Commons:Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi muilla kielillä:
Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | فارسی | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | молдовеняскэ | norsk bokmål | português | polski | română | русский | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi        Statuksen poistoehdotukset Statuksen poistoehdotukset

Alla on tämänhetkiset ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi. Huomaa, että tämä ei ole sama asia kuin päivän kuva.

Ehdottaminen[edit]

Ohjeita ehdottajille[edit]

Lue läpi Commons:Image guidelines ennen kuvan ehdottamista.

Alla on yhteenveto siitä, mitä tulee tarkastella arvioidessa kuvan sopivuutta suositelluksi kuvaksi:

  • Resoluutio – Yleensä kuvat, joiden resoluutio on alle kaksi megapikseliä, on hylätty. Alle kahden megapikselin kuva voidaan hyväksyä vain poikkeustapauksessa. Huomaa, että kuvassa, jonka resoluutio on 1 600 × 1 200, on noin 1,92 megapikseliä, joten se on kelvoton.
Commonsissa sijaitsevia kuvia voidaan käyttää muuhunkin kuin tietokoneen näytöllä katselemiseen. Niitä voidaan tulostaa tai katsella suurella resoluutiolla olevilla monitoreilla. Emme voi ennustaa, millaisia laitteistot tulevat olemaan tulevaisuudessa, joten kuvan tulee olla niin suurella resoluutiolla kuin mahdollista.
  • Fokus – kuvan tärkeimpien kohteiden tulisi olla teräviä.
  • Edusta ja tausta – edustalla ja taustalla olevat asiat voivat olla häiritseviä. Tarkista, että edustalla olevat kohteet eivät peitä mitään kuvan kannalta tärkeää ja taustalla olevat kohteet eivät pilaa asetelmaa, esimerkiksi katuvalo ei näytä tulevan jonkun päästä.
  • Tekninen korkealaatuisuus – suositellun kuvan tulee olla teknisesti korkealaatuinen.
  • Digitaaliset manipulaatiot eivät saa vetää nenästä kuvan katsojaa. Kuvassa olevien kauneusvirheiden korjaaminen on sallittua, jos korjaus on tehty hyvin ja sen tarkoituksena ei ole vääristää kuvaa. Hyväksyttäjä manipulaatioita ovat rajaus, perspektiivin oikaisu, terävöittäminen, sumentaminen ja valotuksen sekä värien korjailu. Monimutkaisemmat manipulaatiot ovat sallittuja vain, jos mallinetta {{Retouched picture}} käytetään kuvaussivulla. Kuvauksettomat tai väärin kuvatut monimutkaiset manipulaatiot ovat kiellettyjä.
  • Arvo – päätavoitteenamme on erottaa arvokkaimmat kuvat muista. Suositellun kuvan tulee olla jotenkin erikoinen.
    • Auringonlaskuista otetut valokuvat ovat kaikki vähän samanlaisia (Valokuvia)(Suomessa otettuja valokuvia)
    • Yökuvat saattavat olla hienompia, mutta päiväkuvista ilmenee yleensä enemmän tietoa
    • Kaunis ei ole sama asia kuin arvokas

Teknisiä yksityiskohtia käsitellään kohdissa valotus, asetelma, liikkeenhallinta ja terävyysalue.

  • Valotus – valotuksella tarkoitetaan valokuvauksessa kameran filmiin tallentuvaa tai digitaalikamerassa valoherkän kennon tallentamaa valon määrää. Valotuksen tulisi olla sopiva. Laajat ylivalottuneet alueet ovat usein häiritseviä.
  • Asetelma – asetelmalla tarkoitetaan kuvan esineiden sijoittumista toisiinsa nähden. ”Kolmoissääntö” (esimerkkikuva) on hyvä nyrkkisääntö siitä, millainen on hyvä asetelma. Kolmoissäännön ideana on, että kuva jaetaan kahdella pystyviivalla ja kahdella vaakaviivalla yhdeksään osaan (3×3). Pääaiheen sijoittaminen tiukasti kuvan keskelle on yleensä huonompi vaihtoehto mielenkiintoisuuden kannalta kuin pääaiheen sijoittaminen johonkin neljästä viivojen muodostamasta risteyksestä. Horisonttia ei tulisi sijoittaa kuvan keskelle, vaan jommankumman viivan keskelle. Kolmoissäännön avulla saadaan luotua dynaaminen kuva.
  • Liikkeenhallinta – liikkeenhallinnalla tarkoitetaan sitä, miten liike näkyy kuvassa. Liike voi olla terävää tai epätarkkaa. Jompikumpi aina ei ole paras vaihtoehto, vaan tärkeintä on aikomus havainnollistaa jotain. Liike on suhteellista kuvan kohteisiin verrattuna. Esimerkiksi valokuva ralliautosta, joka näyttäisi olevan paikallaan taustaa vasten, on huonompi vaihtoehto kuin valokuva ralliautosta, joka näkyy terävästi, mutta jonka tausta on sumuista, koska tällöin liikkeen huomaa helposti. Tätä kutsutaan ”panoroinniksi”. Toisaalta valokuva hyppäävästä koripallon pelaajasta, joka näyttää olevan paikallaan taustaa vasten, on hyvä sen epäluonnollisuuden takia.
  • Terävyysalue – terävyysalueella tarkoitetaan kuvan kohteen terävyyttä ympäristöön verrattuna. Terävyysalue valitaan jokaisen kuvan kohdalla erikseen. Suuri tai pieni terävyysalue voi huonontaa tai parantaa kuvan laatua. Pientä terävyysaluetta voidaan käyttää erottamaan pääkohde muusta ympäristöstä. Näin katsojan huomio kiinnittyy haluttuun kohteeseen. Suurta terävyysaluetta voidaan taas käyttää tilan havainnollistamiseen. Lähtökohtaisesti syväterävyysalue muodostuu sitä lyhyemmäksi, mitä suurempaa aukkoarvoa valokuvaaja käyttää. Vastaavasti pientä aukkoarvoa käytettäessä syväterävyysalue voi ulottua kuvan etualalta äärettömään. Aukon arvon lisäksi syväterävyysalueeseen vaikuttaa kuitenkin myös objektiivin todellinen polttoväli ja toisaalta kohteen etäisyys kuvaajasta.

Alla käsitellään vielä grafiikkaa.

  • Terävyys – pääkohteiden ääriviivojen on oltava teräviä.
  • Kolmiulotteisuus – kolmiulotteisuuden on oltava laadukasta. Parhaiten tämä onnistuu siten, että valo tulee kohteen sivulta. Yleensä kuvaajasta päin tuleva valo ei onnistu luomaan kunnollista kolmiulotteista vaikutelmaa, vaan se johtaa litteään vaikutelmaan. Paras valo ulkona on aamulla tai illalla.
  • Värit – värit eivät saa olla liian kylläisiä.
  • Tekstuuri – kohteen pinnan on oltava kolmiulotteisen näköinen ja laadukas.
  • Perspektiivi – kuvan tulee olla kolmiulotteinen.
  • Tasapaino – kuvan kohteiden tulisi olla tasapainossa keskenään. Suurta määrää kohteita ei tulisi jommallakummalla puolella.
  • Mittasuhde – mittasuhteella tarkoitetaan kuvan kohteiden kokoa toisiinsa verrattuna. Yleensä meillä taipumus esittää pienet kohteet pieninä, mutta toisaalta pienen kohteen esittäminen suurena luonnossa suurta kohdetta vasten on myös hyvä tekniikka, esimerkiksi kukan esittäminen vuorta vasten.
  • Symbolinen tarkoitus – huono kuva vaikeasta aiheesta on parempi kuin hyvä kuva helposta aiheesta.
Valokuvaaja ja/tai sen katselija voivat tarkastella kuvan kohdetta puolueellisesti. Kuvan arvoa ei tulisi arvioida arvioijan kulttuurillisen taustan perusteella, vaan se tulisi arvioida kuvan kulttuurillisen taustan perusteella. Hyvä kuva ”puhuu” katsojalle herättäen sellaisia tunteita kuin ilo, sympatia, herkkyys, suru, inho, viha ja raivo. Hyvän kuvan herättämät tunteet eivät ole vain positiivisia.

Uuden ehdotuksen lisääminen[edit]

Jos sinusta tuntuu siltä, että olet löytänyt kuvan, josta voisi tulla suositeltu kuva ja jonka kuvaussivulla on hyväksytty ja totuudenmukainen tekijänoikeusmalline, toimi seuraavasti:

Askel 1: Kopioi kuvan nimi alla olevaan laatikkoon ja paina nappia ”Luo äänestyssivu”.


Askel 2: Noudata avautuvalla sivulla olevia ohjeita.

Askel 3: Lisää ehdokaslistan alkuun seuraava koodi:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:KIRJOITA TIEDOSTON NIMI TÄHÄN}}

Äänestäminen[edit]

Käytä äänestäessäsi seuraavia mallineita:

  • {{Support}} luo lopputuloksen Symbol support vote.svg Support. Käytä mallinetta, jos kannatat kuvaa suositelluksi kuvaksi.
  • {{Oppose}} luo lopputuloksen Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Käytä mallinetta, jos vastustat statusta.
  • {{Neutral}} luo lopputuloksen Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Käytä mallinetta, jos äänestät tyhjää.
  • {{Comment}} luo lopputuloksen Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. Käytä mallinetta, jos kommentoit jotakin.
  • {{Info}} luo lopputuloksen Pictogram voting info.svg Info. Käytä mallinetta, jos informoit jostakin.
  • {{Question}} luo lopputuloksen Pictogram voting question.svg Question. Käytä mallinetta, jos kysyt jostakin.

Jos kuvan ei ole mahdollista päästä suositelluksi kuvaksi, lisää äänestyssivulle {{FPX|KIRJOITA TÄHÄN, MIKSI KUVA EI VOI OLLA SUOSITELTU KUVA}}.

Perustele aina mielipiteesi. Muista allekirjoittaa lisäyksesi. Allekirjoittaminen tapahtuu kirjoittamalla ~~~~ kommentin perään tai painamalla työkalurivin painiketta Button sig.png kursorin ollessa sopivalla kohdalla.

Statuksen poistoehdotuksen lisääminen[edit]

Jos jokin suositeltu kuva on mielestäsi kelvoton suositelluksi kuvaksi, voit ehdottaa suositellun kuvan statuksen poistoa.

Sellaisissa äänestyksissä tulee käyttää mallinetta {{Keep}}, joka luo lopputuloksen Symbol keep vote.svg Keep, halutessasi statuksen säilyvän tai mallinetta {{Delist}}, joka luo lopputuloksen Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist , halutessasi statuksen poistoa.

Luodessasi uuden äänestyksen, toimi ohjeen mukaan:

Askel 1: Kopioi kuvan nimi alla olevaan laatikkoon ja paina nappia ”Luo äänestyssivu”.


Askel 2: Noudata avautuvalla sivulla olevia ohjeita.

Askel 3: Lisää ehdokaslistan alkuun seuraava koodi:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/File:KIRJOITA TIEDOSTON NIMI TÄHÄN}}

Käytäntö[edit]

Yleiset säännöt[edit]

  1. Äänestys on auki tasan yhdeksän vuorokautta ehdotuksen tekemisen jälkeen.
  2. Käyttäjätunnuksettomat käyttäjät saavat ehdottaa ja keskustella, mutta eivät äänestää.
  3. Ehdotus ei ole ääni. Ääni on annettava erikseen.
  4. Ehdottaja voi vetää ehdotuksen pois lisäämällä {{withdraw|~~~~}} äänestyssivulle.
  5. Wikimedia Commons ei ole vain Wikipedian kuvavarasto, joten kuvia ei tule arvioida vain Wikipediaan soveltuvuuden perusteella.
  6. Jos kuva ei saa muita kannattavia ääniä kuin ehdottajan viiden vuorokauden kuluessa ehdotuksen tekemisestä, poistoäänestys tulee lopettaa.
  7. Mallineella {{FPX}} merkitty poistoäänestys tulee lopettaa 24 tunnin kuluttua mallineen lisäämisestä, jos muita kannatusääniä kuin ehdottajan ei ole.

Statuksen muutos[edit]

Kuvasta tulee suositeltu kuva, jos se täyttää seuraavat vaatimukset:

  1. Kuvaussivulla on hyväksytty ja totuudenmukainen tekijänoikeusmalline
  2. Vähintään viisi kannatusääntä
  3. Vähintään kaksi kolmasosaa äänistä kannattavia
  4. Saman kuvan eri versiosta vain yksi saa olla suositeltu kuva. Siitä kuvasta, joka on kerännyt eniten kannattavia ääniä, tulee suositeltu kuva.

Statuksen poistoehdotuksen kohdalla sovelletaan samoja sääntöjä. Jos statuksen poistoa kannattavia ääniä ei ole tullut ehdottajan äänen lisäksi viiden vuorokauden kuluessa ehdotuksen teosta, äänestys tulee sulkea.

Ohjeita äänestyksen lopettamisesta on sivulla Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished.

Arvostele hyvien tapojen mukaisesti[edit]

Muista, että kuva jota kommentoit on jonkun tekemä. Älä käytä sellaista tyyliä kommenteissasi kuin ”Vihaan kuvaa”, ”Kuva on ihan ruma” tai ”Kamala kuva”.

Katso myös[edit]

Sisällysluettelo[edit]

Contents

Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi[edit]

Jos uudet ehdotukset eivät näy tällä sivulla, purge this page's cache.

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Heldervue Somerset West.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 08:38:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Heldervue (meaning "clear view") is suburb in Somerset West which is a town in the Western Cape, South Africa. It is situated in the Helderberg area (formerly called Hottentots Holland), about 50 kilometres east of Cape Town central city area, and 10 kilometres from Strand. The town is overlooked by the Helderberg (meaning "clear mountain").

File:Strand Beach Road at Dusk.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 08:31:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Strand Beach Road, Cape Town at Dusk, is a popular beach front walking area in the northern part of Cape Town.

File:Sète from Mount Saint-Clair by night 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 06:17:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sète from Mount Saint-Clair, France

File:Coat of arms of Brazil.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2015 at 22:12:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Reflektion Langkær Gymnasium.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2015 at 10:11:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

reflection in an artwork at Langkær Gymnasium

File:Medusa head by Gianlorenzo Bernini in Musei capitolini.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2015 at 17:33:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Medusa head by Gianlorenzo Bernini in Musei capitolini
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Medusa is a marble sculpture of the eponymous character from the classical myth. It was executed by the Italian sculptor Gianlorenzo Bernini. Its precise date of creation is unknown, but it is likely to have been executed in the 1630s. It was first documented in 1731 when presented to the Palazzo dei Conservatori in Rome, and is now part of the collections of the Capitoline Museums. All by -- LivioAndronico talk 17:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico talk 17:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment rotate it, see note. What was so strong ligth source ? I see no flash was used. --Mile (talk) 17:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC) P.S. I would crop it above the head.
  • ✓ Done Mile,the light is of museum (in the night use a strong light),thanks --LivioAndronico talk 18:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lighting. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unattractive harsh light, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I can't do nothing for the light,but there aren't parts burn out --LivioAndronico talk 19:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Why can you not take a photo of the subject at a time of the day, where the light is better? Just because it is not overexposed, does not mean it is good lightning. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Because was the inauguration of the restoration of the statue and they made at night, I did not say that the light was good for you, in fact, I just said that there aren't burned parts --LivioAndronico talk 20:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Nijubashi bridge Edo castle Tokyo Japan by D Ramey Logan.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2015 at 05:16:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nijubashi bridge at Edo castle in Tokyo Japan is the main entrance to The Imperial Palace
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The scenery in general is interesting and could probably made an FP. But there are imho too many issues with the photo. You should compose / crop your photo more thoroughly - there are some distracting elements in the images borders (see notes). E.g. certain branches hanging from the top are not fortunate. There are further quality issues: CAs, most remarkable at the top right. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose follwing the good review by Tuxyso. — Julian H. 11:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,nice but not very good quality --LivioAndronico talk 16:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxyso. And though it’s above size limit, I expect an FPC of just 6 mpix to be crisp sharp. --Kreuzschnabel 17:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Tuxyso. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxiso. The image is improperly categorized. --Cayambe (talk) 19:58, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What category would you suggest this be in?? --WPPilot (talk) 23:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Category:Edo Castle, Castle with an uppercase C. :-) Regards, --Cayambe (talk) 07:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Alternative 1[edit]

2013 Ahmanson Cup Regatta yacht Zapata II alt 1

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's better now that the issues are fixed, but at 4.5 MP, any bit of unsharpness is too much. --King of ♠ 02:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Kodak BW 2015-02-18 20-07-15.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 15:00:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The shadow goes inwards (bad positioned ligth ?), also camera could be tunred little bit to recth, to see front plane better. --Mile (talk) 15:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kodak of 1902.....good quality....for me is good. The shadow is not disturb for me --LivioAndronico talk 19:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the Shadow is ok. Maybe, right a bit crop? And a little bit more light? But its good for FP to me. --Ralf Roleček 21:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm missing an extra main front light, sorry. --Kadellar (talk) 11:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment [Edit conflict: per Kadellar, pretty much] I really think the front could be a little brighter, this should be relatively simple to correct. It's your choice of course. — Julian H. 11:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Front is too dark for me. Supporting surface could be better cleaned. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Cervo do Pantano Perfil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 14:42:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Close-up of a marsh deer (Blastocerus dichotomus) in Itirapina, São Paulo state, Brazil.
The marsh deer is the largest deer species from South America reaching a length of 2 m (6.6 ft) and a shoulder height of 1.2 m (3.9 ft). It is found in Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay. Formerly found in much of tropical and subtropical South America, it ranged east of the Andes, south from the Amazon rainforest, west of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest and north of the Argentinian Pampa. Today it is largely reduced to isolated populations at marsh and lagoon zones in the Paraná, Paraguay, Araguaia and Guapore river basins. Created and uploaded by Jonathan Wilkins - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Is this deer Airport keeper ? Is it in nature ? --Mile (talk) 15:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High-quality portrait, excellent. --King of ♠ 04:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 08:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 11:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Simple, but effective composition. Less is more. --Pugilist (talk),
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The size is a little small but focus is just on the head and the way of using focal plane is very good. (a bit distracting background though.) --Laitche (talk) 16:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 19:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @ArionEstar: You better change the color space to sRGB otherwise you might be scolded by Colin... --Laitche (talk) 21:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Laitche: Sorry, but what? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
      • I must get round to writing a guide for this. Unless Jonathan Wilkins can save as sRGB from raw, the benefits are reduced. -- 21:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
        • @Colin: OK, I almost understood, thanks and please signature above. @ArionEstar: I am not so good about color space but "Images for the web are most widely viewable when in the sRGB color space." as you can see on that page, and this image's ICC Profile is Adobe RGB (1998). --Laitche (talk) 22:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
        • Never mind, I guess some FP's color space are uncalibrated, same as this :) --Laitche (talk) 23:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Paneles solares en Cariñena, España, 2015-01-08, DD 09-12 PAN.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 14:16:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the photovoltaic power station of Cariñena, Zaragoza, Spain. The panels are mounted on dual axis trackers in order to maximise the intensity of incoming direct radiation. This solution enables the arrays to track the sun in its daily orbit.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of the photovoltaic power station of Cariñena, Zaragoza, Spain. The panels are mounted on dual axis trackers in order to maximise the intensity of incoming direct radiation. This solution enables the arrays to track the sun in its daily orbit. Poco2 14:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 14:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice composition. --Kadellar (talk) 14:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice composition, nice light, nice sky but bad news... stitching errors. --Laitche (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2015 (UTC) fixed. --Laitche (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I suggest litle +contrast and move curve a bit down, its better. Now too brigth. This would be Sci-Fi photo without that tree. --Mile (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good and as already mentioned very futuristic - looks more like artwork than a photovoltaic power station. I found a another stitching error (see note) but I am sure Diego will fix it soon. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ New version uploaded adressing all issues mentioned here (also yours Iifar) Poco2 17:32, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Stitching errors are fixed but moiré appear instead... --Laitche (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC) disappeared. --Laitche (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Moiré gone, thanks! Poco2 18:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I Love this original things,good quality too --LivioAndronico talk 19:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support though a bit hazier than I would have liked. --King of ♠ 04:42, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm not sure if there is a caching problem, but I see a very strong stitching problem with the fence post on the right side. — Julian H. 10:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes, the fences are disappearing or appearing. --Laitche (talk) 11:31, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Oops, how could I miss that? I tried some editing but finally came to the conclusion that the best I can do with the fence is getting rid of it, at least in the middle. Therefore I cropped it and did some minor editing Poco2 14:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Better. :) A weak Symbol support vote.svg Support from me then, because the place really is very cool but the clipping in the middle is quite large in area. — Julian H. 14:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great idea and composition, perfect lighting, reasonable quality. Pity for the CA on the fenceposts to the left. --Kreuzschnabel 17:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ CA gone, that was easy Poco2 17:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The image has huge wow. There is a CA on the fence poles to the left, but it is acceptable for me given the large resolution. I am a little confused about the horizontal angle of view. Could you please indicate that on the file page. A geolocation would also be helpful for understanding better the layout of the solar power plant.-- Slaunger (talk) 19:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    Slaunger: ✓ Done It looks like I uploaded the wrong version, the version uploaded now is free of CA. I also added the geodata Poco2 22:34, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:15-05-23-Berlin-Sachsendamm-Tesla-RalfR-N3S 7354.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 12:50:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tesla Roadster; Breakdown on the highway
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Ralf Roleček
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ralf Roleček 12:50, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice impression. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Please add an other license. Only the "GFDL 1.2 only" license isn't enough. New FPC rule. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, a good idea and a good capture! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice. Ich frage mich, warum du dort mit dem Stativ warst haha. --Kadellar (talk) 14:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Ohne Stativ, Brückengeländer und 4 unscharfe Versuche --Ralf Roleček 14:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interesting shot and composition but it looks a bit loss details, maybe with f/22? --Laitche (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 00:40, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. But I ask—what is the message being sent by this picture? That you shouldn't buy a Tesla because it will break down and you'll be stuck on the side of the road while traffic zooms by? Face-smile.svg Daniel Case (talk) 03:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very intriguing shot. --King of ♠ 04:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm slightly concerned regarding the legal situation of this photo. Based on which interpretation do you regard this as being ok? — Julian H. 10:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Was meinst du? Die Person ist Beiwerk, Nummernschilder brauchen nicht verpixelt werden. --Ralf Roleček 11:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Ich hätte hier stark bezweifelt, dass man sie als Beiwerk bezeichnen kann, aber ich bin natürlich diesbezüglich gar kein Experte. — Julian H. 11:25, 24 May 2015 (UTC) Edit: siehe z.B. hier. — Julian H. 11:29, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
        • "..daß sie auch entfallen könnten, ohne daß Inhalt und Charakter des Bildes sich veränderten.." ist schon lange gelebter Konsens bei deutschen Gerichten. --Ralf Roleček 12:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 11:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A photograph that leaves the viewer slightly puzzled. I am still annoyed that I find it difficult to see the idea behind the composition - but I prefer "annoying" photos that are able to attract my interest. --Pugilist (talk) 11:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:42, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 11:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Code (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:25, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another very good idea, and achievement, for RR.--Jebulon (talk) 19:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good timing with the cars passing by and excellent idea. Eyecatching, and it can serve as an illustration for many kinds of subjects. The motion blur on the passing car naturally draws the attention to the red Tesla and the young lady. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good idea, nice capture. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good photo --Qian.Nivan (talk) 09:18, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Klensmedjan Horndal May 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 07:43:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Horndal iron works.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The blacksmith shop ("klensmedja") of Horndals bruk, Avesta Municipality, Sweden. Tools used in the Lancashire forge of Horndals bruk or the foundry were probably repaired in this workshop. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 07:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arild Vågen (talk) 07:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 12:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Seems there is danger at the camera location. Your life is more important than FP! --Laitche (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is true but it is not a big house, it is possible to shoot from the doorpost.--ArildV (talk) 05:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting subject and very well done. --Code (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 19:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral In thumb I was pretty convinced it would end out with an oppose from me as I find the crop vertically unbalanced (too little below, too much above) and it seemed too dark. However, in full view it is a rather well done photo with many details, good light despite the many dark areas of an usual subject recalling us that "valuable is not always beautiful". -- Slaunger (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Xian China Cultural-Performance-02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 05:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Xian, China: Cultural show
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cccefalon - uploaded by Cccefalon - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer 05:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 05:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Bojars (talk) 06:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment WB is really off. --Mile (talk) 06:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I get the same impression. They must have used some really yellow stage lights. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Maire (talk) 09:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 10:08, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMHO it needs a WB correction. It's to me so yellowish, that it gets disturbing Poco2 12:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose White balance is off. It should have been corrected before nomination in FPC.--Jebulon (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Jebulon, you forgot to sign Poco2 17:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Indeed, thank you. Done now.--Jebulon (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jebulon, I'm aware the lighting was probably colored and it helps to preserve a bit of it but this is still too much. --King of ♠ 20:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I commented on the coloured light on my talk page --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:17, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I don't think anyone's looking for their white shirts to be pure white. But if the yellows were a little less overwhelming... — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I read explanation for ligths and WB, but i have my opinion. There is no camera which would handle WB correct at such "extreme" temperature. Especially when set on Auto white balance. Unless you made calibration with color cards (which doeasnt look like). This and choped hands of woman in rigth. --Mile (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC) P.S. I did try to lower T and it looks little better, i think from RAW could be even better.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, regarding the white balance. It doesn't have to be perfectly neutral in such a case, but too much of the actual variation in colour seems to have been lost here. — Julian H. 11:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Texelgruppe Hohe Wilde 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 21:20:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View on Hochwilde (3480m), a mountain of the Ötztal Alps photographed from a trail near Lazinser Alm inside the Texelgruppe Nature Park
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View on Hochwilde (3480m), a mountain of the Ötztal Alps photographed from a trail near Lazinser Alm inside the Texelgruppe Nature Park
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Good composition, though lighting could be better. --King of ♠ 21:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What had been better light for you here, King of Hearts? The creek and mountain are in sunlight, the trees at the left are partly in shadow which is imho a good contrast to the bright and snowy mountain. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • It's a bit flat, an unavoidable consequence of shooting at noon. Granted, it might be the best possible light for this scene (as sunrise/sunset could create unwanted shadows) which is why I still supported, but not particularly inspiring in an absolute sense. The composition and contrasting colors are what I like about this image. --King of ♠ 05:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As already mentioned, the flat lighting. Personally, the image doesn't bring any wow for me, it's a pretty common sight. Sorry, but I can't see this as FP in any way. --LB 08:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment LB, I tried to capture the beauty of that place. I like the place and think I've chosen I good composition to transport that beauty. For me it is far from being a "common sight". I cannot say if a different shooting time had been better but the valley is quite narrow thus I think you will have distracting shadows, as King of Hearts has mentioned. BTW: A comment "does not bringing any wow for me" is not really appreciating. You should keep in mind that most of us spend a lot of time to produce nice photos. IMHO it is better to stay factual rather emphasizing two times that you cannot imagine why this [bad photo] should be an FP. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Tuxyso, what do you regard as a "factual" review? Dust spots and chroma noise pixel peeping? FP requires an emotional response to an image, "wow", and a failure to deliver that to a reviewer is just important a flaw as any other subjective opinion on composition or lighting. I think "I can't see this as FP in any way" is too strong/rude considering this is far from being FPX. -- Colin (talk) 10:48, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
        • Colin, I can say what is imho no deliberative (better word) review: Writing two times that an photo is no FP in any manner as LC did. It is absolutely OK to write: The images has no wow for me. Assessing FPCs is always subjective and not fully factual. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:56, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Tuxyso: I apologise for saying that I can't see this as FP in any way, I didn't mean to sound rude and I agree that it was too much. I do, however, stand to the statement that the image doesn't appeal to me. I do appreciate your work. --LB 11:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks, LB for the clarification. Everything is fine - the statement (mentioned once) is completely OK. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • {{o}}} Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral as I said during the QI process. For me not good enough with sharpness, therefore not FP-quality. --Hubertl (talk) 10:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hubertl - you've reviewed a different image :) For me the photo is sharp enough - a lot of details are visible on the trees, wood in the foreground and on the mountain itself. --10:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You are right, I am really sorry for my mistake. This one is better, even when I am not absolutely convinced for FP. Sorry. So I go to neutral. --Hubertl (talk) 10:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 12:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive composition. --Laitche (talk) 19:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another picture I wish I could say I had taken. Daniel Case (talk) 20:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm also not comfortable with the light. The very bright snow opposing the very dark shadows leave very little range for everything in-between, and the colours are very muted as a result. — Julian H. 11:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Julian--LivioAndronico talk 16:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me it has wow and I think a reasonable tradeoff has been made regarding the light, presence of shadows and time of day. I almost feel I can sense the fresh air and hear the stream of fresh water coming down. It is a little soft in focus in the upper right corner, but OK for me. I like the diagonal coming down from that corner. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Mount Ida chain Messara plain from Phaistos Crete Greece.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 15:54:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Ida chain and Messara plain from Phaistos
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 15:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Messara plain and the Mount Ida Chain, where Zeus was born, as seen from the archaeological site of Phaistos, Crete, Greece, february 2015.-- Jebulon (talk) 15:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support The kind of landscape I'm always hoping to be able to take and upload myself. Daniel Case (talk) 21:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 06:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry very parts unsharps and don't understand what is the subject--LivioAndronico talk 09:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • The subject is a landscape. Sharp enough for me.--Jebulon (talk) 10:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For me the composition is unbalanced; some of the sky at the top can be cropped off. --King of ♠ 10:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, thanks. --King of ♠ 14:47, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 12:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice landscape and very nice clouds, a bit hazy but acceptable for me. --Laitche (talk) 18:50, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The landscape obviously has a lot of three-dimensional variation and depth, but the flat light hides all of that. There are still a few nice patterns, but I personally don't see a fp-level landscape, sorry. — Julian H. 10:59, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think it is sharp. Many other landscape and monument pictures get support here being much softer. I have suggested a crop, per King of Hearts. --Kadellar (talk) 11:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Nice -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:11, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Kadellar:, @King of Hearts:, I've followed your suggestion, and cropped out a part of the sky. I hope other voters will agree, I don't think it is an "alternative". Everybody disagreeing,(or agreeing now) can change their vote, of course.--Jebulon (talk) 14:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 06:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Leo Tolstoy 1897, black and white, 37767u.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 14:46:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leo Tolstoy, 1897
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by F. W. Taylor (?), restored, uploaded, and nominated by -- Yann (talk) 14:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The best picture we have of Leo Tolstoy, along with File:L.N.Tolstoy Prokudin-Gorsky.jpg, and probably one of the best which exists. -- Yann (talk) 14:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Actually, I don't know who should be credited as Author. The LoC says that F. W. Taylor claimed a copyright, but I doubt he is the photographer of this picture. Yann (talk) 14:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Why black and white ? The original was deliberately sepia ! --Jebulon (talk) 20:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Well, not sepia, but rosy. And I don't think it was deliberate. Yann (talk) 21:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Historic and valued. --Mile (talk) 06:29, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't oppose him --LivioAndronico talk 09:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job, D kuba (talk) 19:19, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality is not the best, but acceptable. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Per my !vote on the English Wikipedia. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:44, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:2014 Picunda, Sobór św. Andrzeja (03).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 13:17:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Andrew the Apostle Cathedral in Pitsunda, Gagra District, Abkhazia.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just a QI for me, sorry. --King of ♠ 10:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For a "clean" exterior building shot, I would expect (probably per King) either great light or some other feature like unusually high resolution or a special composition to make it more than a good QI. — Julian H. 10:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian. --Laitche (talk) 11:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. Just QP. -- Pofka (talk) 15:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Lion d'Afrique.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 12:26:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Clément Bardot - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 12:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice portrait! --Tremonist (talk) 12:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree, very nice! --Halavar (talk) 13:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 17:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Clément Bardot: what kind of shot is it? zoo or wild animal? Poco2 19:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Why this question ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • It is a nice portrait, quality is good and lighting is great. The crop is though pretty tight, that is why I was wondering whether it is a zoo shot where you have no problem to take 50 pictures (animals are used to people) and choose the best one or in a safari where it is sometimes tricky to get such a good picture? Poco2 12:08, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • And this may have an influence on your vote ?--Jebulon (talk) 16:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Does only the result count? I provide as much information as possible of my pictures when I nominate here. I don't expect that from others but in cases like this I'd really appreciate to know whether this animal is captive and stands like this in front of the zoo visitors for hours or is a lucky strike in a safari. What is the problem with that?. Clément Bardot can you please, give a hint about this picture? thanks, Poco2 18:49, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • No, dear Poco, there is no problem for me with that, and, yes, "don't hide behind your finger" as we say in french, only the result count (a pity, I agree). I try too to provide as much infos as possible when I upload - not only nominate in FPC - here in Commons.--Jebulon (talk) 09:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 21:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 21:42, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:08, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But some information, where the photo was taken, would be useful --Llez (talk) 06:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 09:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 10:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support :—< 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:12, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Better description and location are needed and useful. --Kadellar (talk) 14:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:02, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good light, nice expression of the lion. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gorgeous. -- Pofka (talk) 15:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good --Qian.Nivan (talk) 09:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Krause Glucke Sparassis crispa.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 10:55:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fungi Sparassis crispa, Family: Sparassidaceae, Location: Germany, Erbach

File:Going am Wilden Kaiser Panorama 2011-01-29.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 09:26:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wilden Kaiser Panorama
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created &- uploaded by Bernie Kohl - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support A bit overexposed but simply nice. --Laitche (talk) 12:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Beautiful landscape, but especially the summits are blurred. --Tremonist (talk) 12:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Don't see any overexposure. Beautiful, clear, pro --LC-de (talk) 13:35, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although the mountains are a bit soft --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:47, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 19:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. Perfect scene.--LB 19:08, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good picture and I love this place. --Code (talk) 21:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Lovely snow. I don't like the rounded horizon, but I accept it as a result of the wideness of the panorama. --King of ♠ 10:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Moderate support per Laitche. Daniel Case (talk) 20:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very nice scenery, nonetheless slight overexposure / detail loss on the snowy areas and relatively soft. This pano in the high end quality as the winterscapes of Böhringer had been perfect. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Without a doubt very nice, but too bright in my opinion. — Julian H. 10:38, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:29, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Viborg_Katedralskole_Symmetrical.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 06:43:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Morning panorama of the Eastern facade of Viborg Katedralskole, Viborg, Denmark
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Slaunger - uploaded by Slaunger - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 06:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent work, beautiful light. I like the silence of the photo - everything seems to be at the right place and rests in itself. -- Tuxyso (talk) 06:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The sky is too diffused. And what are the shadows in front? --Tremonist (talk) 12:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your review, Tremonist. The shadows in the front are from recently pruned trees in the low hanging morning sun, similar to what you see in the background at the sides. The school is surrounded with such trees. Personally, I think they help guide the eye towards the main subject, but that is of course a matter of taste. I do not quite understand your comment about the diffuse sky, I am afraid. I think it is rather visually attractive. -- Slaunger (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thank you for your comment and for the explanation. There are too many pixels visible in the clouds I think. --Tremonist (talk) 16:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for this nomination, Tuxyso! -- Slaunger (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the goemetry does it -- KlausFoehl (talk) 18:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Both sides are leaning in Poco2 19:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Poco a poco: Well spotted! I also noticed some dust spots, which are best removed from the source images in Lightroom prior to export to PTGui. I think I will rework the whole thing, and add some vertical control lines. Hold on, processing... -- Slaunger (talk) 19:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • ✓ Done. Poco a poco: Perspective corrected, dust spot removed. Tremonist: Look again: I have remorked the sky a bit. -- Slaunger (talk) 06:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 12:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Splendid --LivioAndronico talk 09:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. I spotted a little moire, that should be simple to remove with your brush. -- Colin (talk) 10:35, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Colin: ✓ Done Well spotted and thanks for the advice. I have never tried to fix Moiré patterns before with the adjustment brush in Lightroom, but that worked like a charm. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:56, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose These black lines on the grass are way too distracting. The quality and resolution is great. But not the timing of the shot. Sorry. -- Pofka (talk) 15:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Standardgraph stencils by Lucasbosch[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 May 2015 at 21:17:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Standardgraph 1309 metric nut stencil.jpg

Standardgraph 1310 radius stencil.jpg
Standardgraph 2522 2.5 to 7mm lettering guides.jpg
Standardgraph 1316 circle stencil.jpg
Standardgraph 1186 isometric dimetric stencil.jpg

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created + uploaded by Lucasbosch, Group nomination by ArionEstar -- LB 21:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support All these are already FP on persian Wikipedia-- LB 21:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support More objects! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:34, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question @Lucasbosch: You want me to make a Set for you? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @ArionEstar: That would be great. Would you then also include this one and remove this nomination? Do whatever makes the best sense,. So there are four non-FP stencils left, including this one, see my User page. --LB 06:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • @Lucasbosch: ✓ Done. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • I redirected Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Standardgraph 2522 2.5 to 7mm lettering guides.jpg because I think it would be better if the image is promoted here. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
        • @ArionEstar: Thanks. I just tried to rename the page to "Standardgraph stencils by Lucasbosch" to make it more clear what they are (instead of just "Standardgraphs by...", but now I think I broke it, as the nomination doesn't show up on the FP candidates page. Also this page now is called "Standardgraphs by Lucasbosch" and the plural form isn't appropriate. Could you please see what went wrong? Thanks a lot for your efforts. --LB 17:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very well done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question ArionEstar: can you please explain in which of the 4 variant does this set nomination fall? if you mean it is variant 4 (A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object) then I wonder whether these capture depit all existing variants of its sort or only a few of them. Poco2 19:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Poco a poco: It is only a group of all images with the same theme (standardgraph stencil), with the same quality and the same author. Whence that it is "by Lucasbosch". 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Well, then let me Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. The criteria to define this set is randomed to me. Yes, same author, good quality, no doubt about that, but just images with the same theme without any indication that the set is complete (I remind the expectation of a set: "a group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object"). Sorry, but we need to the more strict with sets and the criteria followed here is not convincing to me. Poco2 12:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
        • @Poco a poco: You think the images should be promoted separately then? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:49, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
          • You can do so, but to be honest, the originality plus of the first nomination would be gone and therefore I wouldn't be too optimistic in achieving further FP stamps (my particular opinion). Poco2 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
            • @Poco a poco: I'm biased here, of course, but my opinion is that my first nomination, the lettering guides, was itself already kind of a set nomination, because the image showed four stencils at once, instead of one image per distinct subject. So I don't see a problem in having this set nomination to complete it. The rule about sets showing all possible variations would simply not be achievable with these objects, so I'm trying to do as well as possible. Are you solely concerned about the set nomination rules or do you think the first nomination (lettering guides) has been much more FP-worthy than the rest of the stencil photographs? --LB 20:46, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
              • For a single nomination it is not an issue whether you have a stencil of each category, your 5 favourites or the most sold of them. If you nominate these works as a set it is a different animal. We expect that the set as a whole falls into one of the 4 categories, and this nomination just doesn't meet any of them. Therefore this nomination is technically invalid (I am surprised about the supporting votes). It is not a matter of taste it is just not aligned with the existing rules, sorry. Poco2 08:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:56, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very interesting, valuable and educational (and...encyclopedic !!), but strongly per Poco.--Jebulon (talk) 16:58, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm with Poco here. — Julian H. 10:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Mausoleum of Galla Placidia ceiling mosaics.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 May 2015 at 20:06:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Garden of Eden" mosaic in mausoleum of Galla Placidia. UNESCO World heritage site. Ravenna, Italy. 5th century A.D.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A mosiac from 5th century A.D called "Garden of Eden" in mausoleum of Galla Placidia. UNESCO World heritage site. Ravenna, Italy. You are looking at ceiling in shape of shell. All by --Mile (talk) 20:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 20:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:52, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 19:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unless this image's colours fall well outside sRGB, could you please save your RAW as sRGB for upload to the internet. Using AdobeRGB is highly likely to cause others to see the wrong colours and extremely likely to not notice any improvement anyway. -- Colin (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done You are right Colin, i didnt notice, colors are more original now. Camera was set so by default, didnt check that since was new. Thanx. --Mile (talk) 06:14, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

File:14 05 2015 Gomphus pulchellus Keiljungfer 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 May 2015 at 17:04:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dragon-fly Gomphus pulchellus
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 17:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 17:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I guess a bit overprocessing (and also maybe downsized too much but I'm not certain.) plus that brown lines(sprigs? stalks?) in background are a bit distracting, but in any case it's a nice photo. --Laitche (talk) 09:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 10:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 13:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support One second exposure? Jee 16:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The dragonfly just molted from the nymph state and couldn't move much because the wings needed to dry. The perfect moment for a longer exposure with iso100. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 09:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the info. Good observation too. Jee 10:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 19:14, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bzzzzzz… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Brilliant. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 14:35, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:14, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:59, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great work. — Julian H. 10:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Rotring Technical Pens by Lucasbosch[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 May 2015 at 16:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Disassembled Rotring Isograph and Rapidograph technical pens, vector drawing.

Rotring Isograph 0.35mm technical pen
Rotring Rapidograph 0.35mm technical pen
ISO line widths and color codes, illustrated with Rotring Rapidograph technical pens

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is a set nomination consisting of four SVG vector image files. The first one shows the technical pens disassembled, image 2 and 3 show them being assembled and the last one shows the full range of line widths available, and their standardized color codes. The two pen versions shown (Isograph and Rapidograph) are the two main product lines by the Rotring brand. All by LB -- LB 16:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LB 16:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Don't you have a version with more resolution? Poco2 18:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Poco It's a SVG, a vector graphic :) --Laitche (talk) 19:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC) should not open it as PNG. --Laitche (talk) 20:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
    Oops, you are right. Actually I thought that it was for real! you got my Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 19:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small for me --LivioAndronico talk 19:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment LivioAndronico just open it normaly and press CTRL + how much you want to...it wont lose resolution since vector graphic. --Mile (talk) 19:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • CTRL + how much you want to works with every image,anyway i delete my oppose,but i'm not very sure --LivioAndronico talk 20:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The difference is, that with a vector graphic like this you can enlarge it infinitely without negative effects. The default display size really doesn't matter here. --El Grafo (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Infinitely? isn't true.--LivioAndronico talk 10:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
That infinitely means you can see the more details in larger images (loss details) but those are not smooth because you can see kinda path (like this) of vector graphics and Bézier curve in larger images, but it's actually infinite at times, that depends on the way of making. --Laitche (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
@LB If my comment is wrong, please remark. --Laitche (talk) 09:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, that looks extremely realistic to me. --El Grafo (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:56, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't understand the composition. Is it a set ? a picture ? Why the series ? Why individuals ? It lacks of clarification to me.--Jebulon (talk) 16:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Jebulon: It's a set nomination consisting of four SVG vector image files (your comment reads as if you think it's all one file). The first one shows the technical pens disassembled, image 2 and 3 show them being assembled and the last one shows the full range of line widths available, and their standardized color codes. The two pen versions shown (Isograph and Rapidograph) are the two main product lines by the Rotring brand. I hope you will reconsider your vote. --LB 20:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks for pinging me. I know and understand what I see, my concern is about the "set" nomination. It is a very impressive work, by the way. --Jebulon (talk) 21:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
        • @Jebulon: Set nominations are okay by the FP nomination rules, and this set can be seen as a "group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object." (see set nomination rules, category 4). The class of object is technical pens currently sold under the Rotring brand, all possible variations are both Rapidograph and Isograph pens and the extra images showing them disassembled and the color codes (and different nib sizes) are for illustrative purposes. --LB 21:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This clear explanation makes sense, I strike my oppose, and I think that such a quality job deserves a support. btw, I'm the proud owner of two FP sets...Smile--Jebulon (talk) 21:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice work. — Julian H. 10:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a great (and very nice) work! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 18:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:59, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Prospect Park New York May 2015 008.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 May 2015 at 00:49:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Prospect Park Lake

File:Still Pond 2, Isabella Plantation, Richmond Park, London, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2015 at 17:24:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Still Pond, Isabella Plantation, Richmond Park, London, UK
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Laitche -- Laitche (talk) 17:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Depicting the interplay of light and the shadow. Beautiful colors, nice composition and good quality. -- Laitche (talk) 17:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not bad, but the other one is better. Too dark for me. Yann (talk) 18:00, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. It's a bit dark yes but it's a shadowy scene, with only small patches of light reaching the pond. I think the brightness is suitable for the scene. And I think it's different enough to the other FPC that it can stand alone. The focus is mostly on the reflection of the pond, with the flowers and trees framing it. Diliff (talk) 19:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, what colors, reflection and light. And nice with a digression from church interiors;) It is good to come out! -- Slaunger (talk) 20:18, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Now this one I can Symbol support vote.svg Support. Daniel Case (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very dreamy. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the diagonals formed by the light. --King of ♠ 00:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 04:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 04:43, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support of course, no doubt, awesome --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This look like a paint --LivioAndronico talk 19:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 10:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Gombak Selangor Batu-Caves-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2015 at 13:34:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The statue of Lord Murugan at Batu Caves, Gombak, Selangor, Malaysia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The 'Lord Murugan Statue' in Batu Caves, Malaysia is the tallest statue of Hindu deity in Malaysia and second tallest statue of Hindu deity in the world.
    All by -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 13:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 13:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 13:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Great view of the statue! (What counts most.) But background blurred a little and readability of inscriptions below could be better. --Tremonist (talk) 13:55, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great everything!!! --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:44, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now this is what we mean by "wow". Daniel Case (talk) 16:55, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 17:44, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Great work and interesting. One perhaps improvable aspect: The cliffs in the background at the top have an almost plastic look. Maybe noise reduction should be applied less agressively there to better bring out the texture? -- Slaunger (talk) 20:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I doubt the signs would be more legible unless Uwe did a panoramic stitch so that they weren't right at the edge of the frame. Wow overcomes minor technical issues for me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Might be slightly oversharpened, but very good anyways. --King of ♠ 00:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 07:44, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Slightly over-sharpened at full size for my taste. On the other hand, that makes the statue really pop at smaller sizes (e.g. 682 × 1,024). --El Grafo (talk) 18:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The bottom crop is tricky and the left part doesn't look straight, but hell of a picture anyhow Poco2 18:59, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 01:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 13:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LC-de (talk) 13:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support Too much contrast. Did you push on the Clarity knob too far? -- Colin (talk) 20:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 10:18, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:23, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 09:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but oversharpened. — Julian H. 10:31, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Purekkari neeme rändrahn 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2015 at 13:03:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Boulder in Cape Purekkari
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by MinuHiiumaa - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice lights, but a little too dark. --Tremonist (talk) 13:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice colors and light but some frame's focus are changed. If that problem is fixed, I would support. --Laitche (talk) 18:40, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support, OK, I overlook that focus change but if the creator can fix it, that would be better. --Laitche (talk) 09:34, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent lighting. Quality is fine IMO. --King of ♠ 00:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per King of Hearts. --Code (talk) 04:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 17:16, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 18:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice light, place and quality, FP to me Poco2 18:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support beautiful --99of9 (talk) 05:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 05:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 11:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 13:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 20:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:23, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. It's realtively dark, but I understand that brightening it would weaken the colours, so that's ok. — Julian H. 10:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Viljandi järv ja lossimäed.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2015 at 13:03:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Viljandi from castle hill
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by TauriV - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Many nice shades of green and blue. --Tremonist (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice compositional theme. --King of ♠ 00:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It looks oversaturated to me Poco2 18:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment per Poco. --Laitche (talk) 19:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Stitching problem on the top left. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I think these are cropping errors not a stitching problem :) --Laitche (talk) 16:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree it looks oversaturated. But not convinced the composition is best or the vista worth the extreme wide-angle projection. -- Colin (talk) 20:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated. — Julian H. 10:20, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated for part, IMO. I'm not sure this kind of landscape deserves a panorama view and such a tough work.--Jebulon (talk) 13:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. River looks completely unrealistic. -- Pofka (talk) 15:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:2015 Góry Złote z Borówkowej.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2015 at 10:10:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden Mountains (Sudetes)

File:Misvormde nevelzwam (Clitocybe nebularis) 02.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2015 at 04:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Fungi

File:Barker Dam Joshua Tree December 2013 004.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2015 at 01:02:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rocks along Barker Dam Trail
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♠ 01:02, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 01:02, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful colours, nice vista, great place overall. --Tremonist (talk) 12:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Pleasant view. Though, I think these shadows are a bit too dark as they almost completely hides some parts. Furthermore, the top of the mountain on the right is missing for me. Probably QP, not FP, but I'll leave it as neutral because I really like the illumination and the atmosphere in it. Still it looks quite ordinary. -- Pofka (talk) 12:44, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I'm not really a fan of the composition actually. It's feels unbalanced and with a lack of compositional focus. What is it trying to show? The afternoon light is nice, but that's about all I can really appreciate about it. Diliff (talk) 22:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Pofka: I filled in the shadows a bit; better? --King of ♠ 00:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes it is, but I still doubt it might be FP. Staying with neutral position though. -- Pofka (talk) 15:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nice image and very nice light however, the composition lack of something, maybe too much of rock on the right. Pictogram voting question.svg Question what is the thing at bottom left, a sculpted rock? -- Christian Ferrer 11:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bit random, and the near bush seems to dominate in an unattractive way. -- Colin (talk) 19:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Technically very good. I'm also not too pleased with the foreground though - one of those greener bushes could have possibly made a nicer foreground element. Hard to say of course if the actual composition would have worked better. — Julian H. 10:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Bluebells ICM, Ashridge Estate, 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 22:40:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bluebells at Ashridge Estate
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The bluebells with beech trees at Ashridge Estate. The image is the result of intentional camera movement (ICM), which creates an impressionistic effect. All by Colin.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's 16:9 so fill you screen. Or zoom to 100% to appreciate the slightly grainy streaks of colour. Educational imagery is more than sharp lenses and megapixel panoramas. Sometimes conveying the impression of a bluebell woodland is more important than a straight capture with all the distractions such a photograph may contain. -- Colin (talk) 22:40, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No explanation needed.--Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no FP, no wow to me. --Ralf Roleček 22:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't undestant this kind of images....I wait for give my vote --LivioAndronico talk 23:12, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Abstract, very nice. --King of ♠ 01:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support simply great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:37, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice fine art, but not FP for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. Great colours. Has both artistic and educational value. --Code (talk) 09:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice demonstration of a classic photographic technique – and pleasing to the eye as well. --El Grafo (talk) 10:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, I like it. In this case I don´t miss sharpness at all. ;-) --Hubertl (talk) 10:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressionism revisited. :) --Tremonist (talk) 12:13, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice and useful image and remarkable but not outstanding. I like this challenging shot. --Laitche (talk) 12:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see no possible usage for such pictures. -- Pofka (talk) 12:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I supported this File:Allébron September 2014.jpg and will also support this. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I knew this image would be controversial. We are geared towards considering images on Commons as source material for the direct illustrations of a concrete article subject in Wikipedia. But only a fraction of our vocabulary concerns nouns, and only a fraction of educational material deals with such concrete subjects one can see or touch. Outside of such direct and obvious illustrations, Commons is a weak repository of images. How does one illustrate educational material on emotions such as "peace", "stress", "calm", "depression", "joy"? Or how about more abstract health issues such as "pain" or "migraine" or "cancer"? Or general topics like "nature" or "urban" where one wants a general impression of the subject without the distractions of specific examples. If you look on Wikipedia, if the articles are illustrated well at all, then it is with free historical work of art. Many of WP's articles are not illustrated, or illustrated with naive and crude image choices. But in a commercial world, were a picture editor can pay for or commission suitable material, then the choice is much wider.
Pick up a New Scientist magazine and there's a good chance the front cover is (or some of the articles contain) an artistic illustration or a surreal photograph. For example, their article on migraine. You can't take a photograph of a migraine. An educational picture editor will choose an image that helps the reader engage with the material, process and store the information they are reading. Sometimes the image helps that process, rather than being the information itself.
If you are British, then bluebell woodland represents Spring, the local natural environment, protected wildflowers, family walks, natures bold colours. And the above image can illustrate those without being an image of the specific beech woodland at Ashridge Estate in Hertfordshire, 10 May 2015. Without going too "contemporary art bollocks", what you get out of an image like this, is partly what you bring to it yourself. -- Colin (talk) 13:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
+1 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wish this could go into category Physics. Since its about Optics. cat "Places" isnt so good chosen, you show us technique, place is of other importance. We have 3 "space" cats, and none of Physics. Well, till then... --Mile (talk) 15:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
    • While I feel this is a good example of intentional camera movement (ICM) (and currently illustrates the Wikipedia article on the subject), I hope it can be appreciated more than just as an example of a photographic technique. If Commons is to embrace its mission of being a comprehensive repository of educational media, then it needs to contain more than just perfectly exposed, sharply rendered photographers of some object. There are so many missing "featured" categories, it is hard to know where to begin. Go to iStockPhoto and click on a category like Nature or Lifestyle. You won't find a picture of a specific woodland or a picture of a specific person. You find images (mainly of people) that deliver an emotion. And most of our featured images deliver very little in the way of emotion. Take the images young woman standing in a field or bike at the summer meadow. These aren't photographed to illustrate "lens flare", or to illustrate an article on young women or on bikes. But there's an educational use for them for sure. -- Colin (talk) 15:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Tomascastelazo's image File:Falling rain in mexico.jpg - is classified under "Natural phenomena", but is all you see just heavy rain? How does it make you feel? I want more of this on Commons. -- Colin (talk) 15:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Let´s look at this from several perspectives. We feature pictures of different types of architecture, and there is no one right way to architecture. We feature paintings from different schools, abstract, classical, impressionism, etc., and there is no one correct way to painting... The medium to represent those and many other themes is through the camera, through photography. But it turns out that photography, besides being a medium, is also a legitimate art form, just as painting, as music, as architecture. So why not feature photography not just as a representation medium of other art forms but for the art of photography itself? Photography has its own language, capable of not just registering "reality" but also capable of having its own discourse. My support of this image springs from there, from the recognition of the art of photography. If we deny the art of photography, we may as well deny all art. Not that everyone has to like it, just as not everyone appreciates architecture, or types of architecture, but we cannot ignore its place in the world of art. Like it or not, know it or not, should or should not, it has its little corner there. Have a look #REDIRECT[[1]] --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is right on the Monet Face-wink.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Category Places is not useful. This doesn't show a place, but a technique. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
    • It doesn't show a photographic technique any more than Diliff's cathedral photographs show an HDR stitched megapixel technique. It may be an example of a technique, but that's a very secondary aspect, and not why I took the picture. But worrying about what classification to put it in, is really tomorrows problem, and quite irrelevant to whether or not this is a fine image. -- Colin (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
      • My HDR technique helps to see the cathedral more clearly and with more detail though, and is fairly invisible to the viewer. Your blur technique helps to show the scene less clearly and is fairly dominant in the photo... Your photo illustrates the location poorly, but the effect of the technique well. They're both 'techniques' but they have opposite effects on understanding the place you're viewing. Not saying that's a bad thing. I quite like the effect, and obviously you chose the 'place' to suit the effect but I think Yann is right that the image is more about the technique and the effect than about the place. It's just a category, but I think it has implications for how we view the image too. Out of interest, what are the orange streaks in the grass? Diliff (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
        • It isn't "my blur technique" and isn't even an original subject for the technique. The straight photo is here, which explains the colours. Saying the "photo illustrates the location poorly" is missing the point. The purpose isn't to illustrate the specific beech woodland at Ashridge Estate in Hertfordshire on 10 May 2015. Nor, I believe, is its only education function to illustrate a photographic technique. That's like looking at The Scream and thinking only of a painting using oil, tempera, pastel and crayon on cardboard, or complaining it is a poor likeness of a person compared to a studio photograph taken with the latest Canon L portrait lens. There is far more to educational imagery than this conservative approach. -- Colin (talk)
          • @Colin you have a nice fantasy :-) and sorry, but you are not Edvard Munch too ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
          • I wasn't saying 'your' technique in the sense that you invented it. It's simply yours because you're using it. Also, I agree with you that the purpose of the photo isn't to illustrate "specific beech woodland at Ashridge Estate etc", but we were discussing it in the context of what the suitable category is, and if it doesn't illustrate the place well, why is the category 'places'? That's the point I was making. Perhaps we need a new category: "artistic expression". I don't think it's a fair comparison though to think about it like The Scream. That is an established artistic work, and would be categorised as such. We don't need to break that work down to a technique in order to find an educational use for it because it is already notable and as such educational for that reason - it illustrates the work of a notable artist. I don't agree with Alchemist-HP's comments above at all though. I don't think it matters that you're not Edvard Munch. Anyone can create art, and your works don't become art only when others start respecting you as an 'artist'. But I'm not sure that Commons is intended to be a repository for non-notable art. It would have to serve an educational purpose beyond being merely art. I think this image does that though, by being a fairly clear example of the technique. Not all art could necessarily do that. Diliff (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
            • I agree that media on Commons has to have some educational purpose, whether direct photography, artistic photography, drawing, painting, or video. We already have featured pictures that take a non-direct non-documentary approach to photography. For example:
Now I don't want to compare directly with any specific examples above, but just talk generally. We have images where the subject is contrived or the lighting hides detail, where colours are removed or altered, where the subject is obscured through movement or rain. The effect is artistic at the expense of a straight documentary photograph of a regular unaltered subject. But something else is gained, we hope, and educational qualities are altered but not eliminated. Some of us like to (only) take straight photographs that maximize their encyclopaedic value in their opinion. That's fine but not the only way to create educational media. -- Colin (talk) 12:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support you are really crazy --The Photographer (talk) 17:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry per Laitche --LivioAndronico talk 18:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Pofka, D kuba (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 10:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Diliff (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I also supported File:Allébron September 2014.jpg, but this one is just too much. On the other side the colors look fine and I cannot say how it would look if I had shot it, therefore my vote is neutral Poco2 18:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposers. --Ivar (talk) 05:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alchemist --LC-de (talk) 09:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gildir (talk) 15:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Encyclopedic interest, very limited. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Archaeodontosaurus, there's no requirement for any image on Commons, nor any featured image on Commons, to have "Encyclopedic interest". That's not the definition of "educational" that we use here. And it is wrong anyway, since the image is in use on Wikipedia, which is more than can be said for many Featured Pictures. To be "educational", the image doesn't have to be a source of information itself, but may help one think about a subject while reading about it. -- Colin (talk) 16:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Please note I did not say she was no sense in what I said was little. I warned the community about promoting this kind of image can be produced in two clicks. We could have quickly large amounts of image such that it will judge in various competitions. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I find your reply very difficult to understand, but I'd like to say that I don't think it matters whether it was difficult to produce or not. What matters is whether it's a useful or educational and of good technical quality. Some great FPs are trivially easy to photograph, some are extremely difficult technical accomplishments. Also, as Colin said, when it comes to usefulness, whether you think it's interesting isn't really the point. I think we (as reviewers) need to think beyond our personal interests and consider whether it could be useful or interesting to others too. Of course our personal interests will factor into how we judge images and it is impossible to completely separate that, but the more objective we can be, the better reviewers we will be. Diliff (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Archaeodontosaurus, we don't care if "no" or "little" "Encyclopaedic interest". It is irrelevant to the question of FP on Commons, and that's not just my opinion, it's our whole ethos at Commons FP which you should know. Encyclopaedic matters on Wikipedia FP only. Some people take "specimen" photos, as you do, and they are valuable and encyclopaedic, but many many other featured pictures on Commons are never destined to appear on Wikipedia nor any other encyclopaedia. Please do not confuse "Encyclopaedic" with "Educational", and for the latter, Commons has an extremely broad interpretation, which includes exploding light bulbs, hazy bridges obscured by rain drops, and lovers caught in a storm.
I find your "two clicks" comment insulting and ignorant. This image was not the result of going out one morning and getting lucky when I dropped my camera; perhaps fortune smiles on you that way. This is the third Spring where I've experimented with ICM in bluebell woods, which are at their best for only about one or two weeks a year. It's a particularly low-success-rate endeavour, and one that requires tweaking the exposure, focal length and focus to get the best results, and trying a variety of locations, angles and lighting conditions. I've taken many dozens of photographs before reaching one I'm happy with. And I spent quality time post-processing this as I do for all my images on Commons. So on one measure, this photo has taken me three years, not "two clicks". Go ahead and mock that if you like; it seems others want to. -- Colin (talk) 19:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I am sad to be misspoke. I know your work I really admire. All what you told me, consernant your image, I believe without a doubt. My only message is to draw attention to the risk of seeing our contests invaded by images in two clicks. For cons, I continue to argue that we are primarily in the service of various encyclopedias --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. -- Colin (talk) 09:32, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I state that all my FP are used in various items of wikipedia and 90% my QI also. But I think your phrase was very unhappy. As said Oscar Wilde :"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."--LivioAndronico talk 09:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I thought a long time, creative work is a multimedia as useful as an other, I'm very favorable to explore different techniques of photography or edition. I strongly agree with Archaeodontosaurus on the fact we are in the service of various encyclopedias, this is why I give my support here. Explorations of the technical and artistic possibilities of our cameras or hardwares have a big encyclopedic value from my point of view, as well as programing languages or as other knowledges. I support the pleasant image, the technique and the gait... -- Christian Ferrer 20:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank-you for your considered response.-- Colin (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Crocodylus acutus camouflage.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 21:06:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • If it is this you want to show, you are of course right. But I still find the reflections too disturbing. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 10:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support A lot of reflections. Interesting. --XRay talk 18:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Inevitable reflections. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's not a typical image that makes you say "wow," with anything distinctive in it - but that's precisely how the camouflage manages to work so well. --King of ♠ 06:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 10:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but noise and I don't like the composition --LivioAndronico talk 11:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Of course it is a very tough task to depict an example of camouflage as you might want to show the subject and how it merges with the background - two contradictory requirements. But frankly, the picture here is not an example of a camouflaged animal. The reason why you don't see the croc clearly is just a combination of disturbing reflections with a somewhat unhappy composition. --LC-de (talk) 12:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the camouflaged reflections and the fact he is approaching the viewer. -- Colin (talk) 19:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I generally try not to “explain” my photographs, but I think it is appropriate in this case. First of all, mangroves offer difficult light conditions. Most pictures of mangroves are taken from the outside looking in, but the view stops at the edge of the mangroves, and seldom ventures in. This is due to the thick foilage that makes it difficult to see far into it. Once inside the mangrove, depending on the day, light seeps in and gives a very spoty look inside, with patches of light next to patches of shadows with a great differential in exposure values, basically photographing small sunlit areas next to shadow areas, and thus making overal light conditions terrible. As just as light seeps in, the reflections of the canopy make a very confusing scene, visually speaking. Reflections everywhere, sunlight coming in small ray like patterns, etc. See here #REDIRECT[[2]] and here #REDIRECT[[3]] and here #REDIRECT[[4]]. When the water is still, it acts as a mirror to a very complex scene, and it is hard to distinguish the real thing from the reflection.
Now to the crocs… When taken in lazy mode, that is, the crocs sunbathing, it is very easy to distinguish them in their environment, and this type of picture give una a good idea of the physiognomy, but not necesarily of their adaptive characteristics or their ability to blend into a scene. See here #REDIRECT[[5]] and here #REDIRECT[[6]].
Now, if we take a close look at the “design” of the crock skin, we see a camouflage pattern on the Surface, and further out, the texture of the skin give the crocs a different type of taxture base camoflage. Se here #REDIRECT[[7]] and here #REDIRECT[[8]]
So between the skin pattern and the texture pattern added to the reflections and to the choppy waters, the crocs blend in beautifully giving them a survival advantage or a hunting advantage. See here #REDIRECT[[9]], and here #REDIRECT[[10]]
Interistingly, when waters are still, the crocs laying still, just beneath the water, resemble logs floating around. See here #REDIRECT[[11]] and here #REDIRECT[[12]]
So, with all that, this picture is not a picture of a croc only, it is a picture of an environment that shows the blending in of a croc in that environment.
--Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is an interesting, and possibly a useful photo. The visual appeal is very limited though, and I would expect more of that for a featured picture. — Julian H. 10:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian, sorry. Interesting and useful but no wow for me. --Kreuzschnabel 17:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Royal Navy Sea King helicopter comes to the aid of French fishing vessel 'Alf' in the Irish Sea (8675799486).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 13:40:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Sea King rescue helicopter of the UK Royal Navy assists French fishing vessel 'Alf' in the Irish Sea.
@LivioAndronico Double vote! --Laitche (talk) 22:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support per Pofka and I can accept the quality in this conditions. --Laitche (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Just a comment about the suggested lack of quality: the scenery shows the irish sea during a storm in late winter not the calm sunlit mediterranian sea in the summer. --Dirtsc (talk) 15:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gildir (talk) 15:42, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad quality. 1/200 f/13 ? --· Favalli ⟡ 00:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great scene, very questionable aperature choice and lost potential in editing. As a result, the quality is not at a featured picture level, even for an action shot in bad weather. — Julian H. 10:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting scene but too poor quality (chroma noise everywhere) --Kreuzschnabel 17:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Three women tiredly look at Antoin Sevruguin as he photographs them in the late 19th century..jpeg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 12:22:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Three women tiredly look at Antoin Sevruguin as he photographs them in the late 19th century
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Yann. --Tremonist (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose Per others. The quality probably nowhere is near the QP standards, not even talking about the FP. Check the middle woman nose. The quality is so poor that it is pixeled. -- Pofka (talk) 17:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It appears that this image was up-sampled, which introduced strong pixelization. I've uploaded what appears to be the original from the given source → @Yann, Tremonist, Pofka: please have another look. --El Grafo (talk) 18:31, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Quality still is problematic. Pixels spots everywhere, especially on cheeks, but visible everywhere else as well. By featuring this we would put the lath way too low. -- Pofka (talk) 18:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Quality is better, but still not good enough. There is quite a lot of noise, and it needs restoration anyway. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment per Pofka and Yann. --Tremonist (talk) 12:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Btw, what’s the thing at the center of the bottom edge? Doesn’t look like part of the original photograph. --Kreuzschnabel 17:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Ana Ivanović - Masters de Madrid 2015 - 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 12:10:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ana Ivanović at the Madrid Open 2015, Madrid, Spain.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Ana Ivanović at the Madrid Open 2015, Madrid, Spain. The crop is not tighter to see the net and have better context and depth. Created, uploaded, nominated -- Kadellar (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think my primitive brain made me vote. --The Photographer (talk) 12:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral due to quality problems. --Tremonist (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Can you please be more specific? --Kadellar (talk) 16:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • That grey thing was quite difficult to figure out what it is due to the poor quality of it. Tennis ball seems quite blurred as well. There also are a lot of visible pixels all over the player, especially seen on her face, arms and legs. This is the major issue. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pofka (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Its sport shot, Ana is well in focus, ball at some 100 km/h made some distance in that milisecond. Sun would solve it, but also spoil it since i like there is no clear shadow of player on clay which often disturbs so much. Maybe i would crop the net so you concentrate solely on Ana ;) (yes, we dont have female voters here). Gray thing Pofka mentioned is microphone, sure is out of focus - no relevance. At 263 mm this is very well executed.--Mile (talk) 18:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great.--Soundwaweserb (talk) 19:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but not outstanding for me --LivioAndronico talk 23:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Not quite FP for me either, the action you've captured is good (better if the ball is closer to her racquet though), but the composition not so good. I'd prefer to see her take up much more of the frame, but I don't think you have enough detail to crop it that much. Diliff (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Actually I prefer the angle and moment to the other one you nominated some days ago. I'd probably get rid of the net, though. Poco2 18:54, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think the composition works well in a portrait orientation, with the action being horizontal and the upper background area having very strong contrast (and therefore drawing a lot of attention). — Julian H. 10:19, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ana is very attractive however I agree background (and bottom too) are disturbing. The cropped version is far much better from my point of view -- Christian Ferrer 21:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Jatra Posters and a Tram.JPG [edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 11:52:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jatra Posters and a Tram
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Previously nominated image, no deletion requests from anyone due to alleged FOP issue, hence re-nomination. c/u/n by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as I just said --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I never understood such pictures, but previously some of them actually passed, so maybe that's just me? But for me it simply looks like: "The more you blur, the better it looks" ? By going this way soon we will nominate a few random color pixels for the Featured Pictures. It is barely possible to see anything in this picture, excluding that strange poster which is not extraordinary. I absolutely have no clue where it would be possible to use such image. It has no encyclopedia value. It even hurts my eyes by simply looking at it and I want to scroll down as soon as possible. This reminds me of some "randomly thrown tables and chairs" art. Never understood it and never will. Sorry. -- Pofka (talk) 18:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
There's a whole range of potentially suitable articles for pictures like this one: 1, 2, 3... but besides: encyclopedic value in a narrow sense is (luckily!) no requirement for FP stars on Commons. You have - of course! - every right to dislike a picture though. Happens to all of us. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
A picture of Commons must not be useful for an encyclopedia and also needs no educational mission. Commons is a free pool of media and not the photo database of Wikipedia. And this picture can be used very good in Wikipedia. --Ralf Roleček 12:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Blurring isn't a problem for me. Some images looks quite impressive with blurred parts, but in this one I can barely see anything. I cannot like something which I cannot see. It's like tasting ice cream without taste receptors. -- Pofka (talk) 12:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 22:54, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 10:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noise is a bit high, and I find it compositionally lacking compared to the other "blurred train" pictures we've seen here. --King of ♠ 00:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. --Mile (talk) 20:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As before: Good capture: makes you want to investigate the image. -- Colin (talk) 19:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King. — Julian H. 10:15, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Mexican fast street food.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 04:22:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 04:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 04:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice idea but poor quality, sorry, and the look on the background peoples’ faces ruins it. Strong CA, sides leaning, white objects blown, the reddish apron seems channel-blown too (blueish look on the bright parts). A tighter framing would have done better (just the one lady doing her work). --Kreuzschnabel 07:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @ Kreuzschnabel, thanks for the suggestion, but the idea of the image is everything, food, people, environment... I used a 10mm lens to get as much in as possible... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:56, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    • You perfectly described how to take cluttered, overbusy pictures. Squeezing as much as possible into the frame is not a way to take breathtaking images. Less is more. --Kreuzschnabel 09:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If you eliminate CA, it's fine for me. Can you add coordinates, please? --Kadellar (talk) 12:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @ Kadellar, removed CA, added location in image description. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:53, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Symbol support vote.svg Support now. --Kadellar (talk) 19:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral due to quality problems. --Tremonist (talk) 14:54, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality could be better but something different at least. --Mile (talk) 18:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The women at the left look a bit distorted. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose really interesting but the 1/3 left is a bit disturbing (harsh light, a bit blurred and distorted) -- Christian Ferrer 21:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Santa Maria in Trastevere - Cappella Altemps.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2015 at 08:25:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Santa Maria in Trastevere - Cappella Altemps
  • see the crop carefully, pixels are short of a four-step. --Laitche (talk) 22:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:16, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 10:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:07, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 04:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg In my opinion: I think when the category is Non-photographic media, the creator is a painter in this case. If the category is interiors or something, the photographer is a creator. --Laitche (talk) 10:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Umm... maybe it is on a case-by-case but this way might be better, imo. --Laitche (talk) 11:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:13, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Miners shower, Rammelsberg Mining Museum, Harz, Germany, 2015-05-18-.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2015 at 20:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Miners' shower in Rammelsberg Mining Museum
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Rammelsberg mining museum in Lower Saxony, Germany is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Here is shown the miners' shower room. Created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 20:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As beautiful and well-done in its own way as David's churches. Daniel Case (talk) 00:41, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ordinary can be beautiful. --King of ♠ 04:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 05:07, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per King once again --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yet an other symmetrical image but with a different motive than the churches, the ceilings and the trainstations! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 06:09, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Villy Fink Isaksen: I placed windows on one side and port openings on the other just to make you less symmetrically bored.Smile -- Slaunger (talk) 20:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Well done but sides still leaning out IMHO, should be easily fixable --Kreuzschnabel 07:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Kreuzschnabel:: Thanks for your observation. You are correct. I have now uploaded a corrected version. -- Slaunger (talk) 17:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality, but no wow. Sorry. Yann (talk) 08:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    • That is OK. I appreciate every review. Smile -- Slaunger (talk) 17:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I partly agree with Yann, it's not the most exciting interior, but the picture is as good as it gets. --Kadellar (talk) 12:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Yann --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another example of "So ugly, but catches your view for some unknown reason". -- Pofka (talk) 18:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 18:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. Professional-quality photography of an important aspect of history. -- Colin (talk) 22:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 22:54, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Excellent (and different). --Pugilist (talk) 22:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:19, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 04:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice mood. I am not certain but that may be posterization. --Laitche (talk) 18:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your observation, Laitche. Again I am impressed by your careful review and scrutiny. I believe you are correct that there is a little posterization in that dark corner. The photo is an HDR tone-mapped photo from three exposures 2 EV apart. That corner was very dark and I guess that despite the HDR and due to the limited dynamic range of my sensor, the posterization there has appeared due to a quite dramatic lift of shadows in Lightroom. I have tried to spend 20 mins again now fiddling around with a radial filter over that patch in Lightroom to try and make it better. It has not been a success, so I am not uploading a new version. I am afraid there is just not much that I can do about it. If I do not lift the shadows as much I feel it compromises the overall impression of the photo too much. In my opinion this small area of sub-optimal quality has negligable impact on the image when seen in its entirety. It is a question of making a reasonable tradeoff. My camera only allows three bracketed exposures and they cannot be separated more than 2 EV apart. I guess that I could have been even more careful and taken two sets of bracketed exposures to get six exposures 2 EV apart and get a larger dynamic range (Diliff normally uses five exposures in his church interiors, which is natively supported with his camera). But even then, my longest exposure was 13 s here and my camera allows only up to 30 s, so there is not much more I could have done to get the light out of that corner unless I had opened the aperture up from f/11, but then I would have lost DOF. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks for your comment again! It seems I have to be honest, I am guessing overall this HDR image is just a little bit poterized. Please look at the windows very carefully, just my opinion :) --Laitche (talk) 21:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
      • If your longest exposure was 13 seconds then you could have easily doubled the luminosity of the shadows.... Or simply bumped up your ISO a bit. The thing that many people forget (or don't understand) is that you can actually use higher ISOs with HDR tone mapping, as long as your darkest exposures in the bracket are exposed properly for the shadows. ISO 500-800 on most cameras will actually look okay as long as there are no dark areas in the image (the detail in the brightest 1/3 of the histogram will have very little noise at all). So you could have easily gone to ISO 400 without too many problems with noise IMO. ISO 100 is great for single exposures but unnecessary for HDR work. Diliff (talk) 00:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Laitche and Diliff for your further observations. You are correct, Diliff about the posterization on the red soap tray as well. You are also correct, that I could have done better and used the equipment at hand more optimally by taking a 30 s exposure as well to get as much as possible out of the shadows. My technique is still good, I think, but improvable. Regarding the ISO, I should try that, although I do not share you optimism about how high I can go. I may go to ISO 200, but I really think my sensor is so noisy that I should not go higher. Yesterday, I worked on this HDR panorama where the scenary has less dynamic range to capture than in this interior. Here, I did not have to boost the shadows and dampen the highligts nearly as much in Lightroom, but still, I had to yank up the luminosity NR quite a bit to avoid too much noise in the sky at ISO 100 even after masking out sharpening in the sky. Well, but I should test this systematically. -- Slaunger (talk) 16:10, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
          • Test my theory out then. :-) Take a photo that is overexposed at ISO 640 or ISO 800. Expose it so that the deep shadows of the scene are very bright, too bright to appear 'normal' but not too bright that they are actually blown. Then look at how much noise there is there. Then adjust the exposure in Lightroom so that the shadows look like normal shadows again. That's how much noise you'll have when you combine it into an HDR tone mapped image. Then compare it to a 'normal' image at ISO 100 with pushed shadows. The overexposed high ISO image will probably 'win' the noise competition against ISO 100. Normally this wouldn't be a useful method because exposing 'to the right' (of the histogram) would normally result in far too many blown details elsewhere in the scene, but it doesn't happen in an HDR image because you have other bracketed images to rescue the highlights from instead. The ISO level is almost arbitrary. What matters more is that you've 'exposed to the right' so that the details you want to capture in each bracket (highlights, mid tones and shadows) are in the upper end of the histogram. Diliff (talk) 16:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice but not outstanding to me, the perspective is nice but I miss a special touch here Poco2 19:00, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Aguarales de Valpalmas, Zaragoza, España, 2015-01-06, DD 26.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2015 at 18:11:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Los Aguarales de Valpalmas, is a rare, fragile and dynamic geological phenomena located near Valpalmas, Zaragoza, Spain. The landscape is the result of water flows over fragile material in a process known as piping.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Los Aguarales de Valpalmas, is a rare, fragile and dynamic geological phenomena located near Valpalmas, Zaragoza, Spain. The landscape is the result of water flows over fragile material in a process known as piping. All by me, Poco2 18:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 18:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is for me a very interesting geological formation. I have never seen anything like it. It took me a long time to get any idea of scale until I noticed the twig and other plant debris there. On the one hand it makes you curious to try and figure what is going on (and I did read a machine-translated version of the article on Spanish Wikipedia, where the photo is used to better understand); on the other hand the lack of an evident sense of scale is also confusing for the observer. I have a problem with the chosen focal distance which is in the immediate foreground, leading to a large fraction of the image being out of focus. This can be a good effect if you want to highlight a special interesting part of the formation and attract the eye to it, but it does not work very convincing for me in this case. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    To be honest, the picture looks pretty much the way I wanted it to look like, I could have tried a higher f number but then would have good sharpness issues overall and I couldn't get further to increase the focal length with a similar frame because the perspective would have been completely different (the angle of view would have had to be higher, different picture indeed). And yes, I deliberately introduced a factor of "confusion" due to a missing scale. Is it a high mountain range or small heaps? That actually makes the picture the more interesting to me. Poco2 20:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is special. --Tremonist (talk) 14:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting! --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 22:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Reminds Lithuanian cake Šakotis. Simply cannot say no to something which looks like a sea of these delicious things. -- Pofka (talk) 12:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice idea and interesting photo but overall, it is lacking variation for me. I want some kind of tension or decoration which means something making the photo more attractive, like a golden hours light or fogs or condensation or like that. --Laitche (talk) 08:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Strange, very attractive, never seen for me. Many questions in this picture, nice sharpness, good light and shadows... Wonderful Nature ! --Jebulon (talk) 21:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 10:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Иультинский район.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2015 at 16:37:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Иультинский район,Iultinsky area
  • I still oppose, sorry, also per KoH. --Kadellar (talk) 12:18, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This one is worth to save. So nice scenery from Russia. Border removed, watermark also, jpeg as before. Let give photo a try. --Mile (talk) 18:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe is tilted !? --Mile (talk) 18:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support I am probably neutral on the picture alone as it has a technical quality a bit below the high FP landscape bar. But for me, the location is a mitigating factor. I do not think we have much other pictures from this very remote and thinly populated area of Russia. So value put it just above the FP threshold for me. Maybe I am also touched on a soft spot; it reminds me of a small settlement in Northwest Greenland I once visited. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I don't find the composition very interesting; in particular, I think the lower crop cuts off the water in an awkward place. Perhaps a lower framing to include more foreground and less sky would be better. --King of ♠ 00:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Croped to rule of thirds.--Mile (talk) 06:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Tremonist (talk) 14:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose or at least an outstanding composition or at least an outstanding quality, here both are ok but not enough featured -- Christian Ferrer 21:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Stirling railway station - 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2015 at 16:13:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stirling railway station
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Stirling railway station. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 16:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 16:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Small tilt and blue channel satured (WB) Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done, much better --The Photographer (talk) 16:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I largely agree with The Photographer, although I think the tilt is more a slight perspective issue in the left part of the image. WB too cold, I think (check WB on white paint on pillar). -- Slaunger (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • The Photographer, Slaunger: I have uploaded a new version correcting the slight tilt and the WB (according to LR, 250 K warmer, which is not much). --Kadellar (talk) 11:59, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the edit. I think it is an FP now. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I find this a bit different (and refreshing) compared to the recent spurt of train station FPCs we've seen. --King of ♠ 00:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per King. Very nice! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support When blurred item actually improves image. -- Pofka (talk) 18:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 22:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the perspective and ghostly train. Daniel Case (talk) 02:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose It's not photographer's fault. The platform is curving to the right and the lampposts as well therefore I feel double vanishing point here and that is making an unbalanced composition, imho. --Laitche (talk) 10:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Basilique Saint-Remi de Reims Exterior 1, Reims, France - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2015 at 15:54:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 15:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 15:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 16:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Diliff (talk) 17:45, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hmm. Of course there is Diliff-execution and therefore great quality, but honestly I am not a fan of the angle (I understand that you (Diliff) didn't nominate it). I stood there a year ago, and I felt that the straight-on angle works better. Of course your image is much better technically (and much colder, fwiw), but having just a bit of the right surface of the right tower looks a bit odd to me, especially given that we have much more of the left tower. It is good to see that your version included the transept, which is a major plus. I realize you also have a version that looks very similar to mine, but imo is improvable w.r.t. PC (e.g. the rose is clearly not a perfect circle). Imho that second version, better processed and perhaps with a less squary crop could be a good FP. --DXR (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    • From memory, I applied a small amount of vertical compression to it to avoid too much distortion in the towers (I could be wrong, but it would explain the slightly squashed rose). I think both views have different strengths and weaknesses but overall, showing the transept is useful for an understanding of the shape of it. I enjoy the symmetry of a straight on view, but you lose a sense of what the building really is. A full frontal view a church is often nothing more than a study of its face, so I try to get a diagonal view of the church when it is practical to do so (often there are too many obstructions for a good view). But yes, you're right. I didn't nominate it, so I suppose it's Paris16's choice. I could support either, and I'd be happy to restitch without vertical compression if you think it's necessary (I didn't notice the rose until you mentioned it - it's only very slightly squashed). Diliff (talk) 19:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
      • I quite like your face analogy, and fair enough. Of course I don't intend to oppose or do anything like that and like with portraits, it might indeed just be personal preference. I personally find that tall towers make diagonals prone to strange effects, especially with full PC (and so I get your reasoning for slight squishing of the height). Perhaps I simply have a mind that works best in 45° increments ;-) --DXR (talk) 05:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It needs a vertical perspective correction IMO. The right side is leaning in. Otherwise great quality and composition is ok. Poco2 19:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Hmm, yes slightly.. It looks like Paris 16 has introduced that problem when he did some perspective correction on it. I compared it to the previous version and while mine wasn't perfect (seems to be leaning outwards on both sides a tiny bit), he seems to have made it worse. Oh well, I'll see if I can fix it. Diliff (talk) 19:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Still Pond 3, Isabella Plantation, Richmond Park, London, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2015 at 08:20:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Isabella Plantation Still Pond
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. This is an attempt to correct the criticisms of my previous FPC of this scene, which seemed to be mainly regarding the composition, the flat light and the blown sky. This image improves on each of these faults IMO, although the bright dappled sunlight through the trees does bring its own problems, as the contrast is very extreme. -- Diliff (talk) 08:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 08:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better! --Code (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support much better colors on sunny day. --Mile (talk) 11:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not a few overexposed parts on the leaves like this one. I added some notes. --Laitche (talk) 11:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    • What you're seeing in this image and the one you linked to is actually not overexposure, it's artefacts caused by the slight movement of the leaves blowing in the wind which cannot be merged together properly when the HDR image is processed (and as discussed at length in my previous nomination, it is not possible to capture a scene like this without HDR). I can try to remove the problems by cloning them out, but it's not really possible to avoid completely, and no HDR processing software that I am aware of can remove these ghosts completely and successfully. But I think our obsession with finding problems with small details does sometimes overshadow the bigger picture: does the image deliver the scene to the viewer in an aesthetic and accurate way? I would argue that small amounts of ghosted leaves in the trees doesn't diminish that. You only see it as an artefact when you pixel peep. I could probably hide them completely by downsampling the image. Consider that it's a sharp 50 megapixel image. I could reduce the image to the point where these little details in the problem could be obscured, but Commons would suffer from not having such a detailed image. Diliff (talk) 12:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
      • I understood, it's unavoidable problem with HDR (Sorry, I haven't read the discussion of your previous nomination.) and I can not see them in [downsampled image] as you said. Maybe I was too picky, I deleted the notes. Thanks. --Laitche (talk) 13:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose hmm, way too saturated, imo. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:39, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

    • It's so difficult to please everyone. What specifically do you think is too saturated? In my previous nomination, people complained that the colours/lighting was too flat. I haven't increased the saturation of this image at all though. The flowers are actually very bright and saturated and I don't think they are misrepresented. The leaves in the tree are saturated because they are illuminated by the sunlight, not because the saturation has been enhanced digitally. Here's two screen captures from Lightroom of the original RAW files of the flowers and the leaves, showing no additional processing at all. Spring is just a very saturated time of year for colours. Diliff (talk) 15:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually the sky's the dealbreaker for me. Just doesn't look natural here. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Fair enough. The saturation of the sky hasn't been altered either. Diliff (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I uploaded a few version with a lightened sky (which has the effect of making the sky look desaturated). Can you comment on that version? Diliff (talk) 20:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Much (!) better. Symbol support vote.svg Support now --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 21:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I think (and I know) this reason is not so good for voting but "This cramped and busy composition (including the aspect ratio of the image) does not meet with my tastes..." Other elements are splendid. --Laitche (talk) 22:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I tried a less cramped and less busy composition last time, and it was opposed, so I followed the suggestions and ended with this image. You know what they say "you can't please everybody, all of the time". :-) Maybe you would prefer this composition. I didn't think it would be as successful as a FP though. Diliff (talk) 22:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • That picture is simply wonderful (ok, maybe you should lighten the sky a tad... ;-))! What makes you believe it couldn't stand a chance as FPC? --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Oh, I didn't think it would stand no chance, I just thought it was a composition that was slightly more artistic (with the focus being on the reflection) which is often not rewarded on Commons. It's also not as high resolution. I considered both images for nomination but thought this one would have a better chance. Maybe I was wrong! Diliff (talk) 11:12, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes, commons (or commoners) could truly benefit from a somewhat bolder approach towards artistic compositions at times --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Agree with Martin. --Laitche (talk) 17:40, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I think that's maybe bad decision, both of images for alternative would better, I prefer that one... --Laitche (talk) 11:53, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Diliff: May I nominate that one as other nomination? --Laitche (talk) 15:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • You would be more than welcome to. I do also wonder if people would find it too similar, but we can find out. I think they have different focuses, personally (even if they show the same pond), so it would be fine for me. Diliff (talk) 16:27, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The HDR look is a bit too strong. It looks weird when the sky is such a dark shade of blue relative to the foreground which is in shade. In my opinion it should be a faint blue, just barely enough to not blow out. --King of ♠ 00:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Wrt sky colour, we are not seeing the sky close to the horizon (where it is light) but relatively high (where it is deeper). The deep blue of the sky varies with the weather and pollution. Today, on my journey to work, I saw solid blue sky through very light green leaves. But other areas of the sky were pale blue and others verging on turquoise. I don't think expecting the sky to be "faint blue, just barely enough to not blow out" is valid if the sky wasn't actually that light a shade of blue. The issues of the sky being very bright compared to a shady area aren't represented by making the sky go pale, which is an artificial result of a sensor blowing on all channels: if you turn up the brightness of a blue (or red, or green) bulb, it doesn't go white. It just goes a more intense and bright blue. -- Colin (talk) 09:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Yeah, in addition to what Colin said, I would just add that the point of HDR is to help replicate what the eye sees, not to replicate the limitations of digital camera sensors. I know that traditionally with photography, we would expect to see the sky being brighter than the shaded foliage but I can tell you that when I was there, I could clearly see deep blue sky through the trees. The sky was a paler blue closer to the horizon (and that is reflected in the image where it starts to verge on white) due to the effect of haze and clouds, but up high in the sky as Colin mentioned was a deep blue. I know nothing I can say will necessarily convince your eyes that it looks 'right' as that is subjective, but for me, it looks very close to what I saw when I photographed it. Sometimes HDR can 'overdo' the contrast of the scene but I usually try quite hard to replicate what was seen and not push the contrast and saturation just for dramatic effect. Diliff (talk) 11:05, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
        • We are limited by the relatively low dynamic range of JPG and computer monitors. The next ultra high definition movie format is supposed to be higher DR and we are promised a higher DR in our TV and monitors to go with it. But even then, it won't match reality because then you'd have a TV that, if it showed a picture of the sun, could burn your retina and fade your furniture fabric :-). Just be grateful we're not pre-1900 where film wasn't even panchromatic and all blue skys were burnt out pure white. -- Colin (talk) 11:56, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
          • We are limited by the LDR of computer monitors, but we can attempt to replicate the tones that the eye sees, even if we can't replicate the intensity of them. I don't think HDR TVs and monitors that replicate the real luminosity of a scene is really the answer anyway. Yes, we can increase the maximum luminosity but it still has to factor in comfortable ranges suitable to the room that you're watching in. If you're in a dark room watching a film, you don't want an intense beam of sunlight in your face, you want something merely bright relative to the dark room you're watching in to give the illusion of sunlight. In any case, you'd also need a TV screen that covered your entire field of view to replicate how the eye sees. Having highlights that are as bright as the sun but concentrated in a 60" box of pixels would be much harder on the eyes than reality ever could be, because in the real world we actually have to shade the sun away from our eyes if we want to have any hope of seeing something in the shadows, lest it be washed out by the effect of the sunlight reflecting around inside our eyeballs! It would be very difficult to do that with a narrow angle of view that we typically watch a TV with. Diliff (talk) 12:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 18:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 21:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with King of Hearts. --Halavar (talk) 13:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Archbasilica of St. John Lateran HD.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2015 at 13:35:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Archbasilica of St. John Lateran
because on the right there was a great advertisement and on the left a stage ... is the union of 10 photos .... for the top honestly I have not noticed. Thank you.--LivioAndronico talk 21:17, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support. The image quality still has quite a lot of issues (look at the bottom of the image, the grass is hardly even recognisable as grass, it is soft and looks like a watercolour painting (too much noise reduction?). Thankfully, because it is high resolution and stitched, it can be downsampled to a reasonable resolution to look sharper and to minimise the image quality problems. As for the crop, I can understand why you needed to crop it so close on the sides, but it does make the composition feel a bit cramped. Diliff (talk) 08:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, sorry, but it needs more space, too tight crop everywhere except at the bottom. --Kadellar (talk) 16:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but par Kadellar. Yann (talk) 20:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- exactly the same comments as Diliff. Too much NR. The bottom part is just a mush with no details and unattractive light. I can at least downsize to get the sharpness. -- Colin (talk) 21:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Stitching errors, added the notes. --Laitche (talk) 16:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • A little bit carelessly but OK :) --Laitche (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm learning Face-smile.svg thanks --LivioAndronico talk 18:09, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I understand the reasons for the tight crop; honestly the picture is so well done that this is not a real problem. Daniel Case (talk) 01:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Majestic --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 05:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support This picture is way too tight, Livio, this is an issue I see often in your pictures. Let your pictures breath! On the other side the quality is pretty good, probably the best one I have seen here among your works. I also agree with Diliff that that the bottom part (probably through brightening during processing) has little detail but it is IMO not so important for this composition Poco2 08:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 21:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Rainbow-spiral lollipop.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2015 at 10:48:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rainbow spiral lollipop
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by AntanO
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- AntanO 10:48, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good lighting which supplements the object well. Could use a bit tighter cropping though. --LB 15:31, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overprocessing, postarized. --Laitche (talk) 16:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you specify? --AntanO 16:47, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, I'm not 100% sure but added a few notes. --Laitche (talk) 16:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
It's not posterization, but "nature" of the candy. --AntanO 17:09, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
If it's not, I don't mind to remove the notes at all :) --Laitche (talk) 17:31, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually I agree with you, it almost definitely is posterization, but it's not too significant. Diliff (talk) 13:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, not too significant, IMO posterization mostly means overprocessing. --Laitche (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Sometimes it is an indication, but not always. I think we should judge the nomination by what we see though, not by the mistakes we think have been made. I'm not saying you can't have an opinion, but your opinion on what could or should be done differently should be independent of your opinion of the image itself. Just my thoughts on judging anyway. Diliff (talk) 15:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@Diliff: Thanks for sharing your thoughts. --Laitche (talk) 17:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Its not bad, i like the colors, but background not so much. At least could be croped some (see note). Done. --Mile (talk) 12:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Object isn't in the centre of image. So it was your target? D kuba (talk) 11:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good colours. --Tremonist (talk) 14:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I know, isn't the best for quality but I love original images --LivioAndronico talk 18:11, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Livioandronico2013 Poco2 19:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Fireworks over Houston, Texas (LOC).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2015 at 22:21:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fireworks over Houston, Texas
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Carol M. Highsmith, uploaded and nominated by -- Yann (talk) 22:21, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There is some noise, but seeing the resolution, I hope you will accept it... -- Yann (talk) 22:21, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. For a scan that's not sharp at full res, I accept that it was scanned perhaps too precisely and try to look at it at a reasonable size, 3000px in this case. It's pretty much sharp except for the building on the right. Nice fireworks but I can't have such an important element of the composition be visibly unsharp at 7 MP. --King of ♠ 23:08, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Photo from 1980. Its good to see some of it. --Mile (talk) 05:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is bad also for 1980 --LivioAndronico talk 09:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Mile. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:54, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 15:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good scene, and acceptable sharpness if downsized. -- Colin (talk) 21:05, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The resolution (7475px) is not remarkable since this is an analog photography, Simply the quality is not good and spectators are a bit distracting, imho. --Laitche (talk) 08:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Laitche Poco2 19:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 21:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Gorna Leshnica Shara.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2015 at 21:40:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View on Bozovska Reka valley at the,.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Gadjowsky - uploaded by Gadjowsky - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Excellent composition and colors. There is some minor posterization in the sky and chromatic aberration in the mountains. --King of ♠ 22:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice view and light but not so details (unsharp) and oversaturation plus CAs, sorry. --Laitche (talk) 22:49, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Heartwrenching oppose Such a great shot.. Such a great angle. Such great light. Such great colors ... until you see that patch of just not-quite-right blue in the sky on the right. And then all the unsharpness and CA, and you want to cry. "Where did it go wrong?" you find yourself asking. Well, shooting it at anything below f/11 was a start. And with ISO 200, to boot. Daniel Case (talk) 05:29, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Daniel. "f/11 ISO 200"! Bollocks. -- Colin (talk) 15:46, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel Case, I'm afraid. Though I'm not sure whether f/8 and ISO 200 are really to blame here. What a pity! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:16, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Excellent composition and colors but not very good quality --LivioAndronico talk 09:36, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Gadjowsky, Kiril Simeonovski Something went wrong with equipement i suppose. This is second serie of great photos ruined by something. I see its made with D5100 series, nothing wrong with EXIF. D5100 has affected series with sensor position, find it on forum and check serial Number of camera. Some made it on their own, hex key solved it. I would try with some other lens first too see if it repeats and its not the lens. --Mile (talk) 12:30, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Some of the problem is processing, not just softness/CA. Were the frames taken at the same exposure or was too much post-processing applied? Polarising lens? -- Colin (talk) 15:46, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per others. --Tremonist (talk) 14:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

File:2014 Ostrawa, Kościół Niepokalanego Poczęcia NMP 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2015 at 10:34:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of the Immaculate Conception in Ostrava. Moravian-Silesian Region, Czech Republic.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Halavar - nominated by Halavar -- Halavar (talk) 10:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Halavar (talk) 10:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice church! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:46, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support The quality isn't outstanding but the composition is very good --LivioAndronico talk 11:31, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looks a bit hazy. Raise the contrast maybe? --King of ♠ 16:10, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Version with more contrast uploaded. Hope it's better now:) --Halavar (talk) 19:24, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
    Perhaps I should have been more emphatic - it could still use more contrast. --King of ♠ 22:10, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support D kuba (talk) 11:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 12:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not eye-catching enough for me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support One of these pictures when you doubt that it is FP, but in the same way you find it quite good. Probably minimum standards are passed. -- Pofka (talk) 18:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A good QI of this church. -- Colin (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Nice composition and good perspective control but the colours and the quality are not reaching the FP standards, imho. --Laitche (talk) 08:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Yes, I think this is more of a QI than FP. There's nothing wrong with a simple composition like this but it needs something extra (nice light, lots of detail, etc) for it to reach FP for me. Diliff (talk) 12:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Diliff Poco2 19:15, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 08:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:2013 02 Foz do Iguacu 248.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2015 at 10:34:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iguazu Falls, Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural or Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Iguazu Falls, Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil. Created and uploaded by Sergio Alexandre Korndorfer - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me very special --LivioAndronico talk 11:29, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support You shouldn't go chasing waterfalls, but if you get results like this no one should mind. An excellent example of when you shouldn't use a long bridal-veil exposure to make a great image of a torrential cataract like this. I can almost hear it roar. Daniel Case (talk) 16:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Daniel Case: Look at the "water smoke" going up. I'm almost feeling the water drops touching my arm. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:35, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good work, nice place. Yann (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality is not the best but very dramatic image. --King of ♠ 22:11, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King of Hearts but composition-wise and lighting-wise, not remarkable light, too tight crop, I don't find the composition works. almost same as this opposes (about composition and light). --Laitche (talk) 22:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC) That was bad way to vote. --Laitche (talk) 17:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Laitche: Why "That was bad way to vote"? You can argue when to oppose. Clin 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:28, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
      • @ArionEstar: I should vote with my own words, only a link is not good way :) --Laitche (talk) 18:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Laitche and too tight and random crop/composition. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 23:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Lauro Sirgadocontribs 18:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. There are a lot of way better waterfalls shots. -- Pofka (talk) 18:41, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like sunsets, large waterfalls are attractive, but this one isn't a great image. Composition issues and a bit under-exposed. -- Colin (talk) 19:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others, comparing this one to other waterfall FPs I don't thing that it is the same league. The crop and composition is not convincing, e.g. the bottom left (or generall the bottom crop) is disturbing and the cropped waterfall on the right is also unfortunate. Poco2 08:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination @Laitche, Alchemist-hp, Pofka, Colin, Poco a poco: Thanks for all comments. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Wrocław Główny (Breslau Hauptbahnhof) by night.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 May 2015 at 14:54:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wrocław Główny (Breslau Hauptbahnhof) by night
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 14:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 14:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fascinating angle on a lovely old train shed. A bit distorted and unsharp near the left edge, and the signals are a little posterized, but as I so often say I don't think that's enough to ruin this. Daniel Case (talk) 15:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 21:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Quality is OK for me and I like this empty and antique-looking mood. --Laitche (talk) 22:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Maybe I was "You cannot see the wood for the trees.". It is an unbalanced composition as DXR mentioned so I've changed my vote to neutral. --Laitche (talk) 12:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Ambiance overcomes technical shortcomings. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:24, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Nice use of line and perspective. I think the composition would be even better if the point of convergence were a bit further to the right. --King of ♠ 06:30, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Objection I can overlook the modern train at the right side but if the vanishing point were further to the right, that train would appear much more (means they can't crop out the train in this composition) and ruins this mood, just my opinion :) --Laitche (talk) 11:55, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 10:36, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:18, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but imo the right side crop is not good. The building either needs some space or should be cut, but this creates an unbalanced composition for me. --DXR (talk) 10:53, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:03, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 15:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:07, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 18:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There are hundreds of train station photos on Commons. This one is a QI but not more. Why downsized 2/3? The right hand side isn't very interesting and no people to add interest to make up for this. -- Colin (talk) 19:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per DXR. — Julian H. 13:26, 20 May 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors


Statuksen poistoehdotukset[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Heldervue Somerset West.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 08:38:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Heldervue (meaning "clear view") is suburb in Somerset West which is a town in the Western Cape, South Africa. It is situated in the Helderberg area (formerly called Hottentots Holland), about 50 kilometres east of Cape Town central city area, and 10 kilometres from Strand. The town is overlooked by the Helderberg (meaning "clear mountain").

File:Strand Beach Road at Dusk.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 08:31:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Strand Beach Road, Cape Town at Dusk, is a popular beach front walking area in the northern part of Cape Town.

File:Sète from Mount Saint-Clair by night 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 06:17:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sète from Mount Saint-Clair, France

File:Coat of arms of Brazil.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2015 at 22:12:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Reflektion Langkær Gymnasium.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2015 at 10:11:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

reflection in an artwork at Langkær Gymnasium

File:Medusa head by Gianlorenzo Bernini in Musei capitolini.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2015 at 17:33:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Medusa head by Gianlorenzo Bernini in Musei capitolini
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Medusa is a marble sculpture of the eponymous character from the classical myth. It was executed by the Italian sculptor Gianlorenzo Bernini. Its precise date of creation is unknown, but it is likely to have been executed in the 1630s. It was first documented in 1731 when presented to the Palazzo dei Conservatori in Rome, and is now part of the collections of the Capitoline Museums. All by -- LivioAndronico talk 17:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico talk 17:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment rotate it, see note. What was so strong ligth source ? I see no flash was used. --Mile (talk) 17:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC) P.S. I would crop it above the head.
  • ✓ Done Mile,the light is of museum (in the night use a strong light),thanks --LivioAndronico talk 18:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lighting. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unattractive harsh light, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I can't do nothing for the light,but there aren't parts burn out --LivioAndronico talk 19:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Why can you not take a photo of the subject at a time of the day, where the light is better? Just because it is not overexposed, does not mean it is good lightning. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Because was the inauguration of the restoration of the statue and they made at night, I did not say that the light was good for you, in fact, I just said that there aren't burned parts --LivioAndronico talk 20:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Nijubashi bridge Edo castle Tokyo Japan by D Ramey Logan.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2015 at 05:16:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nijubashi bridge at Edo castle in Tokyo Japan is the main entrance to The Imperial Palace
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The scenery in general is interesting and could probably made an FP. But there are imho too many issues with the photo. You should compose / crop your photo more thoroughly - there are some distracting elements in the images borders (see notes). E.g. certain branches hanging from the top are not fortunate. There are further quality issues: CAs, most remarkable at the top right. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose follwing the good review by Tuxyso. — Julian H. 11:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,nice but not very good quality --LivioAndronico talk 16:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxyso. And though it’s above size limit, I expect an FPC of just 6 mpix to be crisp sharp. --Kreuzschnabel 17:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Tuxyso. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxiso. The image is improperly categorized. --Cayambe (talk) 19:58, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What category would you suggest this be in?? --WPPilot (talk) 23:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Category:Edo Castle, Castle with an uppercase C. :-) Regards, --Cayambe (talk) 07:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Alternative 1[edit]

2013 Ahmanson Cup Regatta yacht Zapata II alt 1

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's better now that the issues are fixed, but at 4.5 MP, any bit of unsharpness is too much. --King of ♠ 02:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Kodak BW 2015-02-18 20-07-15.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 15:00:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The shadow goes inwards (bad positioned ligth ?), also camera could be tunred little bit to recth, to see front plane better. --Mile (talk) 15:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kodak of 1902.....good quality....for me is good. The shadow is not disturb for me --LivioAndronico talk 19:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the Shadow is ok. Maybe, right a bit crop? And a little bit more light? But its good for FP to me. --Ralf Roleček 21:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm missing an extra main front light, sorry. --Kadellar (talk) 11:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment [Edit conflict: per Kadellar, pretty much] I really think the front could be a little brighter, this should be relatively simple to correct. It's your choice of course. — Julian H. 11:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Front is too dark for me. Supporting surface could be better cleaned. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Cervo do Pantano Perfil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 14:42:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Close-up of a marsh deer (Blastocerus dichotomus) in Itirapina, São Paulo state, Brazil.
The marsh deer is the largest deer species from South America reaching a length of 2 m (6.6 ft) and a shoulder height of 1.2 m (3.9 ft). It is found in Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay. Formerly found in much of tropical and subtropical South America, it ranged east of the Andes, south from the Amazon rainforest, west of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest and north of the Argentinian Pampa. Today it is largely reduced to isolated populations at marsh and lagoon zones in the Paraná, Paraguay, Araguaia and Guapore river basins. Created and uploaded by Jonathan Wilkins - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Is this deer Airport keeper ? Is it in nature ? --Mile (talk) 15:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High-quality portrait, excellent. --King of ♠ 04:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 08:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 11:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Simple, but effective composition. Less is more. --Pugilist (talk),
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The size is a little small but focus is just on the head and the way of using focal plane is very good. (a bit distracting background though.) --Laitche (talk) 16:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 19:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @ArionEstar: You better change the color space to sRGB otherwise you might be scolded by Colin... --Laitche (talk) 21:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Laitche: Sorry, but what? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
      • I must get round to writing a guide for this. Unless Jonathan Wilkins can save as sRGB from raw, the benefits are reduced. -- 21:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
        • @Colin: OK, I almost understood, thanks and please signature above. @ArionEstar: I am not so good about color space but "Images for the web are most widely viewable when in the sRGB color space." as you can see on that page, and this image's ICC Profile is Adobe RGB (1998). --Laitche (talk) 22:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
        • Never mind, I guess some FP's color space are uncalibrated, same as this :) --Laitche (talk) 23:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Paneles solares en Cariñena, España, 2015-01-08, DD 09-12 PAN.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 14:16:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the photovoltaic power station of Cariñena, Zaragoza, Spain. The panels are mounted on dual axis trackers in order to maximise the intensity of incoming direct radiation. This solution enables the arrays to track the sun in its daily orbit.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of the photovoltaic power station of Cariñena, Zaragoza, Spain. The panels are mounted on dual axis trackers in order to maximise the intensity of incoming direct radiation. This solution enables the arrays to track the sun in its daily orbit. Poco2 14:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 14:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice composition. --Kadellar (talk) 14:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice composition, nice light, nice sky but bad news... stitching errors. --Laitche (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2015 (UTC) fixed. --Laitche (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I suggest litle +contrast and move curve a bit down, its better. Now too brigth. This would be Sci-Fi photo without that tree. --Mile (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good and as already mentioned very futuristic - looks more like artwork than a photovoltaic power station. I found a another stitching error (see note) but I am sure Diego will fix it soon. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ New version uploaded adressing all issues mentioned here (also yours Iifar) Poco2 17:32, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Stitching errors are fixed but moiré appear instead... --Laitche (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC) disappeared. --Laitche (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Moiré gone, thanks! Poco2 18:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I Love this original things,good quality too --LivioAndronico talk 19:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support though a bit hazier than I would have liked. --King of ♠ 04:42, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm not sure if there is a caching problem, but I see a very strong stitching problem with the fence post on the right side. — Julian H. 10:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes, the fences are disappearing or appearing. --Laitche (talk) 11:31, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Oops, how could I miss that? I tried some editing but finally came to the conclusion that the best I can do with the fence is getting rid of it, at least in the middle. Therefore I cropped it and did some minor editing Poco2 14:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Better. :) A weak Symbol support vote.svg Support from me then, because the place really is very cool but the clipping in the middle is quite large in area. — Julian H. 14:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great idea and composition, perfect lighting, reasonable quality. Pity for the CA on the fenceposts to the left. --Kreuzschnabel 17:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ CA gone, that was easy Poco2 17:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The image has huge wow. There is a CA on the fence poles to the left, but it is acceptable for me given the large resolution. I am a little confused about the horizontal angle of view. Could you please indicate that on the file page. A geolocation would also be helpful for understanding better the layout of the solar power plant.-- Slaunger (talk) 19:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    Slaunger: ✓ Done It looks like I uploaded the wrong version, the version uploaded now is free of CA. I also added the geodata Poco2 22:34, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:15-05-23-Berlin-Sachsendamm-Tesla-RalfR-N3S 7354.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 12:50:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tesla Roadster; Breakdown on the highway
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Ralf Roleček
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ralf Roleček 12:50, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice impression. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Please add an other license. Only the "GFDL 1.2 only" license isn't enough. New FPC rule. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, a good idea and a good capture! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice. Ich frage mich, warum du dort mit dem Stativ warst haha. --Kadellar (talk) 14:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Ohne Stativ, Brückengeländer und 4 unscharfe Versuche --Ralf Roleček 14:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interesting shot and composition but it looks a bit loss details, maybe with f/22? --Laitche (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 00:40, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. But I ask—what is the message being sent by this picture? That you shouldn't buy a Tesla because it will break down and you'll be stuck on the side of the road while traffic zooms by? Face-smile.svg Daniel Case (talk) 03:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very intriguing shot. --King of ♠ 04:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm slightly concerned regarding the legal situation of this photo. Based on which interpretation do you regard this as being ok? — Julian H. 10:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Was meinst du? Die Person ist Beiwerk, Nummernschilder brauchen nicht verpixelt werden. --Ralf Roleček 11:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Ich hätte hier stark bezweifelt, dass man sie als Beiwerk bezeichnen kann, aber ich bin natürlich diesbezüglich gar kein Experte. — Julian H. 11:25, 24 May 2015 (UTC) Edit: siehe z.B. hier. — Julian H. 11:29, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
        • "..daß sie auch entfallen könnten, ohne daß Inhalt und Charakter des Bildes sich veränderten.." ist schon lange gelebter Konsens bei deutschen Gerichten. --Ralf Roleček 12:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 11:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A photograph that leaves the viewer slightly puzzled. I am still annoyed that I find it difficult to see the idea behind the composition - but I prefer "annoying" photos that are able to attract my interest. --Pugilist (talk) 11:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:42, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 11:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Code (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:25, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another very good idea, and achievement, for RR.--Jebulon (talk) 19:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good timing with the cars passing by and excellent idea. Eyecatching, and it can serve as an illustration for many kinds of subjects. The motion blur on the passing car naturally draws the attention to the red Tesla and the young lady. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good idea, nice capture. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good photo --Qian.Nivan (talk) 09:18, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Klensmedjan Horndal May 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 07:43:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Horndal iron works.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The blacksmith shop ("klensmedja") of Horndals bruk, Avesta Municipality, Sweden. Tools used in the Lancashire forge of Horndals bruk or the foundry were probably repaired in this workshop. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 07:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arild Vågen (talk) 07:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 12:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Seems there is danger at the camera location. Your life is more important than FP! --Laitche (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is true but it is not a big house, it is possible to shoot from the doorpost.--ArildV (talk) 05:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting subject and very well done. --Code (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 19:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral In thumb I was pretty convinced it would end out with an oppose from me as I find the crop vertically unbalanced (too little below, too much above) and it seemed too dark. However, in full view it is a rather well done photo with many details, good light despite the many dark areas of an usual subject recalling us that "valuable is not always beautiful". -- Slaunger (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Xian China Cultural-Performance-02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 05:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Xian, China: Cultural show
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cccefalon - uploaded by Cccefalon - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer 05:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 05:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Bojars (talk) 06:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment WB is really off. --Mile (talk) 06:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I get the same impression. They must have used some really yellow stage lights. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Maire (talk) 09:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 10:08, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMHO it needs a WB correction. It's to me so yellowish, that it gets disturbing Poco2 12:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose White balance is off. It should have been corrected before nomination in FPC.--Jebulon (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Jebulon, you forgot to sign Poco2 17:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Indeed, thank you. Done now.--Jebulon (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jebulon, I'm aware the lighting was probably colored and it helps to preserve a bit of it but this is still too much. --King of ♠ 20:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I commented on the coloured light on my talk page --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:17, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I don't think anyone's looking for their white shirts to be pure white. But if the yellows were a little less overwhelming... — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I read explanation for ligths and WB, but i have my opinion. There is no camera which would handle WB correct at such "extreme" temperature. Especially when set on Auto white balance. Unless you made calibration with color cards (which doeasnt look like). This and choped hands of woman in rigth. --Mile (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC) P.S. I did try to lower T and it looks little better, i think from RAW could be even better.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, regarding the white balance. It doesn't have to be perfectly neutral in such a case, but too much of the actual variation in colour seems to have been lost here. — Julian H. 11:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Texelgruppe Hohe Wilde 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 21:20:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View on Hochwilde (3480m), a mountain of the Ötztal Alps photographed from a trail near Lazinser Alm inside the Texelgruppe Nature Park
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View on Hochwilde (3480m), a mountain of the Ötztal Alps photographed from a trail near Lazinser Alm inside the Texelgruppe Nature Park
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Good composition, though lighting could be better. --King of ♠ 21:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What had been better light for you here, King of Hearts? The creek and mountain are in sunlight, the trees at the left are partly in shadow which is imho a good contrast to the bright and snowy mountain. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • It's a bit flat, an unavoidable consequence of shooting at noon. Granted, it might be the best possible light for this scene (as sunrise/sunset could create unwanted shadows) which is why I still supported, but not particularly inspiring in an absolute sense. The composition and contrasting colors are what I like about this image. --King of ♠ 05:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)