700 in 6 hours (294 columns and 50 rows)
 * Camera 20 Mpx 1200mm (eq 24×36)
 * Year: shooting: June 4, 2015 / public availability: October 16, 2015

Full size zoomable image

Sevilla 111 Gigapixels (December 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Sevilla - 111 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Jose Manuel Domínguez Pablo Pompa
 * Photograph of: Seville
 * Pixels: 111,173,273,248
 * Total images: 9750
 * Year: shooting: September 29, 2010 / public availability: December 12, 2010

Full size zoomable image

Hamburg 100 Gigapixels (August 2015)

 * Name of project/picture: Hamburg von oben - 100 Gigapixels
 * Photograph of: Hamburg
 * Claimed by: Holger Schulze
 * Pixels: 100,000,000,000
 * Year: shooting: 2015 / public availability: August 28, 2015

Full size zoomable image

Sugar Loaf 92 Gigapixels (September 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Sugar Loaf - 0.15 Terapix
 * Claimed by: RioHK group
 * Photograph of: Rio de Janeiro
 * Pixels: 152,407,683,304
 * Year: shooting: July 20, 2010 / public availability: September 28, 2010

Full size zoomable image

New York City from Empire State Building 80 Gigapixels (April 2021)
Full size zoomable image
 * Photograph of: New York City, United States
 * Year: photographed in 2021; published in April 2021
 * Photographed by: EarthCam
 * Camera: GigapixelCam X80
 * Pixels: 80,000,000,000

London 80 Gigapixels (November 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: London 80 gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Jeffrey Martin
 * Photograph of: London, United Kingdom
 * Pixels: 80,000,000,000
 * Year: shooting: June–August 2010 / public availability: November 16, 2010

Arches 77 Gigapixels (September 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Arches National Park - 77 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Rongkai Zhao
 * Photograph of: Arches National Park - Park Avenue Trail Head
 * Pixels: 77,966,309,790
 * Year: shooting: September 6, 2010 / public availability: September 18, 2010

Full size zoomable image

Budapest 70 Gigapixels (2010)

 * Name of project/picture: 70 Billion Pixels Budapest
 * Claimed by: 360systems Ltd.
 * Photograph of: Budapest
 * Pixels: 71,303,841,000
 * Year: shooting: 2010

Full size zoomable image (requires Silverlight)

Corcovado 67 Gigapixels (July 2010)
(Not a cropped image: the sides of the picture are not straight. The real picture is smaller with the black parts on the edge.)

 * Name of project/picture: Corcovado 67 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: RioHK group
 * Photograph of: Rio de Janeiro
 * Pixels: 67,821,473,740
 * Year: shooting: July 8, 2010 / public availability: July 22, 2010

Full size zoomable image

Vienna 50 Gigapixels (July 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Vienna 50 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Photoartkalmar
 * Photograph of: Vienna
 * Dimensions: 404864px (W) × 124832px (H)
 * Pixels: 50,539,982,848
 * Year: shooting: July 2010 / public availability: July 2010

Full size zoomable image

Marburg 47 Gigapixels (July 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Marburg 47 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Peter Lauritis Photography
 * Photograph of: Marburg, Germany
 * Pixels: 47,676,298,005
 * Year: shooting: July 2010 / public availability: July 20, 2010

Full size zoomable image

Dubai 45 Gigapixels (May 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Dubai 45 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Gerald Donovan
 * Photograph of: Dubai
 * Dimensions: 472603px (W) × 94955px (H)
 * Pixels: 44,876,017,865
 * Year: shooting: April 23, 2010 / public availability: May 2, 2010

Full size zoomable image [Link not working]

Prague 34 Gigapixels (May 2013)

 * Name of project/picture: Prague 34 Gigapixel Panorama Photo
 * Claimed by: Jeffrey Martin
 * Photograph of: Prague, Czech Republic
 * Dimensions: 260000px (W) × 130000px (H)
 * Pixels: 33,800,000,000
 * Year: shooting: May, 2013 / public availability: May, 2013

Full size zoomable image

Swiss Alps 31 Gigapixels (April 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Swiss Alps 31 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Simon Oberli
 * Photograph of: Swiss Alps
 * Dimensions: 385163px (W) × 80500px (H)
 * Pixels: 31,005,621,500
 * Year: shooting: March 13, 2010 / public availability: April 25, 2010

Full size zoomable image

Paris 26 Gigapixels (March 2010)

 * Name of project/picture: Paris 26 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Kolor Autopano / Arnaud Frich / Martin Loyer
 * Photograph of: Paris, France and Lyon, France
 * Dimensions: 354159px (W) × 75570px (H)
 * Pixels: 26,763,795,630
 * Year: shooting: September 2009 / public availability: March 2010

Full size zoomable image

Paris 26 Gigapixels is an interactive image showing a view of the French capital and its famous monuments, from the Eiffel Tower to the Pantheon. It was shot from the Church of Saint-Sulpice by photographer Arnaud Frich using a CLAUSS RODEON VR Head HD panoramic head and 2 Canon 5D Mark II DSLR cameras with 300mm f4.0 lenses and two 2x tele converter (equivalent 600mm f8.0). The 2346 images of the project were then assembled using Kolor Autopano Giga software. The website was created using several technologies: Kolor Autopano Tour, KRpano and Microsoft Research's HDview.

Gigapixel Dresden 26 gigapixels (2009)

 * Name of project/picture: Gigapixel Dresden
 * Claimed by: A.F.B. media GmbH / Sächsische Zeitung (local newspaper)
 * Photograph from: Haus der Presse, Dresden, Germany
 * Dimensions: 297,500px (W) × 87,500px (H)
 * Size: 102 GB (raw data)
 * Pixels: 26,031,250,000
 * Year: 2009

Full size zoomable image

Prague 18 Gigapixels Spherical Panorama (December 2009)

 * Name of project/picture: Prague from the TV Tower - 18 Gigapixel Panoramic Photo
 * Claimed by: Jeffrey Martin
 * Photograph of: Prague, Czech Republic
 * Dimensions: 192,000px (W) × 96,000px (H)
 * Size: 120GB (Photoshop file)
 * Pixels: 18,432,000,000
 * Year: shooting: October 2009 / public availability: December 2009

This image, when published in December 2009, was the largest fully spherical panoramic photo in the world. It is 192,000 pixels wide and 96,000 pixels tall. When printed, it is 16 meters (53 feet) long at regular photographic quality (300dpi). It was shot in early October 2009 from the top of the Zizkov TV Tower in Prague, Czech Republic in collaboration with Prague 3 town hall. Canon 5D MKII digital SLR camera and a 200mm lens were used. Hundreds of shots were shot over a few hours; these shots were then stitched together on a computer over the following few weeks.

Largest season image in the world - Ilmenau (Germany) 18 Gigapixel (2009)

 * Name of project/picture: Largest season photo in the world
 * Claimed by: Daniel Richter
 * Photograph of: Ilmenau, Germany
 * Dimensions: 142,736px (W) × 125,546px (H)
 * Pixels: 17,919,933,856
 * Year: shooting: 2009

Full size zoomable image

Yosemite-17-Gigapixels/Glacier Point (2008)

 * Name of project/picture: Yosemite-17-Gigapixels/Glacier Point
 * Claimed by: Gerard Maynard, New York, NY, USA
 * Photograph from: Glacier Point, Yosemite National Park, California, US
 * Dimensions: 214,414px (W) × 80,571px (H)
 * Size: 96.5 GB
 * Pixels: 17,275,550,394
 * Year: 2008

Full size zoomable image

Udaipur 16 Gigapixel Image (2014)

 * Name of project/picture: Udaipur 16 Gigapixel
 * Photographed by: Pranshu Dubey (PixelDo.Com), India
 * Photograph from: Karni Mata Temple, Udaipur, India
 * Dimensions: 455,215px (W) × 36,894px (H)
 * Size: 62.5 GB
 * Pixels: 16,794,702,210
 * Year: 2014

Full size zoomable image

This is the first gigapixel image of any Indian city and this is the first and largest digital interactive image in India. This image is a panorama of 1456 individual shots stitched together. Shot with Canon 550D and Canon 400mm 5.6 lens and robotic panoramic head. Anyone can access the website and experience an interactive tour of Udaipur.

The Last Supper (2007)

 * Name of project/picture: The Last Supper
 * Claimed by: HAL9000 Srl - Novara - Italy
 * Photograph of: The Last Supper, as painted by Leonardo da Vinci, in the back halls of the dining hall at Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan, Italy.
 * Dimensions: 172,181px (W) × 93,611px (H)
 * Size: 94.4 GB
 * Pixels: 16,118,035,591
 * Year: 2007

The 16.1 Gigapixel size was reached by HAL9000 Srl. The project "The Last Supper" was claimed to be the largest digital panoramic photo. It is a stitched photograph created merging 1677 shots from a single point into one photograph, each shot 12.2 Megapixel in size. Captured with a Nikon D2s Camera on a customized CLAUSS RODEON VR Head panoramic head.

Full size zoomable image

Harlem 13 Gigapixels (2007)

 * Name of project/picture: Harlem 13 Gigapixels
 * Claimed by: Gerard Maynard
 * Photograph of: Harlem, New York
 * Dimensions: 279,689px (W) × 46,901px (H)
 * Size: 48.8 GB
 * Pixels: 13,117,693,789
 * Year: 2007

The 13 Gigapixel size was reached by Gerard Maynard. The 2045 images were taken with a Nikon D2X with 300 mm lens mounted on a modified Peace River Studios PixOrb. The stitching and exporting was done automatically by Autopano Pro.

Full size zoomable image

Parete Gaudenziana (2006)

 * Name of project/picture: Parete Gaudenziana
 * Claimed by: HAL9000 Srl - Novara - Italy
 * Photograph of: Parete Gaudenziana in Santa Maria delle Grazie Church in Varallo (Italy)
 * Dimensions: 96,679px (W) × 89,000px (H)
 * Size: 51.6 GB
 * Pixels: 8,604,431,000
 * Year: 2006

The 8.6 Gigapixel size was reached by HAL9000 Srl. The project Parete Gaudenziana was claimed to be the largest digital panoramic photo. It is a stitched photograph created by merging 1145 shots from a single point into one photograph, each shot 12.2 Megapixel big.

Llandudno, North Wales, United Kingdom (2019)

 * Name of project/picture: Llandudno, North Wales
 * Claimed by: Peter Miko
 * Photograph from: Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom
 * Dimensions: 219,973px (W) × 35,847px (H)
 * Size: 61.9 GB
 * Pixels: 7,741,984,131
 * Focal length: 560mm
 * Year: 2019

The 7.74 Gigapixel size was reached by Peter Miko. The 798 images were taken with a Canon EOS-1D X Mark II and Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens + Canon Extender EF 1.4x III.

Full size zoomable image

Gigapix (2004)

 * Name of project/picture: Gigapix
 * Claimed by: TNO
 * Photograph of: Delft, Netherlands
 * Dimensions: 78,797px (W) × 31,565px (H)
 * Size: 7.5GB
 * Pixels: 2,487,227,305
 * Year: 2004

The previous record belonged to Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research. One of these attempts was by Dutch company TNO. The project dubbed "Gigapix" was claimed to be the largest digital panoramic photo, although it is a stitched photograph by merging hundreds of small sections into one photograph. The photograph is 78,797 by 31,565 pixels large. It was taken on a Nikon D1X camera.

A preview of the image can be seen at:
 * TNO Gigapix project description
 * Full size zoomable

Gigapixel: Zug, Switzerland

Ralph Welling Gigapixel Images

welling.ch

Size 3,9 Gigapixel

September, 2017

Unknown title (2003)

 * Name of project/picture: Unknown
 * Claimed by: Max Lyons, Gigapixel Images
 * Photograph of: Bryce Canyon, Utah, United States
 * Dimensions: 40,784px (W) × 26,800px (H)
 * Size: 2.06GB
 * Pixels: 1,093,011,200
 * Year: 2003

The previous record belonged to Max Lyons of Gigapixel Images. He had at one stage claimed to have created the largest photo. It consisted of 196 images that were stitched together. Since then this claim has been surpassed by that of the TNO attempt. TNO's Gigapix is 2.5 times larger.

Portrait of a Coral Reef (1999)

 * Name of project/picture: Portrait of a Coral Reef
 * Claimed by: Jim Hellemn
 * Photograph of: Bloody Bay Wall Coral Reef in Cayman Islands
 * Dimensions: 76,934px (W) × 23,010px (H)
 * Size: 4.95GB
 * Pixels: 1,770,251,340
 * Year: 1999

The previous record may have belonged to Jim Hellemn of Blue Ocean Art. In 1999, Hellemn created a 1.77 gigapixel underwater photocomposite image, which was designed to facilitate life-size reproduction of a 20 ft high by 70 ft wide section of Bloody Bay Wall, a vertical coral reef wall in the Cayman Islands. The image consisted of over 300 images that were manually stitched together from 4000ppi drum scans of Fuji Provia 100 transparency film. To make the image, a grid of 280 frames was photographed with 30% overlap to accurately cover the reef wall with full-spectrum light revealing the natural color and detail of the reef. Additional frames of marine life carefully photographed in the same grid composited in place to complete the scene. The on-site photography, requiring 23 dives and over 12 hours underwater to complete, was accomplished over a ten-day period by Jim Hellemn, with assistants Larry Hellemn and Peter Neubauer, using a neutrally-buoyant camera platform Hellemn designed specifically for the project. The post production of the image was completed in six months using multiple Macintosh G4 computers at Photographix in Poway, California, a digital graphics company owned by Hellemn.

A zoomable version of the image was made available to the public in 2000 using the ER Mapper's ECW (file format) and Image Web Server software on a site operated by Fugro-Pelagos, allowing visitors to explore the life-size image. The project and the techniques used by Hellemn inspired researchers at Miami University to use similar methods to produce wide-coverage video mosaics to study coral reefs. The image was published in the October 2001 issue of National Geographic Magazine, "Portrait of a Coral Reef".

Large print of conventional sized photograph
For the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II, a 100 x print of a photograph of the British Royal Family during her Silver Jubilee was erected in front of the Sea Containers House in London while the building was under renovation. The 7,000 m2 (75,900 ft2) photograph was produced by Service Graphics and was erected over a period of 8 weeks by Artel Scaffolding.

Official websites

 * - official site
 * - official site
 * – official site
 * – official site
 * – official site

Gigapixel photo mosaics

 * Giga Lacrimosa - 80 gigapixel mosaic of a Bulgarian lawyer, entrepreneur, media mogul and politician - Delyan Peevski
 * Queen Elizabeth - 33 gigapixel mosaic

title: List of largest photographs


text:
Talk:Cedar Fire

Untitled
It's true that we will never know if the Cedar Fire could have been stopped by earlier, more massive, intervention. However, it's better to say "We did all we could." than "We didn't bother because it probably wouldn't have made much of a difference." Rsduhamel 01:11, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks to user Minesweeper for adding a photo, but a trio of politicians looking earnest is about the most irrelevant photo for this article. Aren't there any PD photos that show the fire? -Willmcw 21:50, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Found a satellite picture of the smoke plumes instead. Rsduhamel 08:43, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It seems the news media can't get it straight on what Martinez was charged with. I think we may have it straight this time. Rsduhamel 22:38, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Why is the "Why was the Cedar Fire so bad?" section written so poorly and in such an odd way?

 * Because you (or another editor) hasn't yet fixed it! Be bold! Rewrite it. Cheers, -Willmcw 23:59, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

--- Modified narration of fire to follow chronological order (i.e. Julian area and firefighter burned after fire turned east, put approximate time ("noon") of Scripps Ranch fires. "Noon" is approximate but definitely many house were burning (or burnt) by that time. The first houses in Scripps Ranch area were likely burning as early as 8:00 or 9:00 AM. Removed mention of "merger with Grand Prix fire" as no citation is provided and the statement is incorrect (http://www.geog.utah.edu/~cova/kim-etal-nhr-2006.pdf).(The Grand Prix and Old Fires, which were also burning at that time merged but were well to the north of the Cedar Fire. Removed mention of where firefighter was from as while efforts are greatly appreciated, did not seem of first order relevance. 146.244.227.73 18:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Causes of fire severity moved to talk page
I've moved this section here. It's not encyclopedic, completely unsourced, and reads like an essay. It needs a complete rewrite: Would the results have been different if alleged mistakes had not been made in fighting the fire? We will never know, but there is good reason to believe that the Cedar Fire would have been cataclysmic anyway. Once the Santa Ana wind-driven flames took off, there was little that could have been done to stop them. Some have suggested that fire suppression leads to conditions that caused the Cedar fire to be so large. However, extensive research by Jon E. Keeley and C.J. Fotheringham has shown that burn patterns have not changed significantly in southern California since 1878. The California Statewide Fire History Database indicates that since 1910, the mean size of fires in San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside and San Diego counties has remained constant. The timing of fires is equally consistent, with most igniting June through November with September representing the most flammable period. In a study by S.A. Mensing and others, seabed charcoal deposits off the coast of Santa Barbara County have shown that the frequency of large, Santa Ana driven fires has not changed over the past 500 years. Similar results are produced even when comparing years before and after 1950 when advanced fire suppression technology was developed and utilized on a massive scale. The only important change revealed by these studies has been an increase in fire frequency during modern times, not a decrease. Fire in chaparral is a natural, unpreventable event. Despite efforts to control them, large chaparral fires have continued unabated since our arrival in California. The assumption that old stands with an "unnatural accumulation of old brush" encourage fires to spread and become more dangerous is inaccurate. Studies by Max Moritz have shown that fuel age does not significantly affect the probability of burning. Why did the Cedar Fire happen when it did? All fires require a fire triangle whose three vertices are fuel, heat, and oxygen. In San Diego County in October of 2003 fuel was in abundance, and strong Santa Ana conditions had driven daytime temperatures above 90 °F + (32 °C) in the days leading up to the fire. In addition, on the night of October 26 the Santa Ana winds meant humidity was down to single-digits, and 40 miles-per-hour (64 km/h) easterlies were blowing from the desert toward the coast. The result was mass ignition, a rapidly-moving fire, and extreme fire behavior, including large fire whirls. With all elements of the fire triangle present and at high levels, the Cedar Fire rapidly became a record firestorm. Budding Journalist 07:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

List of vicitms
I'm proposing deleting this section as non-encyclopedic. I'm moving this section to here, below. This is more the kind of material I'd expect to find in a newspaper article. As tragic as the loss is for the families of those killed, none of the folks are notable in an encyclopedic sense, and we typically don't have such lists for other disaster articles. The way the heading is, it appears that someone was trying to use Wikipedia as a memorial page, which isn't really in our scope of purpose. Any objections?  AK Radecki Speaketh  15:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The following individuals lost their lives in the Cedar Fire
 * Galen Blacklidge — 50, Lakeside, teacher, artist – Died October 26 2003 while trying to escape in her vehicle
 * Christy-Anne Seiler-Davis — 42, Alpine - Died October 26 2003 while in her home on Vista Viejas Road in Alpine
 * Gary Edward Downs — 50, Lakeside, small-business owner – Died October 26 2003 while trying to escape the flames on Wildcat Canyon Road
 * John Leonard Pack — 28, Lakeside - Died October 26 2003 along with his wife Quynh trying to escape the fire on Wildcat Canyon Road
 * Quynh Yen Chau Pack — 28, Lakeside - Died October 26 2003 along with her husband John trying to escape the fire on Wildcat Canyon Road
 * Mary Lynne Peace — 54, Lakeside, nurse - Died on October 26 2003 along with her sister-in-law Robin Sloan near the Barona Indian Reservation
 * Steven Rucker — 38, Novato, firefighter, died October 29 2003 in Julian fighting the deadly Cedar Fire
 * Stephen Shacklett — 54, Lakeside, construction superintendent - Died October 26 2003 while trying to escape the fire in his motorhome on Muth Valley road
 * James Shohara — 63, Lakeside, correctional officer - Died October 26 2003 along with his wife and son while trying to escape the deadly flames near San Vicente Reservoir, Lakeside
 * Solange Shohara — 43, Lakeside, correctional officer - Died October 26 2003 along with her husband and stepson while trying to escape the fire near San Vicente Reservoir, Lakeside
 * Randy Shohara — 32, Lakeside - Died October 26 2003 with his stepmother and father trying to escape the deadly flames near San Vicente Reservoir, Lakeside
 * Robin Sloan — 45, Lakeside, Walmart employee - Died October 26 2003 attempting to escape the fire near the Barona Indian Reservation
 * Jennifer Sloan — 17, Lakeside, student - Died October 26 2003 along with her mother Robin while attempting to escape the fire near the Barona Indian Reservation
 * Ralph Marshall Westley — 77, Lakeside, retired retail clerk, discovered October 27 2003 at 1088 Barona Road.
 * Unknown found mid-December in the I-15/SR-52 area.
 * Actually, we routinely have lists of victims. Please see List of Charles Whitman's victims and List of victims of the Virginia Tech massacre
 * Please do not confuse the idea that we are not a memorial service (true) with the idea that a list of victims constitutes a memorial (not true). The list of victims is encyclopedic and it is useful.  For instance, it may help the reader spot where the most fatalities occurred, etc.
 * I am going to go ahead and restore the list, since it does comply with policy. I will try to find wording that eliminates any confusion over the possibility of it being a memorial. Johntex\talk 05:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The article calls the I-15 and CA-52 by their named designations ("Escondido Freeway", "Mount Soledad Freeway"). Those are indeed correct, but it is not the custom in San Diego to use those names when referring to freeways. See LA Times style guide referenced here: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/19/local/la-me-rr-southland-freeways-are-a-number-not-a-name-20120919, the first sentence of this wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_California_freeways#Naming. Local media in San Diego never uses the names, but instead the numbers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tilthouse (talk • contribs) 17:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Speculation section moved
This is being moved here due to lack of citations and the statement of uncertainty in the last sentence:

 * Although firefighters were almost universally praised, some citizens reported firefighters making no effort to prevent houses from catching fire. Many houses were saved by citizens who refused to evacuate as the fire approached. A group of citizens is credited with saving hundreds of homes in the community of Eucalyptus Hills, near Lakeside, by cutting a firebreak and fighting flames with a privately owned water truck through the night. At one point a helicopter-borne Sheriff's Deputy threatened the group with citations and arrest if they did not cease their efforts and evacuate. They left only after firefighters arrived in the morning after the brunt of the fire had passed by. The validity of or the circumstances surrounding such reports were often unclear because emotions were running high during the crisis.

I can not site for the privately owned water truck but i can site for the Sheriff's Deputy threatening to write citations and possible arrests for residents not leaving the private road across from magnolia. The intensity of the fire in the eucalyptas hills area only lasted the short 15 minutes with the gust of winds raining embers from muth valley but snuffed its self out from lack of oxygen once the winds changed. The fire spread from embers to flames rapidly because of the large Eucalyptas trees on the hill (some of which we have been told were the largest in the hills)They acted like torches and fell quickly on to roof tops. I personally lost everything i owned including the shirt on my back from the embers raining down. In this 15 minutes of chaos not a single fireman/police officer was in the area because they had been dispatched to the much more dangerous area of wild cat canyon. An area which city officials have recently approved a massive development (muth valley) despite the efforts of residents to remind the officials of the devistation and lives lost from lack of escape routes from a high winds canyon. The morning after fire fighters were dispatched but quickly removed and placed into hotter areas to try and contain the fire. Like i stated before the flames only lasted about 15 minutes and then quickly snuffed themself out as the santa anna winds forced the smoke down and into the hills. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.7.238.104 (talk) 21:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Curfew section moved
This sentence: "In the aftermath of the fire the curfew for firefighting aircraft was extended from 1/2 hour before sunset to 1/2 hour after sunset and pilots have been given more discretion in deciding whether to attack a fire or not." has been removed because it is not cited, and the Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations still lists the operational times as was at the time of the fire.  AK Radecki Speaketh  17:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Would explain why I couldn't find a reference for it. ;-) Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 17:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Removals
I've once again removed the victims list. It's not appropriate for an encyclopedia article...this isn't a newspaper. Second, I've remove the comparisons section, as the first paragraph merely restated material already found here, and the second was just an overview of the 2007 article. SA entry is sufficient  AK Radecki Speaketh  17:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I restored both sections.
 * The list of fatalities is encyclopedic.
 * Please see List of Charles Whitman's victims and List of victims of the Virginia Tech massacre
 * Please do not confuse the idea that we are not a memorial service (true) with the idea that a list of victims constitutes a memorial (not true). The list of victims is encyclopedic and it is useful.  For instance, it may help the reader spot where the most fatalities occurred, etc.
 * The comparison to the 2007 fires is also valid.
 * As to the first paragraph, please see WP:LEDE. It states that information should not be in the lead of the article unless it is also in the body of the article.  Therefore, the information needs to be in the main body of the article if we are putting it in the lead.
 * As to the summary of the 2007 fires article, I see no problem with it. People reading this article will naturally want to know how this fire stacks up against others.  This is particularly true with regards to recent fires they may have heard about it.  We could do this as a "see also", but the prefered way to do it is really to put this into text form.  Please see WP:ALSO for information about this. Johntex\talk 21:51, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

List of fatalities
. I am in the process of cleaning up this article in hopes of getting it to WP:GA status. One of the last main things that needs to be addressed is the list of fatalities. Now lets get one thing clear, no one is suggesting the loss of life is not tragic. The question here is does a LIST of those killed warrant placement in this article? If so, how and in what format. I took a look at WP:USEPROSE (thanks for pointing me there!) and it states Prose is preferred in articles as prose allows the presentation of detail and clarification of context, in a way that a simple list may not. Now I would like to point out the last 2 words may not. It is possible that a list is still the right format here. I am having a hard time seeing what would be gained by having a bunch of sequential sentences that give the name, age and location of death for each of the 15 people killed. I took a look at a couple of other articles that contain large lists of individuals killed: Yarnell Hill Fire, Charles Whitman and Virginia Tech shooting. Each of these use a box on the right side of the page to list the names (not sure what the technical name for this box is... Not an infobox and not a navbox...). I am very much leaning in this direction.

My proposal is to rewrite the fatalities section to have a paragraph or so about the causes of death, how the fire spread faster than predicted, how people thought they had time they didn't really have, etc. (All well referenced of course). Then to have a side box that contains a list of the killed to include Name, age and both date and location of death. Perhaps broken up by date. I welcome any and all feedback! -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:37, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * as members of WP:WILDFIRE I'd love to hear your input! -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:39, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * A list of each individual fatality is completely unnecessary. Look at articles for large-scale disasters like plane accidents and there's a nice summary of fatalities and a table of nationalities, at most. I think the proposal would work well, with only names, ages, and locations in that small box.  Sounder Bruce  02:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * that is an excellent point. However, I would counter by pointing out that in large-scale disasters such as a plane accident, all fatalities occur at the same exact moment, in the same location and the cause is obvious. With a fire that lasted multiple weeks and covered some 280,000+ acres I think that it is more important to include the info. That being said, perhaps that is a strong argument for putting it in a better written paragraph. For example, the list in its current form mentions James Shohara, Solange Shohara and Randy Shohara who all died while trying to escape near San Vicente Reservoir, Lakeside. I think that could be written as "Three family members, James Shohara, Solange Shohara and Randy Shohara, died while trying to escape the fire near San Vicente Reservoir on October 26." (referenced of course) That includes the pertinent information but puts it in prose and not just in a list. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:06, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to agree with Zackmann08 and SounderBruce — it doesn't feel like a list of fatalities is necessary on the article to me. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 21:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC), via the feedback request service

 * Called here by bot. Thanks for your work on this. As Wikipedia is not a print encyclopedia and therefore space is not such a concern, i'd be inclined to follow the lead of Virginia Tech shooting and list the names. But it could go either way. Thanks for doing the daily work of Wikipedia and improving articles. SageRad (talk) 13:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer not to see a list of names. If a decent prose narrative can be written that tells the story and names are included (as Zackmann08's Shohara family example illustrates) then that would be ok. I think there's something sick going on in articles where it lists each and every victim when none of those people are notable. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 21:00, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep I see multiple articles with victims, and articles that had a separate list where the victim names were merged into the article. I do not perceive any harm, and the victim names are historical facts. CuriousMind01 (talk) 15:33, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 one external links on Cedar Fire (2003). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160623225606/http://www.lakesidehistory.org/CedarFire/cedar_fire_memorial.htm to http://www.lakesidehistory.org/CedarFire/cedar_fire_memorial.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/fire/information/story/part_1.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/10/27/california.wildfire/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/fires/weekoffire/20031026-sosdmainbar.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/10/07/news/top_stories/22_24_2910_6_04.txt
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2005/11/18/news/top_stories/20_24_4711_17_05.txt
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/cleveland/documents/documents/sandiegocountyfinal.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/03/04/news/top_stories/3_3_0414_21_16.txt
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nifc.gov/red_book/2007/Chapter17.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cbsnews.com/elements/2003/10/30/in_depth_nature/whoswho580954_0_1_person.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 28 April 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 04:41, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Cedar Fire (2003) → Cedar Fire – It obviously looks like a primary topic for me - Why? When compared into Cedar Fire of 2016, this is absolutely VERY destructive and as such it's much more notable than that. Compare the 2003 incarnation and 2016 incarnation with the Wikimedia's pageviews tool, the 2003 version fully trumped the 2016 version. I cannot doubt that this is the primary topic. SMB99thx XD (contribs) 10:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

 * Oppose – I think because the 2016 fire was more recent, this should not be considered the primary topic. How much it spread or how many page views this article gets does not matter, having this as a primary topic is not the best option at this time. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:9994:4438:446F:641D (talk) 02:03, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Since there is more than one fire with this designation I think "Cedar Fire" is more appropriate for a disambiguation page, which, btw, already exists at Cedar Fire. WP:PRECISE applies in this case.  In the minds of Wikipedia's readers, "Cedar Fire" could be an article about either the 2003 fire or about the 2016 fire or even about a possible future fire and is, therefore, too imprecise to be the article title about the 2003 fire.  The present titles and disambiguation page should be left as is. Shearonink (talk) 03:04, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Size
Please justify using that memorial service source when nearly all reliable sources covering the Thomas Fire have quoted the Cedar Fire as being ~273k acres, and CalFIRE officially has that figure as well.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Cedar Fire


text:
Music of Mass Destruction

Music of Mass Destruction is Anthrax's second full-length live album, and is packaged as one CD and one DVD. The songs were recorded on December 5 and 6, 2003, during performances at Chicago's Metro.

Cover art for the album was done by famous comic artist Alex Ross.

Disc 1 (CD)

 * 1) "What Doesn't Die" – 5:27
 * 2) "Got the Time" – 3:25
 * 3) "Caught in a Mosh" – 5:28
 * 4) "Safe Home" – 5:37
 * 5) "Room for One More" – 5:53
 * 6) "Antisocial" – 4:51
 * 7) "Nobody Knows Anything" – 4:04
 * 8) "Fueled" – 4:26
 * 9) "Inside Out" – 5:47
 * 10) "Refuse to be Denied" – 5:11
 * 11) "I Am the Law" – 6:10
 * 12) "Only" – 5:28

Disc 2 (DVD)

 * 1) "What Doesn't Die" – 4:37
 * 2) "Got the Time" – 3:18
 * 3) "Caught in a Mosh" – 5:28
 * 4) "Safe Home" – 5:36
 * 5) "Room for One More" – 5:53
 * 6) "Antisocial" – 4:51
 * 7) "Nobody Knows Anything" – 4:04
 * 8) "Belly of the Beast" – 4:26
 * 9) "Inside Out" – 5:47
 * 10) "Refuse to Be Denied" – 5:07
 * 11) "604" – 0:35
 * 12) "I Am the Law" – 6:09
 * 13) "Only" – 5:28
 * 14) "Be All, End All" – 7:10
 * 15) "Indians" – 7:39
 * 16) "Bring the Noise" (with extract of Metallica's "Whiplash") – 7:11

Bonus tracks

 * 1) "Fueled" – 4:32
 * 2) "Metal Thrashing Mad" (Neil Turbin, Scott Ian, Lilker) – 2:50

Personnel

 * John Bush – Lead Vocals
 * Rob Caggiano – Lead Guitar
 * Scott Ian – Rhythm Guitar, Backing Vocals
 * Frank Bello – Bass, Backing Vocals
 * Charlie Benante – Drums

title: Music of Mass Destruction


text:
Talk:University of Notre Dame

"University of Notre Dame Folk Choir" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=University_of_Notre_Dame_Folk_Choir&redirect=no University of Notre Dame Folk Choir] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 18:52, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

"Notre Dame is one of the top universities in the United States."
I'm unsure why this is being removed. It's both cited and there was specific conversation in the subsection above, where a source was provided and nobody has objected to the sourcing on talk. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 06:04, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It was removed because what was cited is nowhere near what we need to justify including such a strong statement in the lede of an article as required by the current consensus about statements like this. Additionally, the discussion above doesn't demonstrate a consensus nor can a discussion between a couple of editors override that broader consensus.
 * Frankly, the sources included in the current "Rankings" section of the article are also insufficient to justify including this statement in the lede. In particular, nothing in that section tells readers that this super high ranking has occurred more than once which is what we'd need to support this statement. And we really need a diversity of sources that support this claim, ideally with many of them coming from scholars and experts and not just ranking organizations who have a self-interest in promoting their commercial publications. ElKevbo (talk) 13:38, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Proper citations used to be present, but they were removed without discussion. I re-insrted them. This has been litigated before [], but then it was removed months later without discussion. Eccekevin (talk) 08:35, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Eccekevin @ElKevbo The "top university" statement also lacks the WP:DUE weight in the body to support its placement in the lede, another violation of WP:HIGHEREDREP. It jumps the gun and even so, there's no reason to put it in such a prominent place in the lede. It is better placed in the body, and its reputation section and rankings section can be expanded. GuardianH (talk) 22:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Added the neutrality tag to reflect the concerns over WP:HIGHEREDREP. GuardianH (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Brittanica
Brittanica is an encyclopedia. Summerdays1 (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * A vague statement presented without context is unlikely to make sense much less convince anyone of anything. ElKevbo (talk) 00:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Regarding GH questioning Brittanica as it relates to UND. Summerdays1 (talk) 00:54, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Notre Dame Symphony Orchestra into University of Notre Dame
The symphony orchestra does exist, and its presence isn't small, but I'm having trouble finding the sourcing for this as an independent entity. In light of WP:NOPAGE and general organizational principles, I think it would be better to move the content of the merge subject into our article on the parent institution. As such, I propose merging the article on the orchestra into the relevant section on the larger Notre Dame page. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 18:13, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Strong oppose: A quick Google search turned up these:, . A lot more turns up from various US periodicals in newspaper archives. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:29, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm seeing coverage from The Observer, but that's the student paper, and per WP:RSSM student media does not contribute to notability for topics related to home institutions. Is there broader coverage than that? — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 05:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support - I can't find much independent coverage either. W9793 (talk) 23:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:University of Notre Dame


title: File:2000AD336.jpg


text: Category:Petroleum production

title: Category:Petroleum production


text:
The Grand Rapids Press

The Grand Rapids Press is a daily newspaper published in Grand Rapids, Michigan. It is the largest of the eight Booth newspapers. It is sold for $1.50 daily and $7.99 on Sunday.

AccuWeather provides weather content to the Grand Rapids Press.

History
The Morning Press was founded by William J. Sproat and appeared on Monday, September 1, 1890. Sproat was its proprietor until November 5, 1891, when control passed to the Press Publishing company. Soon after, the controlling interest in the company was purchased by George G. Booth, who in 1892 bought the rival Grand Rapids Eagle and merged it with the Press. January 1, 1893, the Press went into the evening daily field, which it has since occupied.

This newspaper at first was published at 63 Pearl Street. Then for a number of years it occupied a building on the Grand River at the southeast end of the Pearl Street bridge. In 1906 it moved to a new home at Fulton Street and Sheldon Avenue.

The paper was published downtown at the corner of Monroe and Michigan until 2004 when the printing facility was moved to the northern suburb of Walker. The Walker facility was closed in October, 2020, and sold in 2021 to an industrial contracting firm. The newspaper is now printed in Cleveland, OH, at the same facility that prints the Plain Dealer. The editorial and newsroom offices are now at 169 Monroe Ave. NW, suite 100. They hire aspiring journalists through an internship program.

Home delivery for the Press, Muskegon Chronicle and Kalamazoo Gazette were cut back to Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays in 2012; on the other days in which the Grand Rapids Press is published, subscribers receive an e-edition of that day's newspaper. The print edition of each day's Press continues to be available in newsstands.

title: The Grand Rapids Press


text:
The Singles 1992–2003

The Singles 1992–2003 is a greatest hits album by American rock band No Doubt, released on November 14, 2003, by Interscope Records. It features 13 of the band's singles from three studio albums—Tragic Kingdom (1995), Return of Saturn (2000), and Rock Steady (2001)—and the single "Trapped in a Box" from their 1992 self-titled debut album. The album also included a cover of Talk Talk's 1984 song "It's My Life", the only new song on the album and which was released as a single. It was released alongside the DVD Rock Steady Live, a video of a concert as part of the band's Rock Steady tour in 2002, and the box set Boom Box, which contained The Singles 1992–2003, Everything in Time, The Videos 1992–2003, and Live in the Tragic Kingdom.

No Doubt went into hiatus in April 2003 after the release of four singles from their fifth studio album, Rock Steady, allowing the four members to spend time with loved ones. This also allowed their lead singer, Gwen Stefani, to work on her solo music side project, under which she has released three albums, Love. Angel. Music. Baby. (2004), The Sweet Escape (2006), and This Is What the Truth Feels Like (2016). The band regrouped in September 2003 to record the lead single for the album, "It's My Life", with producer Nellee Hooper. Additionally, in May 2010, the band regrouped again to start work on their latest record.

The album received mostly positive reviews from music critics, who praised the variety of music genres on the album. It reached number two on the US Billboard 200, and has been certified double platinum in the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, and platinum in Australia.

Background
No Doubt released their fifth studio album, Rock Steady, in December 2001 and from it released four singles, "Hey Baby", "Hella Good", "Underneath It All", and "Running" between 2001 and 2003. The album was commercially successful, selling three million copies worldwide and being certified platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). In April 2003, No Doubt went into hiatus to take a break to spend time with their families before starting to compile The Singles 1992–2003, which would feature the band's greatest hits from their previous albums.

The main reason to go into hiatus was that, in early 2003, their lead singer Gwen Stefani started work on her 1980s-inspired music side project, under which she released two solo albums—Love. Angel. Music. Baby. on November 23, 2004, and The Sweet Escape on December 5, 2006 (in addition to another solo album in 2016, after a No Doubt reunion album in 2012).

Music
The album was a compilation of 13 commercially released singles by the band from their previous studio albums, Tragic Kingdom, Return of Saturn, and Rock Steady, as well as the independently released single "Trapped in a Box" from No Doubt's self-titled debut studio album, and a brand-new cover version of "It's My Life". However, The Singles did not include "Happy Now?" and "Hey You!", two singles from Tragic Kingdom, neither of which were commercially successful, or "Squeal" and "Doghouse" from The Beacon Street Collection, which were both independently released. "Girls Get the Bass in the Back", a remix of "Hey Baby", and a live acoustic version of "Underneath It All" were included as bonus tracks on international pressings of the album.

Production
Being a greatest hits album and containing only one new song, recording The Singles 1992–2003 took very little time compared with the band's studio albums. Production started in September 2003 with the recording of a cover version of Talk Talk's song "It's My Life", produced by Nellee Hooper. The accompanying music video for the song was filmed by director David LaChapelle at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. Stefani insisted that just because no songwriting was involved in the production of the album did not mean no effort would be needed: the band had to decide which of their songs to include and which to leave out. Two months later on November 25, the album was released along with the B-side, rarity, and remix collection Everything in Time and box set Boom Box.

Singles
The only single from The Singles 1992–2003 was a cover of the song "It's My Life", originally released in 1984 by the synth-pop band Talk Talk. Because the band were taking a break while lead singer Stefani recorded her solo debut album Love. Angel. Music. Baby., they decided to do a cover version to avoid having to write a new song. The band listened to hundreds of songs and narrowed it down to "It's My Life" and the song "Don't Change", released in 1982 by Australian new wave band INXS. No Doubt had doubts on recording a cover and contemplated writing new material, but decided on "It's My Life" after rehearsing the song with producer Nellee Hooper, referring to it as a "feel-good" song. Stefani stated:

"We thought [choosing a song to cover] was going to be so easy, because that was the idea—'Let's just do something that's fun and easy, why do we also have to, like, torture ourselves.' We went and listened to hundreds of songs, hundreds, and imagine trying to pick one, between the four of us? Oh my God, it was ridiculous."

"It's My Life" later became one of the band's biggest hits, being certified platinum by the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA) and gold by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The song was nominated for Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocals at the 47th Grammy Awards, but lost out to Los Lonely Boys' "Heaven". Stuart Price (also known as Jacques Lu Cont), the song's programmer, created the Thin White Duke mix of "It's My Life", which won the award for Best Remixed Recording, Non-Classical.

Critical reception
The Singles 1992–2003 received generally positive reviews from music critics. Mike McGuirk of Rhapsody described the album as "a real joy for anyone who has a taste for Gwen Stefani's yearning vocals and her band's uncanny ability to mix ska, teen pop and hip-hop." Stephen Thomas Erlewine of AllMusic called the album a "stellar collection", concluding that it is "the kind of compilation that satisfies fans of all stripes and converts skeptics. It's the greatest-hits package that [No Doubt] deserve[s]." Anthony Thornton of NME stated, "Despite being an album packed with as much drama as the band themselves have suffered, it'll be the pop anthems you come back for and fortunately there's enough here to keep even the soap addicts happy." Sara McDonnell of musicOMH wrote that the album's music had "sheer diversity" due to the band's "pick 'n mix approach to musical styles". The high points were "Gwen Stefani's lyrics, which deal principally with coming to terms with her own femininity" and "the band's collaborations with various hip producers", such as The Neptunes, Nellee Hooper and Sly and Robbie; and the low points were the album's "hotch-potch feel", "random tracklisting" and the "forays into reggae". Ruth Mitchell of the BBC Music viewed the album as a typical Christmas album that was "unlikely to stand out from the crowd" and "too long, [getting] tiresome about half way through", although complimenting "Just a Girl", "Hey Baby" and "Underneath It All". However, she also expressed disappointment at the placement of "Don't Speak", "the foursome's most glorious pop moment", at the end of the album. The Rolling Stone Album Guide later gave the album four stars out of five.

Commercial performance
The Singles 1992–2003 debuted at number two on the Billboard 200, selling 253,000 copies in its first week. The album was certified double platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) on July 21, 2004, and had sold 2,474,000 copies in the United States. In Canada, the album was certified double platinum on June 13, 2005 by the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA), denoting sales of over 200,000 copies. In Australia, the album was certified gold in 2003 and platinum in 2004 by the Australian Recording Industry Association, signalling sales of over 35,000 and 70,000 units, respectively.

Personnel
Credits adapted from the liner notes of The Singles 1992–2003.

No Doubt

 * Gwen Stefani – vocals
 * Tony Kanal – bass guitar, keyboards (all tracks); programming (tracks 3, 10); saxophone (track 8)
 * Tom Dumont – guitar, keyboards (all tracks); programming (tracks 3, 10)
 * Adrian Young – drums, percussion
 * Eric Stefani – keyboards, piano (1986–1995)

Additional musicians

 * Matthew Wilder – additional keyboards (track 1)
 * Stuart Price – programming (track 2)
 * Gabrial McNair – keyboards (tracks 2, 8); horn arrangement (track 4), piano (tracks 4, 14); trombone (tracks 4, 8, 9, 11); synthesizer (tracks 7, 14); Mellotron (track 12)
 * Bounty Killer – vocals (track 3)
 * Sly Dunbar – programming (track 3)
 * Philip Steir – additional programming (track 3)
 * Stephen Bradley – trumpet (track 4)
 * Fabien Waltmann – programming (tracks 6, 10)
 * Lady Saw – vocals (track 8)
 * Ned Douglas – programming (track 8)
 * Robbie Shakespeare – additional melodic bass (track 8)
 * Andy Potts – saxophone (track 8)
 * Django Stewart – saxophone (track 8)
 * Phil Jordan – trumpet (tracks 9, 11)
 * Stephen Perkins – steel drum (track 11)
 * Melissa Hasin – cello (track 13)
 * Eric Carpenter – saxophone (track 15)
 * Don Hammerstedt – trumpet (track 15)
 * Alex Henderson – trombone (track 15)

Technical

 * Matthew Wilder – production (tracks 1, 5, 9, 11, 13)
 * Phil Kaffel – recording (tracks 1, 5, 13)
 * George Landress – recording (track 1)
 * David J. Holman – mixing (tracks 1, 5, 9, 11, 13)
 * Paul Palmer – mixing (tracks 1, 5, 9, 11, 13)
 * Nellee Hooper – production (tracks 2, 6, 10)
 * No Doubt – production (tracks 2, 3, 6–8, 10, 15, 16)
 * Karl Derfler – recording (tracks 2, 7, 14)
 * Kevin Mills – engineering assistance (track 2)
 * Mark "Spike" Stent – mixing (tracks 2, 3, 6, 8, 10); additional production (tracks 3, 16)
 * Sly & Robbie – production (tracks 3, 8, 16)
 * Dan Chase – recording (tracks 3, 8)
 * Philip Steir – additional production (track 3); remix (track 16)
 * Count – additional engineering (track 3)
 * Tkae Mendez – additional engineering (tracks 3, 8)
 * Rory Baker – additional engineering (tracks 3, 8)
 * Toby Whalen – engineering assistance (tracks 3, 8)
 * Tom Dumont – additional recording (tracks 3, 10)
 * Tony Kanal – additional recording (tracks 3, 10)
 * Brian Jobson – executive production (tracks 3, 8)
 * Wayne Jobson – executive production (tracks 3, 8)
 * Wayne Wilkins – mix programming (tracks 3, 6, 8, 10)
 * Paul "P Dub" Watson – mix programming (tracks 3, 6, 8, 10)
 * John Gould – additional mix programming (tracks 3, 6, 8, 10)
 * Matt Fields – mix engineering assistance (tracks 3, 6, 8, 10)
 * David Treahearn – mix engineering assistance (tracks 3, 6, 8, 10)
 * Keith Uddin – mix engineering assistance (tracks 3, 6, 8, 10)
 * Glen Ballard – production (tracks 4, 12, 14)
 * Alain Johannes – recording (track 4)
 * Scott Campbell – additional recording (tracks 4, 12, 14)
 * Bryan Carrigan – additional recording (tracks 4, 12, 14)
 * Jack Joseph Puig – mixing (tracks 4, 7, 12, 14)
 * Greg Collins – recording (tracks 6, 10)
 * Simon Gogerly – additional engineering (track 6)
 * Anthony Kilhoffer – engineering assistance (tracks 6, 10)
 * Ian Rossiter – engineering assistance (tracks 6, 10)
 * Jerry Harrison – production (track 7)
 * Sean Beavan – sonic manipulation (tracks 7, 14)
 * Matt Hyde – recording (tracks 9, 11)
 * Dito Godwin – production (track 15)
 * Michael Carnevale – recording (track 15)
 * Brian "Big Bass" Gardner – mastering
 * Chuck Reed – post-engineering
 * Jared Andersen – post-engineering

Artwork

 * Jolie Clemens – art direction, design
 * Nicole Frantz – photography, art coordination
 * Stephanie Hsu – photography, art coordination
 * Cindy Cooper – album packaging coordination
 * Frank W. Ockenfels 3 – cover photography
 * Paris Montoya – liner notes
 * Tom Lanham – liner notes
 * Joseph Cultice – photography
 * F. Scott Schafer – photography
 * David LaChapelle – photography
 * Daniel Arsenault – photography
 * Sonya Farrell – photography
 * Jeffrey Bender – photography
 * Chris Cuffaro – photography

title: The Singles 1992–2003


text:
Talk:Chroma key

Untitled
redundant mention of weather map applications in intro paragraph and within article - Johnjosephbachir 01:24, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree. I don't have time to deal with it now, but I added a cleanup tag. cluth 08:25, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

fact check for the History
The statement "Prior to the introduction of digital compositing, the process was a complex and time consuming one known as 'travelling matte'" does not appear to be completely accurate, however I need some help from someone with more expertise. By at least the 60s (maybe earlier) live TV shows used green screens (chroma key) in real-time, apparently using purely electronic video techniques, which I can imagine has something to do with detecting the part of the signal electronically that is the key color and merging a diff video signal into that part. It did not need ANY digital process, but was definitely not time-consuming or overly-complex for the operators of the live TV production (at least not any more complex than anything else production staff do real-time).

In summary, there are three assertions which are an issue in the above referenced statement...

1. Complexity: The context here, complex would be relative other editing technique. It was not complex as it was performed real-time by a live production crew on many shows on a regular basis at least by the 60s.

2. Digital composting: was not the first non-complex technique. (See above statement). This video chroma key was certainly was NOT digital composing (that should go without saying, the RAM required would have taken up a few buildings, ignoring the processing problem). It was a purely analogue electric signaling process.

3. Time Consuming: this is wrong in that Video based Chroma-key was around before digital, and the video technique not time-consuming at all... it was done in real time to a live audience.

Please editors let me know if you disagree or if you think I'm off my rocker. I shall revisit this article to clarify History at a later time. It will be tedious and take me a long time to create such content as I'm non-technical. Hopefully someone else jumps the gun before me!--Retran (talk) 09:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

There is the fact that the video chroma technique was not suitable for inclusion in motion film, the lines of resolution and interpolation in video wreak havoc when transferred to film. I doubt there was some way more advanced non-digital video technique/equipment with an extremely high lines of res, no interpolation, etc, comparable to film employed anywhere notable... but maybe there was? So the digital thing is probably the next step in reducing complexity and thus increasing availability of the technique... This makes makes me think the statement I have issue with in the article was referring to only motion-film. If so, maybe clarifying that point would be all we have to do for now to vastly improve the quality of this article.--Retran (talk) 09:13, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I finally got rid of the "complex and time consuming" sentence. It was a bad start to the "History" section for many reasons. The history of composite shots neither starts with travelling matte, nor jumps straight to digital compositing. And travelling matte is not one process, it's something which can be done several ways as a part of several different processes. Some sources even refer to modern digital processes as using a "travelling matte". Dranorter (talk) 15:12, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

CSO
My knowledge (and limited research) shows that the term CSO is only used by the BBC, oither UK broadcasters use the term Chroma Keying (ITV for instance) --Jmptdc 13:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC) =: I agree. (I don't have a print source for this, but the subtitled commentary on my Doctor Who DVD tells me about it...) 72.147.60.53 02:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Tags
The reasons for the inclusion of the tags will have to be discussed or they will be removed. --WikiCats 10:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Picture?
This article really needs a picture. I'll try to find one, unless someone else already has one.

Jim Henson demo
I recall seeing a special on TV in the 80s on the making of the Muppet Show where Jim Henson and a (real) lion sat against a bluescreen appearing to be in a computer-generated room, and they switched back and forth between a composited and an actual view for demonstration. For further demonstration he put on a blue tie (which the background showed through). I think this was an excellent intro to the technology, especially for kids. I'd add a reference to the article, but can't remember enough details to cite it. I hope someone else might have better luck. Deco 17:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Use in Australia - relevance?
Is the use of this technique limited to Australia, and if not why is this worthy of the article? The technique has been used in most broadcast news in most countries since the mid-late 90's. I'm removing this section. If anyone wants to add it back in with an explaination of WHY it is pertinant to the article please go ahead. The section removed read: Use in Australia National Nine News bulletins in Australia are always broadcast using the green effect background. At TCN-9, where the majority of national bulletins are broadcast, the same newsdesk is used for the morning news, afternoon news, the 6:00pm news and Nightline. Briefly in 2004, Seven News in Melbourne was broadcast with a shot of Melbourne in the background. This was used from August 2004 until mid-2005. Ten News in Adelaide is broadcast using the green effect background. The shot is of the Adelaide River with the Ten News logo in the middle. This version is actually broadcast in Melbourne to save on costs.

ASH1977LAW 15:39, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Though Use in Australia is certainly not needed as a section, there is one interesting implication here: the article as it exists today gives no specific reason that news teams like to use blue screen. I didn't realize it was because they like to have a bunch of different-looking news desks for different things.64.186.47.170 (talk) 07:22, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Advertisement POV
I removed this text from the "Even Lighting" section because it sounded like advertisement: Recently a much simpler and easier way to create an evenly lit background has been developed. By using screens made from a retroreflective fabric illuminated by a ring of LEDs around the camera lens it is possible to produce very even bright blue or green backgrounds whilst only consuming around five watts. Products such as Reflecmedia's Chromatte and LiteRing systems enable chroma key backgrounds to be created very simply and quickly, freeing the user to concentrate on lighting the foreground creatively. The systems are extremely energy efficient and enable users to create virtual studios in areas where space and energy are at a premium. I ran a check on the IP that added the text, 81.187.36.194, and it's registered to "REFLEC-PLC", the same company as Reflecmedia, the company mentioned in the text... Hmmmm... Interesting. Sbrools ( talk .  contribs ) 17:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Good catch! --Ronz 18:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Adobe Flash
Cant Adobe flash do greenscreen by making a background movie clip and making another layer with a different movie clip? Shouldnt this be mentioned in the article?71.53.20.131 (talk) 00:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Flash can output files that include an alpha channel. This is created by simply recognizing areas that have no objects on them - there is no need to make special layers or background clips.  One would not call this "Chroma Key" however, because the alpha channel has nothing to do with the color of any object, but is instead is rendered from the geometry of files.  A rendered alpha channel is invariably superior to chroma key, because you don't need to worry about color ranges or reduced resolution of color channels.  You can also have transparent objects in the flash file allowing the background video to show through. Algr (talk) 07:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Utv cso studio.jpg
Image:Utv cso studio.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

paulscottfilms@yahoo.co.nz Paul Scott This discussion page seems far more technical than the article. I would say it is difficult to deal with a technical issuse like chroma key without use of specialised words, with exact meanings —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterquixote (talk • contribs) 05:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Racism
The articles says, many times, "human skin", "human skin colour", "human skin pigments", as if only white people were humans (as the article asumes human skin is pinky). I think this point of view is too whitecentric and must be fixed. --87.223.41.137 (talk) 13:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

 * While your concerns are noted, you are incorrect in assuming that the article is referring exclusively to Caucasian skin tones. I've added a reference that states "if the foreground is a person then blue or green backing color is recommended as these colors are not present in human flesh pigments. In fact, human skin color is 70% red for all people regardless of race.". I hope this helps to ease your concerns. --Ckatz chat spy '' 18:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Programming
This section needs some work. The idea that a "program" processes the video on a pixel-by-pixel basis is naive. Earlier, with analog video, this was done using fast video switches. The two video sources had to be frame and line synchronous. The chroma key colored areas were detected with a phase looked loop (PLL). An example of an integrated circuit that could be used for this is the MC1378 by Motorola. Digital video chroma key operation is not programmatic either. A state machine, implemented in digital circuitry, is used. Zen-in (talk) 16:14, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Is there a typo in the Programming section? It appears that

f(r, g, b) → K0 * b − K1 * g + K2

was originally intended to read

f(r, g, b) = K0 * b − K1 * g + K2 * r

Note (1) I added red to the last term (2) I changed the maps to sign (arrow) to an equality (=).

Am I right? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

 * No, the intention is that the last term is a constant and that the red value is not used in the calculation.Spitzak (talk) 00:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks Spitzak. In the article itself, I have inserted an equality (=) . --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Could someone please provide a reference for the example formulae? It would be nice to look at their derivation, but chroma keying gets very little discussion in the standard graphics textbooks. Michael Ashihkmin's paper is a very simplistic discussion (not to disparage its efficacy) and doesn't cover the formulae shown here. Cheers.Fluppeteer (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

 * The math is that used by the Nuke "Keyer" operator, which was implemented by reverse-engineering the keyer in Discreet Logic's Flame in 1995. In both cases these keyers are quite obsolete and do not make acceptable (to modern standard) separations, but the math is simple enough to understand and copy into an arbitrary program.Spitzak (talk) 20:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

The process fact check
The statement "Blue was used before digital keying became commonplace because it was necessary for the optical process" has some problems. It wasn't necessary because it was an "optical process", but the chroma key relied on masking chemically while developing film. And blue is one of the prim colors and the background change could be controlled chemically. This seems to be more accurately described as a chemical process, not an optical one (optical is too broad, yes it employs optics though so do digital). That's my non-technical understanding anyway. --Retran (talk) 09:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Some clarity on this point would be nice, yes. My impression is: 1) Blue was apparently favored before the digital processes. 2) A "chemical process" was not involved. I thought at first there was some special "blue screen" film, a high-contrast monochromatic film using some specific chemical. However, I think what's going on is that a colored filter was used with black and white film when creating the matte. 3) Blue has a shorter wavelength and so is capable of a more detailed, accurate matte than green. I don't know if this makes a practical difference, but it may have been part of the decision, and is probably what a source means if it says blue could be high contrast more easily or could be more accurate.64.186.47.170 (talk) 10:28, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * After rereading the section I decided to delete the offending sentence. (As of today it read "Blue was preferred as a backdrop before digital keying became commonplace because of the existence of high contrast film that was sensitive only to the blue color.") It's making too strong a claim without a source, and the previous paragraph does a better job. Still, it would be nice to have sources verifying why exactly the blue color was popular; it seems like the technology for green screen basically existed. Another possible factor that comes to mind is the low luminosity of blue?64.186.47.170 (talk) 10:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Really?
"This technique is also used in the entertainment industry, the iconic theatre shots in Mystery Science Theater 3000, for example."

MST3K is the best example of this being used in the entertainment field? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.84.11 (talk) 20:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

What Video camera?
Could a blue and green screen work on any video camera? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.53.3 (talk) 03:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, any color camera could work. However, the quality of the result would vary widely depending on the nature of the camera.  The worst case would be if the blue screen image was being played back from something like SVHS or Hi8, as these formats reduce the chroma resolution to well below what NTSC can do.  A camera with component out would be much better than composite.  The digital formats all keep chroma resolution reasonably high, and HD is a big help too. Algr (talk) 17:52, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Green vs Blue and eye colour
The "Processing a green backdrop" section claims "Bright green has also become favored since a blue background may match a subject's eye color..." This is not cited, and does not appear to be factual. It implies that a green backdrop cannot match a subject's eye colour, which denies the existence of green-eyed people. Albertanyone (talk) 06:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That seems unlikely. No one naturally has eyes that have nearly as intense color as the blue or green screens used in chroma key.  Algr (talk) 17:52, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * This point is overlooked in another context. As I understand it, keying is based not only on the hue, but on its saturation. A person could wear a light-blue shirt or dress against a backdrop of the same hue, without it causing problems. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 23:37, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I think this oversight is a significant one. Mostly what I came to the article for was to learn a little more about issues like this; is keying based on hue alone? How much variation in hue is allowed? etc. 64.186.47.170 (talk) 08:11, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Ultimatte
I was looking for an article on Ultimatte. Wikipedia doesn't appear to have one.WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 23:42, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

major error
"In analog color TV, color is represented by the phase of the chroma subcarrier relative to a reference oscillator. Chroma key is achieved by comparing the phase of the video to the phase corresponding to the preselected color. In-phase portions of the video are replaced by the alternate background video."

This isn't true. Chroma keying occurs using the primary-color signals, long before they're manipulated to produce the NTSC or PAL subcarrier. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 16:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

"Background" section
I removed the following sentence from the "Background" section, end of 1st ¶: "For example, in John Pizzarelli's song Birthday Emotions from the Sesame Street television series, painting backgrounds made by Gerri Brioso are used as a live-action film sequence while the kids such as the Italian-American siblings are jumping through the air and celebrating one of their birthday parties."

There is no reference given and the example is not particularly clear, and too detailed. It's supposed to be an example of red backdrops being okay.

That paragraph could use work overall. 64.186.47.170 (talk) 07:47, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

OK I removed another, more thoroughly irrelevant example, and renamed this section to "background color". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.186.47.170 (talk) 08:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Removed "Citation Needed" from paragraph about Tosh.0. It's not a mystery or unfounded rumor. The green chroma key set is shown at the end of every single episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.36.244.10 (talk) 21:53, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Bluescreen vs Chroma Key
I missed some points people made until a second read-through so I've decided to throw all the old merger discussion into one section. Assertions as to what Chroma Key technically means and how it's used seem to be all over the place. There is a little more back at Talk:Bluescreen. Dranorter (talk) 15:23, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Arthur Widmer
Why is there no mention in any of the articles of Arthur Widmer, the inventor of BlueScreen? Seems none of the articles are complete, and so to merge at present would seem unwise/premature Rgds - Trident13 17:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. It is true that none of the articles are complete, but attempting to rectify this in any one article would likely involve adding redundant information. IMO, it is preferable to merge the articles first, then begin to fill in the holes in the collective information. --IntrigueBlue 09:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Merge with Bluescreen
I agree that Bluescreen should be merged into this article. --WikiCats 14:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Bluescreen and greenscreen are types of chroma keying!

Yes, but they it is essential information. It should be merged, along with Greenscreen. --Ksong12 13:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they should be merged. --24.238.178.85 21:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Wait a minute: all these terms, in both film and video, relate to systems of compositing. That article needs work, though it's generally OK as far as it goes. Also, the static or traveling matte pre-digital film technology also used blue (or other color) background screens for compositing. I don't think we've yet found the top of the subject hierarchy here. Jim Stinson 03:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Come to think of it, front and rear screen projection are forms of compositing, as are the glass shots used to combine action with painted set extensions on the original camera negative (The long road up to Ashley Wilkes' plantation in Gone With the Wind is a classic glass shot.) Jim Stinson 20:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Merging bluescreen
I also agree that the article bluescreen should be merged into this, since bluescreen is a subset of chroma keying.

I am changing my vote on merging this article with bluescreen because Chroma key is about television and Bluescreen is about film. They should be separate but have references to each other. --WikiCats 10:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

 * It seems that the proposed merge has not yet happened, so I would also like to go on record supporting a merge of Chromakey, Bluescreening, and Greenscreening. IMHO, the merged article belongs under Chromakey.  Bluescreening and Greenscreening make sense as redirects to a merged article under Chromakey.  Bluescreening is not unique to film at all.  Chromakey with video does tend to use a green background instead of a blue one, but this is far from universal.  I've probably done very nearly as much compositing where I had to key out blue in video as I have with green.  The techniques and concepts are identical. Forkazoo 23:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that they're the same thing, or at least so close that they could be covered accurately by a single article. I don't think anyone looking for information on one will be discouraged by information about the other being present in the same article. Gregory j 11:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that blue screen is a subset of chroma keying. There should be a section in chroma keying that talks about bluescreen as an application, while the search "bluescreen" redirects to the chroma keying article. zapp645 7:11, 19 October 2006

I think there is a certain amount of duplication between the two pages, but they are about (slightly) different topics. Bluescreening is the term known by most people so should remain active, even if only to site a reference to chroma-key. Alternatively how about Chroma Key (Bluescreening)? --A320sean 19:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the two articles can be merged but wouldn't it make more sense to merge this article into bluescreen with a redirect from Chroma Key to bluescreen? After all, bluescreen is the larger of the two articles and this one could easily be made to fit into it. The subject matter is practically the same. I know that bluescreen is technically just a part of chroma keying but it is by far the more well-known term and so it would be easier for readers if that is where the information was as they would be more likely to search that one first. Silent Mime 23:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

But the point is that bluescreen is a subset of the chromakey as a function. So is greenscreen or other new reflective material screens. They should all be combined into the chromakey article and subdivided there into their respective subsets.

New compositing article
The use of blue screen (aka green screen and chroma key)in visual effects is included in the new article Compositing. Jim Stinson 22:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Horrible Merger
Why has Blue screen been redirected to the out-moded term Chroma Key? Merging is a good idea, but merging from one specific term to another specific term, instead of a more general categorical term only adds inaccuracy. Chroma Key is a video only process that has gone out of favor for the most part. It certainly isn't used by the film industry and most video production artists today. Motion Image Compositing (or something else) would be a much better general term. --StevenBradford 22:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Video versus Film
I understood that the term "Chroma Key" only refers to the VIDEO process of blue screen. The process for doing this is totally different when performed on video instead of film, and because of digital intermediates, the film version that is described at length is now obsolete. Doctor Who made extensive use of Chroma Key starting in 1970. -- Algr (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Chroma key is a video process. It is not an film process. These should be clearly separated into two articles. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 23:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

 * What is the difference between video and film? It seems to me there is some need for one article about the various techniques which colloquially get called "blue screen" or "green screen" — that is, archtypically, techniques for making a person whose moving image is captured in the studio appear in the final product against a background which wasn't there in studio. Every technique which can accomplish this has some other uses too of course, but when people say "blue screen" or "green screen" that's what they're thinking of. Currently "green screen" redirects here to chroma key, and "blue screen" redirects to a disambiguation page leading to chroma key.
 * I realize a distinction can be made between video and film. And this article does, in places, need to be more specific about which techniques are chemical (ie, film) vs. optical (prisms, filters) vs. electronic vs. digital. (My impression is there was a stage during which electronic but not truly digital processing was state of the art?) "Chroma key is a video process" just seems a little beside the point to the average person actually seeking out this page.
 * We can't split hairs about what is and isn't chroma key. Nobody uses chroma key anyway. "Chroma key" as a technical term refers to chroma key as opposed to luma key or keying on any other dimension. Modern image compositing software is going to use chroma, luma, and other tricks to identify the backdrop. I don't have a good citation but if you google "not just chroma" you'll get quotes like "the newest generation of keyers are not just chroma keyers", "I think it's far more important that there be very robust controls on a keyer - hue selection, tolerance, edge tolerance and smoothing etc... And support for both luma and alpha channel keys are a must also, not just chroma key.", "they're not just relying on differences in chrominance (color), but also luminance (brightness differences) and other cool mathematical stuff that I can’t hope to understand."64.186.47.170 (talk) 05:00, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Aha, here is a citation on the term "chroma key" almost always being abused in modern usage. The Green Screen Handbook: Real-World Production Techniques, by Jeff Foster; page 29. "The term chroma key is often used loosely to mean anything that refers to pulling a color-difference matte from film or video footage." (Bolding mine.) 64.186.47.170 (talk) 10:42, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Terminology
There are several points where the article needs to take some care to be internally consistent with its terminology. I don't know enough to try and edit it all the way through. I realize there's no right answer on some of these, but consistency would be nice. Please feel free to edit my words beyond this point. Dranorter (talk) 15:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

 * "Blue screen" vs. "Bluescreen"? Bluescreen.
 * "Film" should be used as a verb only in sentences specifically referring to actual film. "Capture", "record", "shoot" seem more general.
 * Can "video" refer to film? I don't know whether this term is general enough to be used in phrases like the opening sentence, "technique for compositing (layering) two images or video streams together".
 * Can "footage" be used to refer to digital video? Is there a good alternative?
 * "Screen" vs. "background" vs. "backdrop".
 * Do we follow the convention some books use and call certain digital processes a "matte"?
 * "Movie" versus "film" - is "movie" an acceptable general term?

 * Bluescreen does seem to be used much more than Blue screen but think about it. Except for the color, Chroma Key using a Blue screen is exactly the same as Chroma key using a Green screen, right? So Bluescreen does not refer to something unique. Quite often people use terms without really thinking about them and you are trying to correct that and that is something I am likely to do but I think that Bluescreen requires more thought. Sam Tomato (talk) 01:26, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chroma key. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071029042547/http://www.skinyourscreen.com/site/Articles/so-you-wanna-make-a-theme to http://www.skinyourscreen.com/site/Articles/so-you-wanna-make-a-theme

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:02, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

i need your help mates
got a school presentation bout cinematics and special effect I would really appreciate you help thanks for your consideration contact me on orfeas987@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.129.13.129 (talk) 11:51, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Blue screen, green screen vs bluescreen, greenscreen
Should these terms be one word or two? --Khajidha (talk) 12:08, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Usage in video games?
The article twice states in the opening that chroma keying is used in video games, but does not elaborate or give any examples of this. The only games I could think of would be something like EyeToy: Play where it recognizes changes in pixels, but this doesn't really qualify as true chroma keying. Ethanicus (talk) 19:19, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I suppose it could be used to produce cut scenes, or to use live action actors as part of a video game. But I agree this is not really used by video games, it is not used by any technology where the image is generated rather than photographed. Also "magic pink" was put in, that is a hand-painted color used to indicate transparent areas in sprites in very old games, it is not photographed and is has nothing to do with this either.

Rear projection
The section Predecessors should mention rear projection. A bit above on this talkpage, it seems somebody tried to argue against including rear projection by calling it "a form of compositing". But that's irrelevant as the function is largely the same: If you wanted to replace a background before the wide use of chroma keying (or as an alternative to it), you would often use rear projection. --46.93.152.142 (talk) 20:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chroma key


text:
User:Etu

I am collecting comments if we could create Wikipedia-like postage stamp catalog. Please comment to my discussion page.

title: User:Etu


text:
User talk:Rhadamanthus~enwiki

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 01:25, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Rhadamanthus. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Rhadamanthus~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 02:40, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rhadamanthus~enwiki


text:
User talk:Dcordero7965

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 01:25, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dcordero7965


text:
Eric Stefani

Eric Matthew Stefani (born June 17, 1967) is an American musician, composer, writer and animator best known as the founder and former member of the ska punk band No Doubt. He is the older brother of former bandmate Gwen Stefani and is also a former animator on the television series The Simpsons and The Ren & Stimpy Show.

Early life and education
Stefani is the son of Dennis and Patti Stefani. He attended Loara High School in Anaheim, California. He worked at a Dairy Queen with his sister Gwen and John Spence. He studied animation at the California Institute of the Arts in 1991.

According to No Doubt's guitarist Tom Dumont, Eric was able to write music for the band despite not knowing music theory—an accomplishment that impressed Dumont since he was a music major.

Career
Stefani, his sister Gwen and John Spence formed the band No Doubt in 1986. The group added several members and performed live shows at venues such as Fenders Ballroom in Long Beach. The group started writing original material much of which Eric Stefani contributed. He left once the band's album Tragic Kingdom was recorded. Eric and Gwen were nominated as a songwriting team at the 1998 Grammy Awards for Song of the Year for "Don't Speak".

Stefani left the group before their breakthrough to work in animation full time, previously splitting his time with the band, and working for The Simpsons. The episode "Homerpalooza" contains a quick scene, drawn by Stefani, where the members of No Doubt appear, although they aren't featured.

In an interview on Late Night with Seth Meyers on October 26, 2020, Gwen revealed that Eric recorded some instrumentation on one of the tracks for her upcoming album, which ended up being "Let Me Reintroduce Myself".

title: Eric Stefani