Template talk:Armor gallery

"set" parameter

I called it skin because of things like Temple armor - there are lots of sets corresponding to the same skin. The gallery technically displays the skin. All the set pages will link to the skin page, which links to the gallery. Might be overly pedantic but that was the thought behind it. pling 16:18, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with this. Making the skin images re-usable for different sets is a good thing. —Dr Ishmael 16:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

The armor gallery overview template uses "set", the pedantic is throwing me off a little.--Relyk ~ talk > 19:21, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

That should probably be changed to skin, then. The point is that we don't need 6 sets of images for the differently-named Temple armor sets when they can all use 1 set of images for the skin. —Dr Ishmael 20:29, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Should all pages use this template?

Are all armor pages supposed to be using this template? I was viewing for example the Winged armor page, and it is done completely differently, with sections like "Armor overview with dye areas" and all armor pieces separately etc, which is different from what the dungeon armor galleries look like. I assume the goal is to get the same layout on all armor pages, so should this armor gallery template be used on all armor pages or are the ones for example at Winged armor more correct? Sorry, I'm still new to this wiki stuff :) -Tulen elementti (talk) 15:26, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

This is intended to be the new gallery format. I don't see the benefit of piece-by-piece images myself, but then I don't see the point of mix-and-matching your armor, either. Still, there's no reason we can't have both. —Dr Ishmael 15:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Redundancy among humanoids

I apologize if this has already been brought up elsewhere. Looking at the armor galleries, it appears that there are really three types of appearance for armor: humanoid (human, norn, sylvari), charr and asura. Therefore, I am suggesting that we condense the human, norn and sylvari appearances into a single gallery using humans, and keep the charr and asura ones as they are. Aqua (talk) 21:55, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

That is true in most cases. But I remember that a friend of mine told me that he cound found a certain piece of equipment until he relized it that he already had the piece but it looked diffrent on humans and norn. So I would be a bit cautious with that condensation, but I think for the most parts you are right. - Yandere 23:20, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Gallery sub-page expects more variables than it needs

I moved the gallery for chain armor to a [[Chain armor/gallery|sub page]], however when the gallery gets put on a sub-page, its set up to automatically expect a weight parameter, and it doesn't work properly without one. I'm not sure what the best way of fixing this is, should I just put the gallery back on the main page? Psycho Robot (talk) 23:01, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Armor gallery formatting, that's because you're suppose to split it by weight.--Relyk ~ talk < 23:30, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

But for chain armor, there's only one weight. Psycho Robot (talk) 00:07, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

No need for a subpage then. So yeah, supply the correct weight (heavy) put it on the main page.--Relyk ~ talk < 00:13, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The only reason I wanted to put it on a sub page was because the table of contents was getting excessively long on the main page. Do you think that's not something that I should be concerning myself with? Psycho Robot (talk) 00:51, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

It's a separate problem from the gallery, you can ignore it.--Relyk ~ talk < 00:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The gallery is the shortest bit on that page, its the very specific crafting tables that are killing the length. -Chieftain Alex 08:22, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Removing sides, keeping front and back?

So, as some of you might be aware, the german wiki has apparently started on their complete armor gallery project, and sadly for us, their template for armor galleries does not include left and right angles, just front and back. Since we're going to take their high-quality images over ours, it would leave a gap between the two sides (front and back) and the old images (left and right), since we won't have any images for those.

Why not just discard the two angles altogether? They rarely offer any real benefits, as most armors' decorations can be seen from the front/back, making left and right rather useless. It would both make the whole process of uploading images a whole lot easier for future uploaders and would allow us to have a consistent gallery across all armors. Some angles even [[:File:Prowler armor charr both left.jpg|obscure]] the majority of the image and extend the contents of the pages.

I understand it would require a mass deletion of, well, quite a lot of files, but I think that with the new upcoming galleries it would make much more sense to adapt to those changes. Another proposition is to communicate with the german wiki, and see if they could possibly implement our left and right angles into their galleries, but that would require more work than the other method. --Ventriloquist 13:59, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Someone can add the side shots later? Angles that get obscured in the preview screen shouldn't use the preview screen.--Relyk ~ talk < 14:10, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

They don't have it as part of their infobox. They most likely replaced it with male and female images for unisex armor, since charr and asura have the identical-looking armor for 99.5% of armors and outfits. --Ventriloquist 14:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

For GW1, which didn't have any sort of preview functionality, it was almost required for the wiki to document every angle of the armor in order for readers to get the full picture (pun not intentional, but I'll take it). GW2's easy-to-use preview feature has removed that onus from us, since anyone can take the item/skin codes that we provide and view the armor in full 360°, and even add dyes to the preview. There's no way that we can match that functionality, so I think it's reasonable for us to back down from our usual "DOCUMENT ALL THE THINGS!" mission statement in this case. —Dr Ishmael 14:28, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I agree, I'm assuming most people looking for armor sets just want a quick overview of it, maybe grab the IDs and then paste it in-game, with the freedom to rotate or re-dye however they please. If the armor set/outfit has something distinct on the sides, it could warrant an image somewhere on the page, but not ten pictures that rarely get uploaded. --Ventriloquist 10:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

"ten pictures that rarely get uploaded." That's patently untrue as all the views tend to be made and upload at the same time.--Relyk ~ talk < 15:18, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

For the newer outfits on human females, sure, but there are a bunch of armors that are lacking in the norn male department. Some armors have primarily female variants uploaded, while others almost nothing. Sure, we could wait for someone to upload them, but as I mentioned before, there are sets since release that haven't been updated. --Ventriloquist 15:39, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I only just noticed this discussion, so I'll just give a general perspective on the armor project. All the images that have been uploaded are taken from Chiubi's (and other people's) live accounts, because there are technical restrictions of us using the testing clients for armor images (from the login screen). We're working with ArenaNet to get those fixed / worked around, but it might take a little while. Generally, we haven't used side views of armors due to them being redundant most of the time, and the associated reduced work load. We do take armor pictures for all races and genders, though, even if there's a shared skin (Asura m/f, Human/Norn), since the interaction with different base meshes tends to show (see Kleidungsset des Edlen Grafen) and compare the female human / norn body sizes. Unrelated note: if there's anything you guys need, just post on my talk page here or over on DE for a faster reply. :) --Tera (talk) 18:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, Tera. I was wondering if there was a reason why the project seemingly stopped; is it still being perfected or were there simply not enough time to upload the majority of the missing armors/outfits? --Ventriloquist 21:19, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

So, technically, the project hasn't officially started yet. The current pictures are taken on the login screen (it has the perfect lighting). On the testing client, the login screen is watermarked by default, and it can't be turned off like it can ingame (which was done for the weapon pictures), so we're working on another location. I still want to do it, but Chiubi and myself, we're perfectionists, and the situation is not perfect yet. Also, I didn't have too much time to work on this project... maybe we can do something early next year, though. I'll try and keep you updated! --Tera (talk) 23:58, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Ah, was wondering where you got those images from, thought it was some sort of model-viewer or something similar. It's great to hear that it's in the works and I look forward to seeing your hard work pay off once again! --Ventriloquist 00:07, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Upcoming removal of side views

Since the German wiki started with their armor-gallery-revamp project, I'm keen on removing the side views from the formatting completely, if everyone's okay with that. It will leave a lot of orphaned images, which I may or may not bug Alex about. Ventriloquist 22:06, 18 February 2015 (UTC)