Commons:Propositions d'images remarquables

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Les règles des Propositions d'images remarquables ont changé.
Conformément aux règles générales, une image est promue avec 7 (sept) votes "support" ou plus (et un ratio de 2/1 de # supports/opposes) et le nombre de nominations actives par utilisateur est limité à 2 (deux)
Désormais, seuls peuvent voter les membres inscrits depuis plus de 10 jours ayant procédé à au moins 50 interventions dans "Commons"


Skip to current candidates Aller directement aux propositions en cours

Cette page recense les images qui sont proposées pour être affichées dans les Images remarquables. Notez qu'il ne s'agit pas de la même chose que l'image du jour ou que les images de qualité.

Les archives des votes précédents se trouvent sur cette page.

Il existe également une liste chronologique des images remarquables.

Voir aussi les Images de qualité, les propositions d'images de qualité et les critiques photographiques.

Procédure[edit]

Conseils avant de proposer une image[edit]

partie en cours de traduction depuis la version anglaise, votre avis est le bienvenu.
Lisez entièrement le guide avant de commencer
Quelques règles informelles à retenir avant de proposer une image (les termes en italiques sont la traduction anglaise des termes).

  • Définition (display resolution) : les images de Commons peuvent être utilisées sur d'autres supports qu'un écran d'ordinateur, par exemple pour être imprimées ou vues à très haute résolution. Il est important que les images proposées aient la plus haute résolution possible. Au moins 2 millions de pixels (par ex. 2000 x 1000) semble raisonnable à présent. Les images de définition inférieure sont systématiquement rejetées sauf s'il y a une bonne raison.
  • Mise au point (focus) : tous les objets importants de l'image devraient être nets. Dans l'idéal les objets non primordiaux sont nets.
  • Avant-plan et arrière-plan (background and foreground): ils peuvent être dérangeants. Le sujet principal ne devrait pas être caché par le premier plan, ni se confondre avec l'arrière-plan.
  • Qualité générale (general quality) : Les images proposées devraient avoir une très haute qualité technique.
  • Une retouche (digital manipulations) ne doit pas tromper l'observateur. La correction de quelques défauts dans l'image est acceptée pour autant que ce soit limité, bien fait, et non pour tromper. Les retouches courantes sont le recadrage, la correction de la perspective, de netteté, des couleurs ou de l'exposition. Des manipulations plus importantes, tels quel l'élimination d'éléments dans l'arrière plan, doivent être décrites dans la description de l'image, par le biais du modèle {{RetouchedPicture}}. Les retouches non décrites ou mal décrites qui transformeraient le sujet sont inacceptables.
  • Utilité (value) : notre but principal est de présenter des images utiles et précieuses. Les images devraient ainsi être spéciales d'une façon ou d'une autre, donc, entre autres :
    • La plupart des coucher de soleil sont beaux, et la plupart ne sont pas différents des autres existant déjà.
    • Les photos de nuit sont souvent belles mais davantage de détails sont visibles de jour.
    • "Beau" ne veut pas dire "utile".

Au niveau technique, nous avons l'exposition, la composition, le mouvement et la profondeur du champ.

  • L'exposition (exposure) est l'obturation du diaphragme qui modifie la luminosité (brightness) pour rendre avec qualité les ombres et les lumières au sein de l'image. Le manque d'ombres dans le détail n'est pas nécessairement négatif, cela peut être un effet désiré.
  • La composition (composition) est l'arrangement des éléments dans l'image. La "Règle de trois" est un bon guide pour la composition, c'est un héritage des écoles de peintures. L'idée est de diviser l'image par deux lignes horizontales et deux lignes verticales, nous avons donc trois parties dans chaque sens. L'objet ne doit pas forcément être centré. Les sujets intéressants doivent êtres placés aux 4 croisements des lignes. L'horizon ne doit jamais être mis au milieu, car il couperait l'image en deux. L'idée principale ici est de rendre l'image dynamique.
  • Netteté (sharpness) renvoie à la manière dont les mouvements sont représentés dans l'image. Ils peuvent être nets ou flous. Ils ne sont pas mieux l'un que l'autre, cela dépend de l'intention du photographe. L'impression de mouvement dépend des différents objets de l'image. Par exemple, photographier une voiture de course qui apparaît nette par rapport à l'arrière plan ne donne pas une idée de la vitesse. Il faudrait en fait que la voiture soit représentée nette, mais avec un arrière plan flou, créant ainsi le mouvement. D'un autre coté, représenter le saut d'un joueur de basket net avec le reste de l'image flou, en raison de la nature peu habituelle de la photo, lui conférerait de l'intérêt.
  • La profondeur de champ (depth of field or DOF) renvoie à la zone de mise au point devant et au delà du sujet principal. La profondeur de champ est choisie en fonction des besoins spécifiques à chaque image. Une profondeur grande ou petite peu améliorer ou dégrader la qualité de l'image. Une faible profondeur de champ peu attirer l'attention sur le sujet principal, en le séparant de son environnement. Le lentilles à petite distance focale (grand angle) ont une grande profondeur de champ, et vice versa, les lentilles à grande distance focale (petite ouverture) ont une petite profondeur de champ.

Proposition[edit]

Si vous pensez avoir trouvé ou créé une image qui puisse être considérée comme parmi les meilleures de Commons, avec une description et une licence appropriée, copiez le nom de l'image dans la boîte ci-dessous (en incluant le préfixe File:), après le texte déjà présent :


Après cela, vous devrez insérer un lien vers la page que vous venez de créer en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

Vote[edit]

A l'exclusion de tous autres, vous pouvez utiliser les modèles suivants:

  • {{Pour}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Contre}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),

Ainsi que :

  • {{Neutre}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram voting question.svg Question).


IMPORTANT: veuillez notamment NE PAS UTILISER les modèles {{weak support}} (GA candidate.svg Weak support) ni {{weak oppose}} (BA candidate.svg Weak oppose), ils ne sont pas reconnus par le robot, et votre vote serait considéré comme non valide.

Merci d'inclure quelques mots expliquant pourquoi vous soutenez ou non la promotion de l'image, surtout si vous votez contre. N'oubliez pas de signer avec ~~~~.

Règles[edit]

Règles générales[edit]

  1. Le résultat est donné 9 jours après la proposition (voir le planning en bas de page). Les votes ajoutés le 10e jour ou après ne sont pas décomptés.
  2. Les utilisateurs non-enregistrés peuvent proposer des images, faire des commentaires, mais pas voter.
  3. La proposition elle-même ne compte pas comme un vote : il faut l'ajouter explicitement.
  4. Le proposant peut retirer une image à tout moment, en écrivant I withdraw my nomination.
  5. Souvenez-vous que le but de Wikimedia Commons est une bibliothèque pour tous les projets Wikimedia, y compris des projets futurs ; les images n'ont pas à être utiles uniquement pour Wikipédia.
  6. Les images peuvent être retirées de la liste dès le 5e jour si elles n'ont reçu aucun vote "pour".
  7. Soyez attentifs et très sélectifs dans les choix que vous faites, car il ne peut y avoir que deux propositions actives par proposant. Toute proposition supplémentaire sera rejetée sans examen.
  8. Seulement 2 nominations actives par même utilisateur (qui est, en nomination sous "review" et non encore close) sont autorisées. Le principal but de cette mesure est de contribuer à une meilleure qualité moyenne des nominations, par un choix plus judicieux des photos présentes en nominations.

Règles de promotion[edit]

L'image candidate devient une image remarquable si elle remplit les conditions suivantes :

  1. Une licence appropriée (bien sûr !)
  2. Au moins sept votes "pour".
  3. un ratio de 2/1 de votes "pour"/"contre".
  4. Deux versions différentes de la même image ne peuvent pas être promues en même temps, mais seulement celle avec le plus grand score.

Contestations[edit]

Avec le temps, les critères d'évaluation évoluent, et il peut être décidé qu'une image qui était auparavant assez bonne pour être dans la liste ne peut plus l'être.

Pour qu'une image soit déchue, il faut qu'une majorité de 2/3 avec au moins 5 votes accepte de retirer l'image, autrement elle reste "remarquable". Pour voter, utiliser les modèles {{Keep}} (Symbol keep vote.svg Keep : mérite de rester "remarquable") ou {{Delist}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist  : ne mérite plus le label).

Pour contester une image, copiez son nom avec le préfixe dans la boîte ci-dessous à la suite du texte déjà présent :


Vous devriez inclure les informations suivantes :

  • Informations sur l'origine de l'image (créateur, importateur).
  • Un lien vers le vote d'origine.
  • La raison pour laquelle vous contestez le label, avec votre signature.

Insérez ensuite un lien en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal.

Sommaire[edit]

Contents

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste[edit]

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste, cliquez ici et ajoutez votre proposition en haut de la liste : {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:FILENAME}}

Propositions en cours[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Alcazaba 1, Almeria, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2014 at 19:14:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alcazaba of Almeria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 19:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Alcazaba (meaning : the fortress in arab) and part of city walls, from San Cristobal hill, Almería, Spain. Alboran Sea in background.-- Jebulon (talk) 19:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good work --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:2013 Longines Global Champions - Lausanne - 14-09-2013 - Kara Chad et Alberto II 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2014 at 12:09:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

2013 Longines Global Champions - Lausanne - 14-09-2013 - Kara Chad et Alberto II
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pleclown - uploaded by Pleclown - nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kara Chad and Alberto II during the CSI2* Final 1.45 m at the 2013 Longines Global Champions Lausanne event on the 14th of september 2013 (Renomination as the first one was cancelled due to the two active nominations restriction) -- Pleclown (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment One man, two votes, Pleclown :) --Tuxyso (talk) 12:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    I don't see what you're talking about :) (c/c error) Pleclown (talk) 12:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- KTC (talk) 08:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Junge Silbermöve im Flug bei Texel 02 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 22:44:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Juvenile European herring gull (Larus argentatus) in fast flight
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Juvenile European herring gull (Larus argentatus) in fast flight
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 22:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 22:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 06:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressively high-resolution image for a bird -- many of our bird-in-flight FPs are much lower than this. -- Colin (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Colin. Jee 12:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Colin -Pugilist (talk) 13:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support also per Colin. Nicely captured. Diliff (talk) 14:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Do you have another frame where the nictitating membrane is not half closed? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Up to now I did not know what the nictitating membrane is :) Unfortunately I have no other (sharp) photo where the eyes are sufficiently visible. With the bird here the nictitating membrane is imho quite transparent thus the eyes are still quite visible - with a lot of other in-flight shots you often only see a pure black eye socket. --Tuxyso (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --57.250.245.249 19:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC) IP voting invalid. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support perfect! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Lörrach - Evangelische Stadtkirche.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 21:14:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lörrach: Protestant Church
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 21:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 21:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support – pity the tree covers so much of the building but I think this is hardly avoidable. Moving the camera a few metres to the right might have cropped the distracting blocks out and shown a little more of the tower. The bicycle wheels not being perfectly round is caused by the wide-angle view, I presume, because the dial-plates are. Impressive picture however. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 04:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Only an average quality shot, nothing special. Unfortunate light: The front part of the church which is the main motive here is in shadow. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
The church isn't in shadow, open your eyes --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
open your eyes is unnecessarily offensive.--Jebulon (talk) 07:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Jebulon. IMHO the nominator is closed minded to any argument - he prefers not seeing the obvious. 2 hours later (as up to now only edit on an FPC page tody) - no comment. Und noch mal auf Deutsch: Der Nominator verschließt sich jeglichen offensichtlicher Argumente. Zwei Stunden später wird eine Nominierung von mir, die bereits mehrere Tage läuft, mit dem inhaltsleeren Kommentar n.th. featureable bedacht (als bis dahin einzige Editierung auf einer FPC-Seite am heutigen Tag) - da muss man glaube ich nichts mehr zu sagen. So macht FPC auf jeden Fall Spaß. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Die nachweisliche Falschbehauptung, die Kirche befände sich im Schatten, darf nicht unkommentiert bleiben. Und was meine Stimmabgabe beim Leuchturm damit zu tun hat und welche Relevanz sich hierfür ergibt, bleibt dein Geheimnis. Weiteres ist hier nicht zu besprechen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Is the church in shadow ? Isn't it ? Not my concern, but of course this can/must be discussed. But the way to discuss this is important, "open your eyes" is not acceptable here IMO. Retaliation votes ? No need to be a strict and circumspect observer to see that they exist in many cases here... Sometimes I feel that "persons" are more important than "pictures" in FPC.--Jebulon (talk) 09:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I make Jebulon's words mine Poco2 11:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
*sigh* -- Colin (talk) 12:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
To maintain s.th. obviously wrong makes me uncomprehending. My advise to open the eyes is compared to this instability proper blandness. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is larger and sharper than your typical QI but isn't making me go wow either for the subject or the arrangement. -- Colin (talk) 12:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. The composition isn't very compelling, with the tree obscuring the most interesting part of the scene. Diliff (talk) 20:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Geranoaetus melanoleucus, Hawk Conservancy.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 16:22:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lewis Hulbert -- Lewis Hulbert (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lewis Hulbert (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not bad but too noisy considering the small size. There’s a focus problem too, the plumage on the neck being distinctly sharper than the face. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 04:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I can probably remove the noise by reworking it, I never applied any noise removal. Would the sharpness alone still be too much of an issue? --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 06:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark, unfortunate light. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info reworked the image from RAW, I don't know if that's any better. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 23:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Turbinhuset September 2014 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 13:49:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Historic turbine house
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Historic turbine house in Västerås, Sweden. This small hydro power built 1891 plant is probably one of the most important buildings in the history of Västerås. In the neighboring town of Arboga was an electric company who was looking for opportunities to expand. To get the company to move to Västerås the Västerås municipality put up with land, capital, and electric power. Västerås Municipality built the turbine house and and rented it out to the company. In 1891 the company moved and changed its name to ASEA (today the ABB Group and soon grew into a multinational empire and Västerås grew into the fifth largest city in Sweden. ASEA rented the building until 1902. (when Sweden had already started to build huge hydroelectric plant in northern Sweden, of course, with technology from ASEA). The building is now a museum, located in the very center between the castle and the City Hall. I really like the early autumn light and the beautiful colors here, the composition is also chosen to include only the older buildings.
  • Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 13:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 13:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much in shade. I'd like to see more of the water on the right and less of the grassy slope (I appreciate this may no be practical without being in the water). Btw, why is the roof so flat and the eaves stick out so far? It looks like someone has taken a taller building and squashed it. -- Colin (talk) 12:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I understand your point Colin although I personally think that the tree shadow on the facade is beautiful. Regarding the architecture; the architect is unknown. The house has been described as a stylish mixture of Gothic and Neo-classical styles. The municipality wanted a representative building of course, located next to the historic medieval castle. A local national romantic architect interested in history (but not necessarily very knowledgeable) maybe?--ArildV (talk) 12:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Schwetzingen BW 2014-07-22 17-04-02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 10:46:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Germany, Baden-Württemberg, Schwetzingen castle, colonnade of the "mosque"
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 10:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 10:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The image lacks detail but this is compensated by the great composition and colors, good job! Poco2 11:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Guter Blick für eine ganz besondere Perspektive. Herzlichen Glückwunsch zu diesem gelungenen Foto! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bottom part is very unsharp, cobblesones look washed. --Mile (talk) 15:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tolle Komposition mit guter Nutzung wiederholter Elemente. Level of detail and sharpness is not very good, but with Poco. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image lacks detail and this is not compensated by the great composition and colors. Tourists are disturbing. And per Mile. Sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 07:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lacking quality/sharpness is not acceptable for a FP, particularly for such more or less easy objects --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Flaminio obelisk.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 06:53:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Refugio Militar Capitan Cobo - Pico Veleta - Sierra Nevada - 2014-08-07.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 06:21:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Refugio militar Capitán Cobo
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 06:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Refugio militar Capitán Cobo are barracks used by the Special Operations Command of Spain (Mando de Operaciones Especiales) for high altitude training. The barracks are located at an altitude of 2550 m in the Sierra Nevada mountain range. The road A-395 in front shows the last public section of the 38 km long access road from Granada leading to Pico del Veleta, the second highest mountain in Sierra Nevada (3394 m). This is also the highest paved road in Europe. A special thanks to Jebulon for showing me this place, and many thanks to Kadellar and Poco a poco for figuring out what was the purpose of the building. For quite some time, I thought it was a youth hostel, LOL! Smile. -- Slaunger (talk) 06:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 06:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • some parts of the building are good and sharp, others are soft and not really sharp. what has happend here? --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Wladyslaw: It is a stitch of four images. My kit lenses are not as good as I would like, and they produce soft results at image borders for certain focal lengths and apertures. (A prime lens is on my wish list). That results in an uneven image quality. The pic is close to 15 Mpixels, and I think the pixel quality is sufficient for FP given the pixelage. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I am in the process of restitching, and I notice that the ueven sharpness is due to not all images having perfect focus. Luckily, there is a big overlap between images, and by using masking in PTGui, I can see that I can achieve a better technical result (and I should stop blaming my glass all the time, it is actually not that bad, when used correctly). -- Slaunger (talk) 21:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like it very much and was ready to support but I got a bit disappointed by the fact that reading the "Todo por la Patria" is pretty annoying. Is there a way to combine those 4 frames to fix it? Poco2 11:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • @Poco a poco: I understand what you say, (I think). The first time I zoomed in I also thought: what an ugly stitching/blending error! Until I realized that the letters are suspended in a frame with space to the wall behind. And since the setting sun is coming in from quite an angle (thus the nice light elsewhere), the shadows gives the impression of ghost letters. See also the 'other version' linked to from the file page, which is a normal single shot photo. I think it would be wrong to clone put the shadows. Don't you agree?-- Slaunger (talk) 17:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Jebulon has pointed out a stitching error on the file page. I would like to try and make a complete rework this evening, since I have acquired Lightroom since I made this stitch, and I would like to try my new LR plus PTGui workflow on this. --Slaunger (talk) 17:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Taxiarchos228:, Poco a poco, Jebulon. I have reworked the image completely in a Lightroom + PTGui workflow. Two (upper right and lower left) of four sources images are not perfectly sharp. Using masking in PTGui, the use of these images is now minimized, the three texts are now entirely clear. There is still some residual softness in lower left and upper right corners. I think it is not so bad, but understand if you find it unacceptable for FP. I did not quite get the same white balance in this process and have ended up with slightly more vivid colors of the roof and a darker sky, to be honest I am not sure, which one is closest to the truth. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not quite sure it is FP overall, but wow that was a massive improvement in quality, well done! --DXR (talk) 05:23, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP to me Poco2 07:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment small error(s) - a note i s addede. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 10:39, 16 September 2014 (UTC) I must have had a look at an old cached, sorry, the note i deleted. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Far much better, once old cache eliminated. You are not far from truth regarding the light if I remember well.--Jebulon (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Lörrach - Stadtbibliothek Lörrach2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 06:02:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lörrach: municipal library
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 06:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 06:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the composition is boring, too much is in shadow and low wow, sorry. Good, but not among our very best works.-- Slaunger (talk) 06:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    Slaunger: The options for a different composition in this case are very rare. I think this image is interessting because of the good visible vanishing point projection, the sharpness of the image and the building itself. The shadows are very low and if we look at two sides of a building we have the inevitable situation that there is always one side illuminated and one in shadow. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    I believe you when you say it cannot be done much better given the possibilities, but not every subject is featureable, and I think this is one of them. No matter how much effort you put into it, it is probably hard to get a wow feeling for this rather ordinary building. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    "ordinary building" is subjective and not appropriate. It's a Art Nouveau building with historic importance (not visible, I admit), but if you don't like it no problem. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    Es wäre hilfreich, wenn du etwas sachlicher bliebest. Daß man dein Bild nicht herausragend findet, heißt doch nicht, daß es schlecht ist, und mit „don’t like it“ hat es auch nichts zu tun. Auf FPC zeichnen wir die allerfeinsten Bilder aus, die Commons überhaupt zu bieten hat, das Sahnehäubchen. Und da finde ich ebenfalls, daß dieses Bild, so gut es auch gemacht ist und so schön und wertvoll das Gebäude sein mag, Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nicht dazugehört. Es hat einfach als Bild zu wenig Besonderes. Natürlich ist das auch Geschmackssache, aber genau deshalb geht’s ja hier per demokratischer Stimmabgabe. Ich habe mir angewöhnt, auch für Contras dankbar zu sein, denn sie zeigen mir auch, daß sich jemand mit meinem Bild auseinandergesetzt hat, wenn er es auch anders sieht und empfindet als ich. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 15:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    Ich persönlich fände es hilfreich wenn du Unterstellungen dort lassen würdest, wo sie hingehören: nämlich außen vor. Ich bin an keiner Stelle unsachlich geworden sondern habe lediglich Slaungers Argumente hinterfragt, um sie besser zu verstehen. Das erlaube ich mir stets dann wenn ich etwas nicht verstehen. Ansonsten brauche ich weder einen Ratgeber, wie ich mit Kontrastimmen umzugehen habe noch sonstige Kommentaroren. Vielen Dank. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    I'm sorry if you find my use of the term 'ordinary' as being not appropriate. With 'ordinary' I mean ordinary relative to other FPCs of buildings. And not supporting an FPC (among the very best Commons has to offer) is not equivalent to 'not liking' (something is good). And yeah, it is tough nowadays at FPC. I sometimes see more notable buildings in better light and compositions being rejected by experienced reviewers such as yourself, also when the best possible vantage point and time of day has been used, but due to the constraints of the place it was simply not good enough. Its tough, the bar is high. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Building 54 CEF Ottawa.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 02:59:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Heritage House (Building 54) at Central Experimantal Farm in Ottawa, this is a National Historic Place of Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The rear view of Heritage House (Building 54) at Central Experimantal Farm in Ottawa. It's built in the Queen Anne Revival style and used to be a home for senior farm staff. This building is a National Historic Place of Canada.

If you have ideas or advice, how to make it better, I'm happy to hear about it. Created by MB-one - uploaded by MB-one - nominated by MB-one -- MB-one (talk) 02:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a nice subject, but the trees in the background are too dark to make the difference between the house and the background. Try at another daylight. -- -donald- (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. I like the image, but a new image with -donald-'s suggestion might be better. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the advice. I reworked the shadows to achieve better contrast between trees and building. --MB-one (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
That looks better imo, struck out weak. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 19:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Important parts of the building are in shadow. IMHO that not really helps for a good overall impression of the photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Luz Metro Station of São Paulo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 01:25:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Luz Metro Station of São Paulo
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Wilfredor, can you explain your intentions with this picture, because clearly it isn't a standard exposure and if the station was actually that dark, people might fall onto the track. I see from other images in the category, that the platforms get very busy with people waiting (something that is barely visible on the right hand side here). It's hard to appreciate the architecture of the roof. -- Colin (talk) 11:58, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your comment Colin (I send a hug o/). I wish to convey the admosfera this terminal on a Sunday afternoon, I wanted to convey the feeling of loneliness, give a picture of this terminal as it was 100 years ago when everything was calm and relaxed, I used the technique of backlighting for obscure details of our current society, the bright colors were too expensive at the time. This photograph is an invitation to stop time in a terminal that always looks in motion, this photograph is a reminder of what once was this terminal. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark for any emotions. --Yikrazuul (talk) 20:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Fugro Explorer.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 23:45:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:2014 Nysa, Bazylika św. Jakuba i św. Agnieszki, witraż.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 22:06:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too soft and no wow for me --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Mercado Central, Valencia, España, 2014-06-30, DD 116.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 22:02:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior view of the dome of the Central Market (Mercado Central), a 100-years-old modernist building located in Valencia, Spain. The market contains 400 stores that employ approx 1500 people, and is the biggest in Europe dedicated to fresh products.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Interior view of the dome of the Central Market (Mercado Central), a 100-years-old modernist building located in Valencia, Spain. The market contains 400 stores that employ approx 1500 people, and is the biggest in Europe dedicated to fresh products. All by me, Poco2 22:02, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 22:02, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! Mesmerizing! ArionEstar (talk) 22:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Some minor quibbles—a little light bleedthrough in one of the windows, and the crop is just a hairsbreadth away from being too tight for me. But sometimes true art is that which stops just short of perfection. (And I like that it looks like a giant watch, without hands or numbers, this way). Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Daniel Case. Maybe some chromatic noise in the darker part at left. I like very much the short descriptions provided in the nomination, always interesting.--Jebulon (talk) 09:23, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done, among other improvements, thanks Poco2 10:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Baños Romanos, Bath, Inglaterra, 2014-08-12, DD 39-41 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 21:56:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Great Bath, part of the Roman Baths complex, a site of historical interest in the city of Bath, England. The baths, based on the local hot springs, were built during the Roman occupation of Britain and has become a major touristic site.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of the Great Bath, part of the Roman Baths complex, a site of historical interest in the city of Bath, England. The baths, based on the local hot springs, were built during the Roman occupation of Britain and has become a major touristic site. Note that this picture is a HDR needed to increase the range due to tricky lighting conditions. All by me, Poco2 21:56, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 21:56, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I'm not sure if I like this angle that much as the water loses its colour because of the reflections, but it's well captured. Especially as you managed to get a view of it without any tourists in the view! Amazing. I've been there 3 or 4 times now and it's always been extremely crowded. Is the timestamp correct or did you forget to change it when you were in the UK? :-) I didn't know it was open so late. Diliff (talk) 05:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    The time stamp is correct. There were a bunch of tourists, but probably very few in comparison to the normal visiting hours, since nobody expects that it's open then. We also got late to Bath and were surprised that you could get in until 9 pm and stay until 10 pm! as you can see here. The problem about going late is the lighting combined with the fact that they will not let you use a tripod, so you have to be imaginative about how to solve that :) Regarding the POV I have to say that before getting there the shot from this angle was my favourite and after taking photographs everywhere in the site I think that I was not mistaken. Poco2 08:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment First of all category has to be corrected ;-) --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done, thanks for the hint! Poco2 08:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 09:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition and colors. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:View of Angers on the Maine river from the castle.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 22:01:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Angers on the river Maine in France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moroder - uploaded by Moroder - nominated by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 22:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 22:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:09, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • nice view, but not really sharp --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to the lack of sharpness which could not be compensated with a stricking composition (the wall in the foreground is disturbing). I wonder whether it would have been possible to the picture further to the left to have a better view of the river and even show a nicer perspective a bit for of the scenery on the left Poco2 11:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • There Is nothing wrong with the sharpness of the photo even if you can't read the number plates of the cars. Technically speaking there is no blur, the focus is correct the aperture is good (f/9), the exposition time is 1//500. I can't comment on the composition, mostly a matter of taste--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Sorry Wolfgang, but I agree with Wladyslaw. It may not be a focus problem but it’s so soft for its 12 mpix I wouldn’t even call it a QI. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 04:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Et plus que l'air marin la douceur angevine (Joachim du Bellay (1522-1560). Yes, but too soft for me too.--Jebulon (talk) 16:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • I might be a bad looser but u are pixel nerds ;-))

--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Hereford Cathedral Choir, Herefordshire, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 21:27:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hereford Cathedral Choir
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 21:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 21:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 08:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Always great and very beautiful. @Diliff I'm curious, the undulations of the shadows in the ribbed vaults are deformations of accommodation of the arches? -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 15:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Winchester Cathedral High Altar, Hampshire, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 21:26:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winchester Cathedral High Altar
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 07:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Very, very impressive... May I ask, how many partial images have you combined in order to achieve the final outcome? If you don't mind disclosing your arcane secrets, that is... --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)

File:Savannah Anole.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 18:59:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by 0x010C - uploaded by 0x010C - nominated by 0x010C -- 0x010C (talk) 18:59, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 0x010C (talk) 18:59, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor detail (due to severe noise reduction I suppose), still very noisy background. Would prefer to see the entire animal too. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 20:35, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Acqueduct arch, Alcazaba gardens, Almeria, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 16:33:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

arch, alcazaba gardens, Almeria, Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 16:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In the gardens of the Alcazaba of Almeria, Andalusia, Spain. The arch is a remain of an ancient arab aqueduct-- Jebulon (talk) 16:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems underexposed, and I really am not excited by the composition. Daniel Case (talk) 19:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With Daniel. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose maybe I have missed s.th, but this is a partial visibel ordinary gate covered with plants and grass, see n.th. special in the object or composition. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • @ Tuxyso: Clin --Jebulon (talk) 13:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Jebulon: may you comment also the other oppose-votings or am I s.th. very special? --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
        • The question is to answer it. But you are s.b., not s.th. --Jebulon (talk) 15:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
          • you seem to need some coaching: please make a difference between "to be s.th. special," but: "to be s.b." thx --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Certainly a nicde moment having been captured but the pic is by no means outstanding. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Stift Göttweig Kaiserstiege Fresko 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 15:36:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling fresco of the Imperial Staircase of Göttweig Abbey by Paul Troger (1739): Apotheosis of Emperor Charles VI.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Ceiling fresco of the Imperial Staircase of Göttweig Abbey by Paul Troger (1739): Apotheosis of Emperor Charles VI. Photographed, uploaded and nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 15:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 15:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 16:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although I feel like the lower right corner is darker than it needs to be, i.e. that it is darker doesn't seem to be intended by the artist. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:17, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is the north-east corner of the fresco, so maybe it is due to uneven illumination. However, as far as I can remember, the light was quite diffuse there. The same effect is visible on all photos I took, and also on photos from other sources. Unfortunately I cannot check on-site in the near future, but I will do further investigations and apply a correction, if necessary. --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Tallinn Toompea Upper Old Town 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 19:47:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tallinn Toompea Upper Old Town
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Ivar (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:40, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Northamerica1000 (talk) 14:02, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love that this is a moonrise photo. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pugilist (talk) 19:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Xicotencatl (talk) 22:30, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice POV of the old town. Looking at it I almost have the impression that it is in the middle of a forest isolated of the civilization Poco2 11:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice light, good view, high quality. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 13:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "The composition isn't very compelling, with the tree obscuring the most interesting part of the scene." Jee 02:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

File:GandM Purist-Grace match cricket balls.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 18:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

GandM Purist-Grace match cricket balls.jpg

File:Panorama Egmond aan Zee Leuchtturm 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 14:26:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view over Egmond aan Zee with J.C.J. van Speijk lighthouse
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 14:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 14:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice stitch and very impressive resolution and overall quality. The Leuchtturm is leaning a bit to the right. Is it leaning in reality also? (difficult to find good vertical alignment points on the conically shaped mast). -- Slaunger (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • IMHO OK as it is. If you draw a vertical line through the red top the line reaches exactly the middle of the lighthouse. I've vertically aligned to the buildings at the background and the pano head was perfectly adjusted. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Weird, it does not reach the exact middle on my monitor.Smile First I got, an impression of leaning by just seeing it in thumb. Then I thought it could be some kind of perceived leaning, so I checked by panning over an approximate 50% view and look at the edges of the base of the tower and where the corresponding vertical lines intersected the top. The intersection points are not symmetrical, which I think they should be. I will try to indicate with an annotation, although it is hard to get sufficient precision in drawing the box. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:49, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree that the remaining building like the church have very good vertical alignment, but the lighthouse protudes much higher and it is really not possible to properly insert vertical alignment points as there are no vertical lines in the lighthouse to align with, and it is my experience that this can easily lead to extrapolation errors although the base align well vertically. Its difficult, its difficult. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed, Slaunger. It took me a lot of time but you had been right, something was wrong there. The problem is that near the light house there are only very few (and short) vertical lines in the background. The solution was to manually add a vertical line with manually estimated coordinates (without having such a long vertical line there). IMHO it is better now, please take another look. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done! I send you a mail shortly after my initial comment offering to send a crop showing it, but you found out yourself. It was subtle to see, I agree.-- Slaunger (talk) 21:17, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very little barrel distortion, the sea at the edges is at a higher elevation. I agree that the lighthouse seems leaning. But all the others verticals are straight, so for me it is leaning in reality. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not sure if it is barrel distortion, but I have now fixed the sea level at both sides. Please take another look, Christian (if you have time) and give me a feedback if the elevation issued is fixed for you. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
At full resolution I moved the cursor of the window from a side to the other : The sea at right is straight but is higher than the sea of the left. The level of the sea at left is more straight than the first version but is always a bit leaning especially near the land. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 06:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done It had been only a few pixels, Christian - should now finally corrected. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Perfectly straight, however the right is always a bit higher than the left... -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:54, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
IMHO only pixels, with regard to the size of the pano neglectable. Probably a rounding error in Hugin :) --Tuxyso (talk) 08:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:36, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Something I forgot to ask, when I got distracted by the lighthouse leaning, which is now fixed... The sky alternates between blue and more white: Did you use a polarization filter? -- Slaunger (talk) 08:21, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Slaunger, using a polarizing filter with Panos is a no-go. If you take a look on the EXIF data you can see that the angle of view is very wide - about 270° - the setting sun is left to the left edge, and right to the right edge thus this is the explanation for the alternating brightness. Exposure time was identical with all shots, light situation did not change during the shot. The brighter areas in the middle are imho due to the opposing sun. Don't expect a 100% homogeneous sky with such a wide view. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
      • (ec) I agree completely. I had actually looked for FOV information but overlooked it in the EXIF. I just wanted to be sure it was not due to using a polarization filter as that could have given such an effect with smaller FOV. With a FOV of 270° the effect as shown here is as expected and is unavoidable. -- Slaunger (talk) 08:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
      • (EC) Add: If you take a look on this 360° pano by Böhringer you can observe a similiar effect: You have two bright spots: The direct sun (and the areas around there) and a brighter area exactly opposed to the direct sun (180° to the direct sun). In my pano the brighter areas around the direct sun are visible at the left and right border, the area 180° from the direct sun is visible in the middle of my pano. All in all I see no problem there. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
so ist es --Böhringer (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:28, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:21, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Frankly, I'm sorry but I'm not sure this ordinary (IMO) landscape deserves a so huge work. The technical performance is probably very high, but I feel no wow in any way (and I prefer remain silent about sharpness...).--Jebulon (talk) 20:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Every motive deserves huge work, but time is often limited, Jebulon. If you are on vacation you can take the time, wait for golden hour light and make a highres pano of an (imho) not ordinary landscape. BTW: A panorama of a similiar position with overexposed sky and bad light was sold in the local shops for 300 euros :) Now a much better pano is freely available. Isn't it a benefit? I do not understand your last sentence: "and I prefer remain silent about sharpness". If you see seriously problems with sharpness I can answer: The pano shown here is an unscaled (!!) sensor resolution version - imho the optical performance of the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 I've used here is impressive. Normally panoramic views (also all of my former panos) are normally downscaled (default setting in Hugin is e.g. 70%) thus they look surely sharper at 100% view. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Tuxyso, I think, on sharpness, that Jebulon's comment is saying he would prefer not to engage in yet another FPC discussion over "pixel-peeping" reviews and whether to downsize for FP. Let's agree to disagree on that one and move on. [but I agree with you that the picture is impressively sharp for a non-downscaled pano] -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Colin, got the point now. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Thanks, Colin, that is exactly what I meant (sorry Tuxyso for the misunderstanding, actualy this part of my comment was not for you)--Jebulon (talk) 13:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 00:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose n.th. featureable --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:39, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 13:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Cheetah at Sunset.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 07:30:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Cheetah silhouetted against a fiery sunset, in the Okavango Delta, in Botswana.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me-- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Truly stunning, but given the marginal resolution, it should be razor-sharp at full resolution, which it really is not. I think the softness is because you have hit the diffraction limit with an aperture of f/17. Would have been better with a larger aperture, ISO 100, and a shorter shutter time. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 09:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Changed my mind after considering the creators reasonable comments on my talk page regarding my original assessment and the conditions of the shot. The timing and atmosphere of the shot mitigates to some extend the not so impressing technical quality and the "thumbnail" resolution. -- Slaunger (talk) 13:54, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I think it worth quoting what Arturo wrote on Slaunger's talk page (which is a reminder imo of the usefulness of saying something when nominating: "By definition, a picture of a wild predator after sunset has important technical challenges, mainly the almost inexistent light, and the fact that a cheetah on the prowl will stay on top of the termite mound for a second, not even two. You are lucky if you see it, compose and fire. There is no time to change settings. Honestly, I think this image is unbelievably atmospheric, one of the most powerful in my portfolio - you can almost hear the crickets, smell the savannah, feel the determination of the hunter. And as such, I expected it to be evaluated on its artistic strength, the story it tells, the feelings it conveys, not by the sharpness you would expect in an arquitectural image." I agree that it is one thing to expect a careful consideration of shutter/aperture/iso for an architectural image, but when capturing a fleeting and magical moment like this, one never gets a second chance and fiddling with one's camera may just lose everything. In terms of the "'thumbnail' resolution", Slaunger mentions, I think there are mitigating factors for wildlife photography. The image was taken at an effective (fully-frame equivalent) focal length of 200mm with a 10-year-old camera. The image resolution is about half the sensor resolution. I don't know if this image is cropped, but heavy cropping is more likely in a wildlife photo than one taken in other circumstances. -- Colin (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 20:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A silhouette is more about recognisable shape than fine detail. Sure, one can find flaws, but it is a great moment captured from just the right angle of view. -- Colin (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you Slaunger for changing your mind, and thank you Colin for your comments. I have uploaded a full-res file, at 4000px, instead of 1920px as before. I think this will improve resolution but some border softness remains as the light was really almost inexistent when the cheetah showed up. The image is very slightly cropped, perhaps only 5% or so. --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Since you have gone all in now! -- Slaunger (talk) 06:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol support vote.svg Support What a great picture! Very nice! --mathias K 07:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, though a bit soft due to the circumstances --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Colin --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --· Favalli ⟡ 00:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is a great one! The settings are though pretty awkward for a telephoto shoot (f/17?) Poco2 11:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks everybody for recent support votes... To Poco, you are of course right, the settings were very awkward indeed... and not on purpose. I think I have never been shooting in the bush at F17... you rarely need more than F10 with wildlife subjects (except macro, or closeups of animals with very long snouts...), and you rarely have enough light for that at dusk... This cheetah took me completely by surprise, I was driving back to camp, almost at night already, when I saw it on the mound. I could only stop the car, grab the camera and shoot. I had probably changed the aperture by accident when leaving the camera on the seat....
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think sharpness can be ignored in a case like this. Excellent shot. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 06:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Lüdinghausen, Burg Lüdinghausen -- 2014 -- 5502.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 06:14:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Burg Lüdinghausen in Lüdinghausen (Germany) at the blue hour
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 06:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 06:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice composition and sky. The photo appears to be exposure fused from more than one image as there are ghosts on the right hand side from vegetation being placed differently in different captures. Also, the glare from the sidelamps on the path to the building are disturbing, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 09:50, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your review. A small remark: It's a tone mapped image from a HDR image. IMO it's nearly impossible to take a HDR image of branches in the nature without movements. But the branches are not illuminated and IMO they are not disturbing.--XRay talk 10:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • OK, HDR mapped and not exposure fused:) Anyway, the same effect regarding the ghosts. I agree you cannot avoid such effects unless you are in conditions of no or very low wind, and I also agree this aspect is not that important. I would also not have opposed due to that little detail in itself. For me the biggest issue is the glare from the lamps. --Slaunger (talk) 14:19, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Perspective looks strange Jiel (talk) 11:31, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is nothing special. There is a long bridge in front of the castle. It's the normal view.--XRay talk 05:25, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice idea and well done. The glares could be a bit less dominating but that doesn’t impair the image too much. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:09, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 13:24, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 15:32, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger, sorry. + halos along the roof (oversharpening ?), and green CA near the right chimney. The sky looks unnatural to me. Excellent composition though, and very nice place.--Jebulon (talk) 20:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Green CAs are reduced/removed. Thanks for your advice.--XRay talk 15:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support For the nice atmosphere and interesting subject and in spite of quality flaws and a centered corridor (would have preferred that the POV is not in the middle of the corridor bridge) Poco2 12:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:View from Imperia Tower Moscow 04-2014 img12.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 05:25:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mercury City Tower

Proposed category : Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for nominating. Yes, there is going to be FoP in Russia from October 1, yes it is also retroactive, and yes it does not require taking the photo from the street. --A.Savin 13:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question There is a section (see annotation) in the middle, which looks "weird" to me (but not necessarily "wrong"). What is it? Is the image a crop or have you downsampled? -- Slaunger (talk) 14:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    Hi. See note. I'm not sure. The only big modifications I did was the removal of some glass reflections. --A.Savin 14:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the reply. It is good. Regarding FoP: Should we just pretend it is October 1 now? The sun does rise sooner as compared to my location, but I did not know you were days ahead:) -- Slaunger (talk) 14:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the FoP question, I had of course the option to wait with the uploading, but other views I took then were all general cityscapes and with this single one I didn't want to delay several months. Again, FoP is retroactive; even if the file was deleted, it had to be undeleted after 10-01. Regarding the nomination, I'm not the nominator and I would have waited of course; but there are few days left, so in the end it's just a hairsplitting. --A.Savin 15:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment – The image description should identify the dominant subject (Mercury City Tower?), not just where it was taken from (Imperial Tower). Quality image of half a building. --Kbh3rdtalk 14:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Done. --A.Savin 15:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:35, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:35, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent, maybe the horizon in the middle is not a perfect illustration of the rule of thirds. But let's celebrate the new FoP in Russia ! (The strange thing annotated appears on many other pictures -see Google- of this skyscraper, there is no wrong manipulation or so).--Jebulon (talk) 20:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, at least for now, due to the bottom crop, it's too abrupt for my taste. The building has for sure FP potential, actually some pictures on the web are pretty amazing. Do you have a way to show more of it at the bottom? If not, why? Poco2 11:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
It was taken from a glazed visitor's deck; the lower part is not visible there. --A.Savin 16:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
That's too bad, the crop ruins it for me Poco2 09:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:2014-09-07 10-57-15 Le-sculpteur.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 18:50:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Le sculpteur.

File:2014-09-07 10-37-55 La-Resurrection.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 18:48:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

La Résurrection.

File:DFC Sete v FNC Douai Coupe de la Ligue 2014 t140222.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 17:20:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

DFC Sète's Dražen Kujačić dribbles the ball in their quarter-final against FNC Douai of the 2014 League Cup at the Georges Vallerey swimming pool in Paris.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jastrow - uploaded by Jastrow - nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 17:20, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really nice picture with a high educational value and good dynamic -- Pleclown (talk) 17:20, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There is allways something special in Jastrows photographs. -- Smial (talk) 06:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great image ! -- Jiel (talk) 11:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 14:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support indeed great sport action (by @Jastrow: again!) --PierreSelim (talk) 05:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Smial.--Jebulon (talk) 19:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:India - Actors - 0258.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 16:12:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Jorgeroyan - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 19:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kbh3rdtalk 03:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 06:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Fine image. Kleuske (talk) 08:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:28, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 15:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. Humans ! --Jebulon (talk) 20:55, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 00:48, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support To be consistent with my recommendation in QIC :) Poco2 11:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support Such a great and memorable people shot ... we need more of these to balance out the landscape and building images that dominate here. However, I'd feel even better about it if something could be done about the CA on the outer fringes of the garments. Daniel Case (talk) 19:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Puente Pulteney, Bath, Inglaterra, 2014-08-12, DD 51.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 14:17:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 14:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 14:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hey, nice finding! :) Thanks Tomer Poco2 14:22, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 15:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 1bumer (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 17:58, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I'll ignore the clipping and Symbol support vote.svg Support. :) — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:28, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me a good photo with a good composition, but I find the light rather dull, and there is something artificial looking with the texture of the brick surface of the Puente. Not among the very best IMO. Maybe too aggressive luminance noise reduction? -- Slaunger (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    No aggresive denoising was applied here. I see your point, but making out of it an oppose is pretty tough Poco2 19:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    Thanks for info. The light is for me the biggest issue. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Schwetzingen BW 2014-07-24 10-50-59.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 13:40:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Germany, Baden-Württemberg, Schwetzingen castle
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 13:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 13:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit soft regarding the relatively small size but well composed and lit. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:55, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Good, but only a half bush at the right. And only a small Wow.--XRay talk 06:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looks underexposed to me. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 11:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good QI, but not outstanding enough for me. --DXR (talk) 15:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have to agree with DXR, sorry, Poco2 12:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Flickr - ggallice - Wax-tail hopper (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 05:13:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wax-tail hopper

Proposed category : Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods

File:Jardim Botânico Fanchette Rischbieter em Curitiba 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2014 at 23:06:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Bubo September 2014-4a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2014 at 22:24:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An European Eagle-owl (Bubo bubo) in a falconry centre, Portugal. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Tricky. It’s certainly not bad but there are some issues I dont approve of: 1. crop (too much space on top, too little on right); 2. perspective (seen from above makes the bird look smallish and a bit funny); 3. motion blur in plumage. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:59, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • You are quite right about the crop. I have nominated an alternative version below. Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The quality is impressive, getting sharp feathers at this resolution is really something. That being said, I also dislike the point of view from above. It's essentially a portrait, and taking it from significantly above eye level doesn't work in my opinion. The background is a little distracting (but not too much), the light is ok. For the crop, I would probably prefer it if the bird would be looking into the picture (i.e. more space on the right than on the left). — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Alternative version[edit]

Bubo September 2014-4.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - Same picture as above, not cropped. Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I’d still crop a bit off on the left and top to de-center the subject and make it look into the image. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 08:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Tarnobrzeg, Zamek Tarnowskich 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2014 at 09:40:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Vihula mõisa tuuleveski 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 18:10:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vihula manor windmill
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Ivar (talk) 18:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good. --Kadellar (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see nice clouds, a not very impressive wind mill in my eyes and a grassland, good quality, top QI, but no wow to me --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:52, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good light -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 10:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 13:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Too much empty/useless grass in foreground, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 09:06, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The grassland takes about 1/3 of the image height, I don't want to crop it. --Ivar (talk) 09:40, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
      • The grassland takes about 1/3 of the image height This is one reason why this image composition isn't so succeed. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:11, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice ! Jiel (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Nice lighting and clouds. But this is an example of a case where (in my opinion) the rule of thirds should not be followed. If a third of the picture is empty space, that's too much. I would crop some of the grass and perhaps a little bit on the right as well. --King of ♠ 05:18, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Agree with the right crop too.--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better. --King of ♠ 01:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral for the time being. Per King and Jebulon. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:42, 12 September 2014 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support ok now --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arcalino (talk) 12:08, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:34, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New crop uploaded. --Ivar (talk) 15:51, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 19:46, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 13:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Happy to see that crop suggestions were followed, and provided subsequent supports ! As for me, I see a very better picture, but I'm still not convinced by the subject--Jebulon (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Duvbo Metro station September 2014 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 17:58:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Duvbo Metro station, Stockholm. Expsoure fusion from a single exposure. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice perspective, image impression and motion capture. maybe you can improve the signs a little bit? the letters are not so sharp as they could be (as non moving parts) --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The motion blur of the train is great, but personally I don't like the slight blur of the people in the picture, especially the guy with the camera. Either they should be sharp or more blurry with movement. -- KTC (talk) 22:41, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
    • As a photographer you don't have a choice, people are moving in a subway station. The only way to avoid blur of the people is to use a very high ISO, but that will affect the quality negative. Longer exposure (with very small aperture=diffraction) is no guarantee for more blurry people (a person can stand still, another only move his head once, and so on). --ArildV (talk) 23:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
      • As a photographer, you do have a choice. You have the choice to wait and wait and wait until all the stars align perfectly and you get the shot. ;-) I say that as a joke, but it's also true. There does have to be a practical limit though, if this is the best result of half an hour of waiting then fair enough, you did your best. I suppose the biggest obstacle to this photo is getting the two trains coming in at the same time and everyone still at the same time. I can imagine that would be very tricky. Diliff (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Fair enough Diliff. I stayed a long time at the station, and only once came two trains simultaneously. I know many of my pictures of Stockholm subway is relatively empty of people, I avoid rush hour traffic and photographs often departing train heading towards the city center (fewer people are leaving the train on suburban stations). But the point here was to get the two trains. Regards--ArildV (talk) 22:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 13:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per KTC, sorry. The guy is really eye catching.--Jebulon (talk) 09:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 09:53, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berdea (talk) 16:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jiel (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I don't think the blurry people is enough to put me off. Although if I have to find one criticism (I usually do!), it's that parts of the image are a bit lacking in contrast. The darker parts of the image look fine, but the seating area, the lighting/air vents at the top and the signs could do with darker blacks and more contrast IMO. Just a minor issue. Diliff (talk) 22:27, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is already about as empty as a metro station can get. --King of ♠ 05:19, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arcalino (talk) 12:09, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 1bumer (talk) 16:33, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

File:2014.06.07.-03-Kirschgartshaeuser Schlaege Mannheim---Tagpfauenauge-Raupe.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 15:33:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I'm not sure because of the stem in the foreground. But I'll never know what you think when I don't dare a try. ;-) All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hockei (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support visualy the stem is not so disturbing : the first time I opened the image I was so much attracted by the caterpillar that I did not seen the stem... -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I uploaded a version with a changed crop. It can be that it looks better. If not, I'll revert it to the first version. --Hockei (talk) 16:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment if I may: the right stem should stay for three reasons: The other stem (unfocused) stands out too much; sheet looks unfinished, loose; the stem helps to identify the blurred in the context. I would cut off only the right side of stem (keep the bud). -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 20:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Certainly you may. :-) Thank's for your advice. You say about what I think. So I changed the crop again. --Hockei (talk) 14:33, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems underexposed, and of course is in the shadow of the leaf so not best lit. I don't see anything here that raises this photo above the many other photographs of the caterpillar, or among our best. -- Colin (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Appearance is not reality, Colin. This picture is not underexposed. This caterpillar is black. And this photo shows the animal in it's real living environment. Maybe I should take and set it on a stem into the sun next time? --Hockei (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I am aware the caterpillar is black. You could present us with a completely black picture and claim this is what it looks like in the real living environment at night. So that's not a strong argument. The level of exposure and lighting are chosen to display the subject to best effect. I think neither are optimal here. But my main concern is that at FPC one needs to compare the image to its peers. And when one does that the picture doesn't stand out. -- Colin (talk) 21:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
        • I look at a picture, see and decide if it is excellent or not and I never compare with others. This is the right way IMO. I don't consider this here as a competition. --Hockei (talk) 19:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Hockei, the definition of this forum is: "Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons." This isn't a Flickr "fave" or a Facebook "Like!" but a serious judgement of whether this picture is considerably better than its peers and deserves to sit among other such images as our finest work. Therefore if you don't compare with others, you really aren't doing your job. The world is full of "nice" pictures. File:2014.05.25.-05-Kirschgartshaeuser Schlaege Mannheim--Tagpfauenauge-Raupe.jpg is better lit, though a less interesting pose. The lighting issue with this photograph is easily resolved by the use of a reflector (even a white card would do) which is pretty standard kit for such photography. -- Colin (talk) 19:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
            • Colin, Please stick to facts and don't suggest the people here I would be active in flickr or facebook just because of my point of view you don't like. --Hockei (talk) 20:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
              • I have absolutely no idea what you are taking about. -- Colin (talk) 20:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
                • I said it due to your comparison of my reviews with the facebook-"like"-button. We should leave it at that. This leads to nothing. --Hockei (talk) 06:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice details, precious moment, ty -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 22:17, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose underexposed --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:26, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
it's a little better but it's easy to do more. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Archaeodontosaurus, I increased the exposure once more. It looks quite good to me and hope it is enough now. --Hockei (talk) 15:23, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Might be slightly underexposed but only slightly. Could easily be fixed by pushing the shadows a bit from the RAW file? Diliff (talk) 17:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done New version. But I personally still prefer the darker version. It is a matter of taste I think. --Hockei (talk) 18:52, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Brandenburg St-Katharinenkirche 19 (MK).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 15:26:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the Katharinenkirche
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Yeah... a church interior! Bored of? I hope not! ;-)
I think it is pretty obvious who was my ideal when I was shooting this one?! :-) My last visit in this church is a while ago and the actual high-res-multi-exposure-church-interior pictures presented by Diliff and DXR where so inspiring that I want to try it for my own in this church again. This nominated result is the most ambitious picture I've made so far. It is merged of 135 single pictures and for those who like, here is the full res ~344mpx version. But instead of the big one I want to nominate this downsampled version because I think it is the best compromise between resolution, size (compression) and quality.
I'm aware that (sadly) the nominated picture isn`t perfect and there are some minor stitching errors which, thats what I think, dont distract that much from the overall view. But thats just my opinion. Also the brightest lights in the windows where not exposed perfect because of shooting "just" 3 exposures with +/-2.0EV... That's too little I've learned! ;-) So far from me, now I´m very curious what you think about this try of mine. c/u/n by me, --mathias K 15:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- mathias K 15:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice disciple. Still, one thing to improve imo, about composition: there's too much floor and the crop of the ceiling isn't optimal. I guess you were more worried about exposures and stitching than about general composition. --Kadellar (talk) 16:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Youre right about the composition thing and the crop at the ceiling. Sadly there isn`t any more room way to the top (still not enough pictures ;-) ?!). At the bottom my intention was to give the left column a little more room to the bottom. I´ve already tried a crop like your sugestion and with the cut on column it feld like the picture was too compresed horizontaly then. Anyway, thanks for your review! --mathias K 17:20, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support... but... with only 3 exposures at +-2EV, as you say there isn't enough dynamic range. I usually do 5 images with +-9EV. ;-) I didn't see any stitching errors on my first look, so probably they're not that bad. Also, why the angle and the cylindrical/Panini projection and not rectilinear? Maybe the angle of view is too high. I do think Church interiors look better when taken from the middle of the interior so that the symmetry is expressed. Diliff (talk) 21:31, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks! My first intension was to take this picture from the middle of the interior, but than I realized that the candelabra would be right in front of the organ. Thats why I choose this point of view. --mathias K 21:50, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • That's a good enough reason, and I guess I would have done the same actually to avoid the candelabra. But I would have chosen a camera position much closer to the seating so that it didn't feel so distant to the viewer. I try to fill the frame with what is interesting, and a lot of foreground empty floor space is not so interesting (but I admit, some of my images such as this recent nomination have the same issue). I don't think anything is really gained from being as far back as you were. I think an ideal camera position might have been close to where the flowers are on the left side. And I still think rectilinear would have been better. :-) Diliff (talk) 20:51, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi Diliff, thanks a lot for the tips! My intention when shooting this one was to capture as much as possible visible from my viewpoint. But I think youre may be right that a) this isn`t the best viewpoint and b) I didn`t have to show that much of the interior. Sometimes less is better... ;-)
To the projection: during the processing in PTGui I thought that rectilinear may look a bit awkward cause of some visible streting at the corners. But now I think when I cut out the stretched areas it could look a bit like youre "sugestion", closer to the chairs, less column and it would look more focused on the interesting things. I will give it a try! So thanks again, mathias K 14:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support impressive --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 19:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pretty much per Diliff. Nice but perhaps still a bit of room for improvement, though I get the argument with the candelabra. Probably better to trade res for large bracketing, if you have to (and can, camera-wise). --DXR (talk) 20:25, 10 September 2014 (UTC) BTW, it is surely too much praise to be mentioned in one breath with the master ;-)

*Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Thank you for this nice image, and of course no, I'm personaly not bored with church interiors. I notice that some supporters here support..."but". All these "but" make me oppose, for instance :I don't think anything is really gained from being as far back as you were. I think an ideal camera position might have been close to where the flowers are on the left side. And I still think rectilinear would have been better by Diliff are for me two good reasons for oppose, and I share the opinion. The left bricks are too much IMO, and the "curved" threshold disturbs me. The overall sharpness is not so good as I expected in thumbnail view. The light of the window is not very well managed (lack of detail: one can see the little window panes below, but not above). I like the original composition though. Sorry for this vote, I feel a bit embarassed with it, because I know pretty well that I'm not able to take the same kind of shots...--Jebulon (talk) 10:02, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Hate to raise this point again, but I really hope sharpness was not a major factor in your decision, because it is excellent at 30MP or so, still much more than most of the uploads here. I guess " I think we should not consider Diliff's work as the 'church interiors bar' " will be pretty tough to handle in practice. --DXR (talk) 10:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jeb, you don`t need to apologize for your vote! It is well founded and I can understand your points. OK, per DXR I hope the sharpness issue isn`t that big. But anyway your vote is OK for me and I think every founded review is helpful. So thank you. ;-) --mathias K 14:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
I think that you and DXR are right that the sharpness should not be a factor in opposing because it is clearly very high resolution and we should not be encouraging downsampling as the only way to impress here at FPC. But Jeb's compositional criticisms are fair and are valid reasons to oppose IMO. As per my comments, I too think the image could be improved with my suggestions but I guess unlike Jeb, I thnk it is still 'good enough'. Diliff (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
(Sorry for bad english) How do I "judge" a picture ? I just open it by clicking on the thumbnail until the full size proposed, and see what is given to me ! And I'm sorry, what I see in this case is (for my taste), not as sharp as it could/should be. About "encouraging downsampling": Don't worry, those who think that downsampling gives a better result will continue to do so, and my oppose vote here will not change anything. Alas. But why uploading very high resolution pictures if they are not sharp enough ? I think it is an interesting question about the final/ultimate purpose of our work here... Must we absolutely chose between 'sharp' and 'big' ? And at the end, I'm not sure that the 'good enough ' concept is compatible with the FP (the best of the best) concept. Thanks for this interesting discution.--Jebulon (talk) 16:23, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Just to make sure, of course I do not want to tell you how to vote, you know that very well and I agree that the compo here is a matter of taste. But I think that the way you review sharpness does indeed encourage downsampling. I completely understand this when we talk about 10 or 15 MP, but here your criticism becomes more "it's an inefficient way to use commons" than "the image is not sharp", and I do not think that should be held against the image. The decision how to size a panorama is much harder than a normal image, imo and we do have to make some trade-off between size and sharpness. --DXR (talk) 17:11, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Agree with you, it does encourage downsampling because with reviews like Jebulon's, it would be much easier to downsample it and have a sharp 30 megapixel image and then nobody could complain about the sharpness. And probably nobody would ever know that it was downsampled either, they would simply be impressed by the sharpness and detail. I downsample my images too, but I am careful not to downsample so much that I lose real detail. I don't do it to impress voters on FPC, I mainly do it because it's easier to manage the files, and because the edges of my images are less sharp than the centre due to the wide angle of view (edges will always be softer for this reason) and because f/13 is a bit softer than lets say f/5.6 or f/8. Even though I usually downsample a bit, I wouldn't usually encourage others to do it because it's easy to go too far and lose detail and because it shouldn't be necessary to win votes. Voters should consider whether it is sufficiently detailed for the subject, not what the sharpness is at 100%. That of course doesn't mean we can't consider and discuss the softness at 100% and whether the right settings or equipment were used, but it shouldn't be a major reason for a vote by itself. In fact, if I didn't downsample my images, Jebulon may oppose my images too as they probably begin life about as soft as this one. :-) I use one of the sharpest prime lenses in existence so it isn't a question of using a good lens, it's just that a typical f/13 image is not very sharp to begin with, and then when you distort the edges with reclinear projection, it will never be as sharp as any of us would like. Diliff (talk) 20:05, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
OK. I understand what you write. Again, this picture, as it is, is not sharp enough to me. Opening a picture at full size is a bad way to review ? I'm afraid we disagree here about sharpness, risks of downsampling, and evaluation. Let's continue to live together, peacefully, with that. Please notice that I opposed for other reasons too, and consider that I agree with the fact that downsampling is a bad thing. --Jebulon (talk) 23:05, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm happy to live together peacefully. I don't want to prolong the discussion too much but just one last set of questions for you to answer so I can understand why you disagree (and also maybe to make you think about why you disagree too)... This image is about 85 megapixels, right? If it was downsampled to 40 megapixels and was sharp (ignore the other compositional issues that we discussed), would you support it then? And if the answer is yes, then why would you support it and not the less sharp 85 megapixel image? The detail is the same (maybe even a bit more detail in the 85 megapixel image), so why is it so important to evaluate it at 100%? Of course we all do it, because it is the highest level of zoom possible before the image pixels begin to become larger than the screen's pixels and it is what our image viewer/browser defaults to. But really, 100% is an arbitrary zoom level. We use it to see 'what the image is made of', but it isn't necessarily the best zoom level to appreciate the image or its real sharpness. Compare this to how we would evaluate the detail of a large billboard poster on a street. A poster usually has much more detail than a 6x4 photo but at a close viewing distance (the equivalent of viewing images at 100%) the 6x4 photo is surely going to look sharper. We might look at a 6x4 photo from a few cm away but we would never normally look at the poster at this distance, so why should we do the same for this image which is the digital equivalent of a poster? What I'm saying is that yes you can review images at 100% if you want, but you should not look only how it appears on the screen at 100%, you should look at how the sharpness relates to the resolution and view it at a zoom level that is appropriate. Only then can the connection between sharpness and low resolution (or softness and high resolution) be broken. Diliff (talk) 07:36, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose First: I appreciate the effort, which has gone into the capture and processing of this image! It is tedious work, and I guess several hours must have been used on it (it would for me). However, I do not like the composition that much, and I can echo the aspects regarding this by Jebulon. Also, the exposure control, while good is a bit lacking at the windows (if the compo had been great, this aspect alone would not have lead me to oppose).
Regarding sharpness and resolution, I find it is more than adequate considering the huge pixelage. I find it is a recurring flaw in reviewing images to open them at 100% and think they should be razor-sharp without at the same time considering their resoltion. Sure, if you nominated a 4 Mpixel image it should, as it is the total amount of information in the image, which counts, but the best balance between resolution and information is best achieved by retaining a little pixel softness. I find that this balance is just perfect in the nomnated photo. You can always downsample, the reverse you cannot do. And if you want to print in large scale, it will always be optimal to have the full pixelage to avoid visible pixelation. Say, for instance, if this image was printed as a 50' image (along the diagonal), in approximately 80×100 cm format, the width of the individual pixels would be less than 0.1 mm or 260 PPI. This is way smaller than what you can resolve by eye at a typical viewing distance of 50 inch display. (At least I do not watch television as at viewing distance of 15 cm). --Slaunger (talk) 09:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
One last thing. I do not agree with Jebulon on weather the "sharp at 100% review philosophy" leads people who would not otherwise downsample to downsample. In my 20 Mpixel Alhambra nomination, which all reviewers appear to fancy, I can honestly say that I have downsampled the final stitch more than needed and more than what would be optimal for large scale printing simply to avoid the silly pixel peeping at 100% comments. I have as such pixel-prostituted myself. Shame on me!--Slaunger (talk) 09:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The new crop works better for me, although it still lacks some wow for me. Changing to neutral. -- Slaunger (talk) 15:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Info @ all: Kadellar,Diliff,Martin Falbisoner,Uoaei1,Christian Ferrer,DXR,Jebulon,Slaunger: I´ve uploaded a complete rework of this pictured where I try to get the composition a bit more pleasant and tried the rectilinear projection. And what should I say... I think Diliff was right! :-) So please have a look If you still like it or maybe even like it more. ;-) Thanks @ all! --mathias K 12:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I like it more, but of course I already supported so it doesn't change my vote. ;-) I did spot a few little stitching errors when reviewing this image, but very insignificant. Did you use a panoramic head or just a regular tripod head? Well done anyway. Diliff (talk) 13:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi David, thanks again. This one was taken with a selfmade pano-head. I've builded me one a couple of years ago but used it not very often. It is not comparable to a "real" one but it works pretty well so far. I will make a pic and show it... --mathias K 18:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Leviathan1983 You can crop the bottom, no problems. But the crop is now too tight at the edges for me, I suggest you propose an alternative. For now I remove my support. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 14:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    I see that you have 7 votes, so it is maybe not necessary of to propose an altertnative only for me... So sorry to have strike my support but I shall have preferred a wider view than the last version. :) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi Christian, thanks for your understanding. You can't do it right to everyone... But anyway, thank you for your review! --mathias K 18:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That made a bigger difference than I thought it would. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 14:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 19:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The new version is totally fine with me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:21, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Striking my oppose. The new version works for me. But folks, we still have a problem about "what is sharpness"...--Jebulon (talk) 09:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support for the light management. Another one who got Diliffitis? :) Poco2 12:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Blackwall DLR station MMB 15.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 14:57:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A DLR train at Blackwall station.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by myself. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -mattbuck (Talk) 14:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice idea but not the best accomplishment, many lights are clearly overexposed and dismal the image impression --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
    Just a question, and apologies to everyone else here, but Wladyslaw, you clearly have a problem with me, and you demonstrate this very well in many locations. Please answer me this: what did I do to you that pissed you off so much for so long? -mattbuck (Talk) 20:11, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
    Just my answer. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:24, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Wladyslaw. --AmaryllisGardener talk 00:48, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 13:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 14:57, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I think there are too many blown areas. A few lights in the background don't worry me, but it's also in the foreground and the sum of the bright surfaces make up a large part of the photo. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 16:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:57, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Julian H. --LivioAndronico talk 23:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a good picture - I like the colour and composition but doesn't reach FP standard. The blown highlights are extensive and the focus is too close resulting in all background being blurred but the nearby motion-blurred train is in focus. Perhaps worth trying again at this location and try during the blue hour for some sky colour too. -- Colin (talk) 12:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jiel (talk) 21:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:36, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Jean-Paul-Denkmal (02).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 12:29:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Jean Paul memorial in Bayreuth, Germany.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by El Grafo. My first nomination, but please be cruel, I can take it ;-) -- El Grafo (talk) 12:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- El Grafo (talk) 12:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The quality is good. What I don't like is that the saturated blue sky is almost blinding in its strength and it makes it hard to enjoy the statue (in my opinion). If others feel the same way, this could probably be corrected through editing. The wow isn't outstanding but it's an interesting sculpture. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 08:39, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for the review. I know that this isn't a high-wow-image, but I decided to give it a try nevertheless. I didn't (intentionally) boost the saturation in any kind of way (just used auto levels in RawTherapee) and as far as I remember, that's how the sky looked on that day. However, if other people feel the same way, I can of course try to turn it down a notch. BTW: I kind of prefer the colors of the Yashinon lens I used in the other picture, but due to the shorter focal length I had to get closer to the statue so the perspective isn't as good. --El Grafo (talk) 10:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
    Sorry, I didn't want to imply that this happened through editing, it probably looked just like that in reality. I just think it would help to change the sky here, making it look differently than it did on that day. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 11:04, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
    No worries, I understood you very well. Just thought I'd provide some additional background information. --El Grafo (talk) 14:43, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 13:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Vienna - Double guitar Paris 1690 - 9606.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 12:00:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Double guitar, Paris, 1690
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Jorge Royan, nominated by Yann (talk) 12:00, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting object, good quality, nice colors. Yann (talk) 12:00, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very eyecatching composition and very interesting and valuable subject. Nice find! --Slaunger (talk) 12:14, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good ! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 12:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Maybe high EV, even for this the top is missing and cut off. -- -donald- (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lower right corner seems to be a bit dark though. --El Grafo (talk) 15:56, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 19:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per -donald- -- Jiel (talk) 21:48, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. I disagree with donald on the cropping. The crop might be right if taken as a composition of light and color rather than a photo of an odd guitar, and including the entire neck and head might ruin the balance of the visual elements as seen here which somehow appeal to me. (Though I would like to see the whole guitar in order to judge whether or not that composition would work, and also because it is an interesting guitar.) Aside from the crop, as a composition of light and color the available lighting is suboptimal – the bridges are harshly illuminated, and the bottom may be too dark and shadowy. --Kbh3rdtalk 03:48, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For the originality, Yann's speciality :) Poco2 12:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:GreenBike@woodenWall.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 09:06:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green bike on a wooden wall
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Alexander Shustov, uploaded by Tuvalkin, nominated by Yann (talk) 09:06, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great colors, nice composition. Yann (talk) 09:06, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unidentified location, and not really sharp I'm afraid --A.Savin 19:56, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful color and texture, and nice composition. But it's not sharp enough, while at the same time parts look like software sharpening was over-applied in an attempt to compensate. And although the colors are of prime interest here, parts look over-saturated, especially when viewed full size. I also think it may have been better with a larger depth of field; I cannot really appreciate the out-of-focus grass in the foreground. --Kbh3rdtalk 03:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Excellent idea, very nice composition, at least something different in the "wow" section. But unsharp, oversharpened, and oversaturated. Per Kbh3rd.--Jebulon (talk) 09:23, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition and colours Jiel (talk) 21:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- as A. Savin an Jebulon Arcalino (talk) 12:15, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Roundhay Garden Scene.ogg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 05:17:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by en:Louis Le Prince - uploaded by Andrewh - nominated by: Alborzagros (talk) 05:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alborzagros (talk) 05:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Roundhay Garden Scene is a two-second film that was shot in October 1888 by Louis Le Prince in the suburb of Roundhay, near Leeds, Yorkshire. It is the earliest surviving motion picture.Alborzagros (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Certainly a lot of value. Not to bad for that date. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:03, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unique. Highest value.--Jebulon (talk) 22:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Vue From Kuelap, Chachapoyas, Peru.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2014 at 14:29:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Kuelap fortress of the Chachapoyas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Christopher Crouzet. View from the Kuelap fortress of the Chachapoyas -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not enough wow. --Graphium 17:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice place and cool weather, some interesting light in my opinion. I would support if the background was a little sharper, especially at the left, the branch was cropped out on the right and possibly with some dodging and burning. Did you shoot RAW? I think this shot has potential in terms of editing. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the feedbacks! Yes I did shoot RAW but I'm not so comfortable with the post-processing bit yet. I've tried to apply the changes you've listed as well as some brightness/colors readjustments. I'm not sure what you meant by dodging/burning though. Let me know if it's any better! -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 03:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, I think it is much better. It's still a bit washed out (due to ISO 400 and some atmosphere I guess) and the subject isn't completely exciting, but I really think the composition works now. I'd be interested to hear what others think. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 20:57, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice ! Jiel (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Lörrach - Burghof Lörrach - Abendansicht5.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2014 at 22:03:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Burghof Lörrach, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 22:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 22:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:50, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support blaue Stunde mag ich gern :-) --Böhringer (talk) 21:10, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice contrast of blue and yellow. --King of ♠ 06:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice Jiel (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition, high quality images of modern architecture.--ArildV (talk) 08:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 13:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportStunning colours, good composition. Good job! --PierreSelim (talk) 05:47, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 05:29, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture


Contestations en cours[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Alcazaba 1, Almeria, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2014 at 19:14:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alcazaba of Almeria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 19:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Alcazaba (meaning : the fortress in arab) and part of city walls, from San Cristobal hill, Almería, Spain. Alboran Sea in background.-- Jebulon (talk) 19:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good work --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:2013 Longines Global Champions - Lausanne - 14-09-2013 - Kara Chad et Alberto II 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2014 at 12:09:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

2013 Longines Global Champions - Lausanne - 14-09-2013 - Kara Chad et Alberto II
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pleclown - uploaded by Pleclown - nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kara Chad and Alberto II during the CSI2* Final 1.45 m at the 2013 Longines Global Champions Lausanne event on the 14th of september 2013 (Renomination as the first one was cancelled due to the two active nominations restriction) -- Pleclown (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment One man, two votes, Pleclown :) --Tuxyso (talk) 12:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    I don't see what you're talking about :) (c/c error) Pleclown (talk) 12:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- KTC (talk) 08:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Junge Silbermöve im Flug bei Texel 02 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 22:44:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Juvenile European herring gull (Larus argentatus) in fast flight
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Juvenile European herring gull (Larus argentatus) in fast flight
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 22:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 22:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 06:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressively high-resolution image for a bird -- many of our bird-in-flight FPs are much lower than this. -- Colin (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Colin. Jee 12:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Colin -Pugilist (talk) 13:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support also per Colin. Nicely captured. Diliff (talk) 14:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Do you have another frame where the nictitating membrane is not half closed? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Up to now I did not know what the nictitating membrane is :) Unfortunately I have no other (sharp) photo where the eyes are sufficiently visible. With the bird here the nictitating membrane is imho quite transparent thus the eyes are still quite visible - with a lot of other in-flight shots you often only see a pure black eye socket. --Tuxyso (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --57.250.245.249 19:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC) IP voting invalid. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support perfect! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Lörrach - Evangelische Stadtkirche.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 21:14:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lörrach: Protestant Church
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 21:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 21:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support – pity the tree covers so much of the building but I think this is hardly avoidable. Moving the camera a few metres to the right might have cropped the distracting blocks out and shown a little more of the tower. The bicycle wheels not being perfectly round is caused by the wide-angle view, I presume, because the dial-plates are. Impressive picture however. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 04:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Only an average quality shot, nothing special. Unfortunate light: The front part of the church which is the main motive here is in shadow. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
The church isn't in shadow, open your eyes --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
open your eyes is unnecessarily offensive.--Jebulon (talk) 07:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Jebulon. IMHO the nominator is closed minded to any argument - he prefers not seeing the obvious. 2 hours later (as up to now only edit on an FPC page tody) - no comment. Und noch mal auf Deutsch: Der Nominator verschließt sich jeglichen offensichtlicher Argumente. Zwei Stunden später wird eine Nominierung von mir, die bereits mehrere Tage läuft, mit dem inhaltsleeren Kommentar n.th. featureable bedacht (als bis dahin einzige Editierung auf einer FPC-Seite am heutigen Tag) - da muss man glaube ich nichts mehr zu sagen. So macht FPC auf jeden Fall Spaß. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Die nachweisliche Falschbehauptung, die Kirche befände sich im Schatten, darf nicht unkommentiert bleiben. Und was meine Stimmabgabe beim Leuchturm damit zu tun hat und welche Relevanz sich hierfür ergibt, bleibt dein Geheimnis. Weiteres ist hier nicht zu besprechen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Is the church in shadow ? Isn't it ? Not my concern, but of course this can/must be discussed. But the way to discuss this is important, "open your eyes" is not acceptable here IMO. Retaliation votes ? No need to be a strict and circumspect observer to see that they exist in many cases here... Sometimes I feel that "persons" are more important than "pictures" in FPC.--Jebulon (talk) 09:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I make Jebulon's words mine Poco2 11:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
*sigh* -- Colin (talk) 12:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
To maintain s.th. obviously wrong makes me uncomprehending. My advise to open the eyes is compared to this instability proper blandness. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is larger and sharper than your typical QI but isn't making me go wow either for the subject or the arrangement. -- Colin (talk) 12:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. The composition isn't very compelling, with the tree obscuring the most interesting part of the scene. Diliff (talk) 20:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Geranoaetus melanoleucus, Hawk Conservancy.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 16:22:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lewis Hulbert -- Lewis Hulbert (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lewis Hulbert (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not bad but too noisy considering the small size. There’s a focus problem too, the plumage on the neck being distinctly sharper than the face. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 04:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I can probably remove the noise by reworking it, I never applied any noise removal. Would the sharpness alone still be too much of an issue? --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 06:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark, unfortunate light. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info reworked the image from RAW, I don't know if that's any better. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 23:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Turbinhuset September 2014 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 13:49:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Historic turbine house
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Historic turbine house in Västerås, Sweden. This small hydro power built 1891 plant is probably one of the most important buildings in the history of Västerås. In the neighboring town of Arboga was an electric company who was looking for opportunities to expand. To get the company to move to Västerås the Västerås municipality put up with land, capital, and electric power. Västerås Municipality built the turbine house and and rented it out to the company. In 1891 the company moved and changed its name to ASEA (today the ABB Group and soon grew into a multinational empire and Västerås grew into the fifth largest city in Sweden. ASEA rented the building until 1902. (when Sweden had already started to build huge hydroelectric plant in northern Sweden, of course, with technology from ASEA). The building is now a museum, located in the very center between the castle and the City Hall. I really like the early autumn light and the beautiful colors here, the composition is also chosen to include only the older buildings.
  • Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 13:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 13:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much in shade. I'd like to see more of the water on the right and less of the grassy slope (I appreciate this may no be practical without being in the water). Btw, why is the roof so flat and the eaves stick out so far? It looks like someone has taken a taller building and squashed it. -- Colin (talk) 12:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I understand your point Colin although I personally think that the tree shadow on the facade is beautiful. Regarding the architecture; the architect is unknown. The house has been described as a stylish mixture of Gothic and Neo-classical styles. The municipality wanted a representative building of course, located next to the historic medieval castle. A local national romantic architect interested in history (but not necessarily very knowledgeable) maybe?--ArildV (talk) 12:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Schwetzingen BW 2014-07-22 17-04-02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 10:46:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Germany, Baden-Württemberg, Schwetzingen castle, colonnade of the "mosque"
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 10:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 10:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The image lacks detail but this is compensated by the great composition and colors, good job! Poco2 11:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Guter Blick für eine ganz besondere Perspektive. Herzlichen Glückwunsch zu diesem gelungenen Foto! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bottom part is very unsharp, cobblesones look washed. --Mile (talk) 15:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tolle Komposition mit guter Nutzung wiederholter Elemente. Level of detail and sharpness is not very good, but with Poco. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image lacks detail and this is not compensated by the great composition and colors. Tourists are disturbing. And per Mile. Sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 07:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lacking quality/sharpness is not acceptable for a FP, particularly for such more or less easy objects --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Flaminio obelisk.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 06:53:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Refugio Militar Capitan Cobo - Pico Veleta - Sierra Nevada - 2014-08-07.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 06:21:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Refugio militar Capitán Cobo
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 06:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Refugio militar Capitán Cobo are barracks used by the Special Operations Command of Spain (Mando de Operaciones Especiales) for high altitude training. The barracks are located at an altitude of 2550 m in the Sierra Nevada mountain range. The road A-395 in front shows the last public section of the 38 km long access road from Granada leading to Pico del Veleta, the second highest mountain in Sierra Nevada (3394 m). This is also the highest paved road in Europe. A special thanks to Jebulon for showing me this place, and many thanks to Kadellar and Poco a poco for figuring out what was the purpose of the building. For quite some time, I thought it was a youth hostel, LOL! Smile. -- Slaunger (talk) 06:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 06:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • some parts of the building are good and sharp, others are soft and not really sharp. what has happend here? --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Wladyslaw: It is a stitch of four images. My kit lenses are not as good as I would like, and they produce soft results at image borders for certain focal lengths and apertures. (A prime lens is on my wish list). That results in an uneven image quality. The pic is close to 15 Mpixels, and I think the pixel quality is sufficient for FP given the pixelage. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I am in the process of restitching, and I notice that the ueven sharpness is due to not all images having perfect focus. Luckily, there is a big overlap between images, and by using masking in PTGui, I can see that I can achieve a better technical result (and I should stop blaming my glass all the time, it is actually not that bad, when used correctly). -- Slaunger (talk) 21:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like it very much and was ready to support but I got a bit disappointed by the fact that reading the "Todo por la Patria" is pretty annoying. Is there a way to combine those 4 frames to fix it? Poco2 11:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • @Poco a poco: I understand what you say, (I think). The first time I zoomed in I also thought: what an ugly stitching/blending error! Until I realized that the letters are suspended in a frame with space to the wall behind. And since the setting sun is coming in from quite an angle (thus the nice light elsewhere), the shadows gives the impression of ghost letters. See also the 'other version' linked to from the file page, which is a normal single shot photo. I think it would be wrong to clone put the shadows. Don't you agree?-- Slaunger (talk) 17:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Jebulon has pointed out a stitching error on the file page. I would like to try and make a complete rework this evening, since I have acquired Lightroom since I made this stitch, and I would like to try my new LR plus PTGui workflow on this. --Slaunger (talk) 17:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Taxiarchos228:, Poco a poco, Jebulon. I have reworked the image completely in a Lightroom + PTGui workflow. Two (upper right and lower left) of four sources images are not perfectly sharp. Using masking in PTGui, the use of these images is now minimized, the three texts are now entirely clear. There is still some residual softness in lower left and upper right corners. I think it is not so bad, but understand if you find it unacceptable for FP. I did not quite get the same white balance in this process and have ended up with slightly more vivid colors of the roof and a darker sky, to be honest I am not sure, which one is closest to the truth. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not quite sure it is FP overall, but wow that was a massive improvement in quality, well done! --DXR (talk) 05:23, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP to me Poco2 07:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment small error(s) - a note i s addede. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 10:39, 16 September 2014 (UTC) I must have had a look at an old cached, sorry, the note i deleted. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Far much better, once old cache eliminated. You are not far from truth regarding the light if I remember well.--Jebulon (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Lörrach - Stadtbibliothek Lörrach2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 06:02:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lörrach: municipal library
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 06:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 06:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the composition is boring, too much is in shadow and low wow, sorry. Good, but not among our very best works.-- Slaunger (talk) 06:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    Slaunger: The options for a different composition in this case are very rare. I think this image is interessting because of the good visible vanishing point projection, the sharpness of the image and the building itself. The shadows are very low and if we look at two sides of a building we have the inevitable situation that there is always one side illuminated and one in shadow. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    I believe you when you say it cannot be done much better given the possibilities, but not every subject is featureable, and I think this is one of them. No matter how much effort you put into it, it is probably hard to get a wow feeling for this rather ordinary building. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    "ordinary building" is subjective and not appropriate. It's a Art Nouveau building with historic importance (not visible, I admit), but if you don't like it no problem. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    Es wäre hilfreich, wenn du etwas sachlicher bliebest. Daß man dein Bild nicht herausragend findet, heißt doch nicht, daß es schlecht ist, und mit „don’t like it“ hat es auch nichts zu tun. Auf FPC zeichnen wir die allerfeinsten Bilder aus, die Commons überhaupt zu bieten hat, das Sahnehäubchen. Und da finde ich ebenfalls, daß dieses Bild, so gut es auch gemacht ist und so schön und wertvoll das Gebäude sein mag, Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nicht dazugehört. Es hat einfach als Bild zu wenig Besonderes. Natürlich ist das auch Geschmackssache, aber genau deshalb geht’s ja hier per demokratischer Stimmabgabe. Ich habe mir angewöhnt, auch für Contras dankbar zu sein, denn sie zeigen mir auch, daß sich jemand mit meinem Bild auseinandergesetzt hat, wenn er es auch anders sieht und empfindet als ich. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 15:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    Ich persönlich fände es hilfreich wenn du Unterstellungen dort lassen würdest, wo sie hingehören: nämlich außen vor. Ich bin an keiner Stelle unsachlich geworden sondern habe lediglich Slaungers Argumente hinterfragt, um sie besser zu verstehen. Das erlaube ich mir stets dann wenn ich etwas nicht verstehen. Ansonsten brauche ich weder einen Ratgeber, wie ich mit Kontrastimmen umzugehen habe noch sonstige Kommentaroren. Vielen Dank. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    I'm sorry if you find my use of the term 'ordinary' as being not appropriate. With 'ordinary' I mean ordinary relative to other FPCs of buildings. And not supporting an FPC (among the very best Commons has to offer) is not equivalent to 'not liking' (something is good). And yeah, it is tough nowadays at FPC. I sometimes see more notable buildings in better light and compositions being rejected by experienced reviewers such as yourself, also when the best possible vantage point and time of day has been used, but due to the constraints of the place it was simply not good enough. Its tough, the bar is high. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Building 54 CEF Ottawa.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 02:59:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Heritage House (Building 54) at Central Experimantal Farm in Ottawa, this is a National Historic Place of Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The rear view of Heritage House (Building 54) at Central Experimantal Farm in Ottawa. It's built in the Queen Anne Revival style and used to be a home for senior farm staff. This building is a National Historic Place of Canada.

If you have ideas or advice, how to make it better, I'm happy to hear about it. Created by MB-one - uploaded by MB-one - nominated by MB-one -- MB-one (talk) 02:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a nice subject, but the trees in the background are too dark to make the difference between the house and the background. Try at another daylight. -- -donald- (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. I like the image, but a new image with -donald-'s suggestion might be better. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the advice. I reworked the shadows to achieve better contrast between trees and building. --MB-one (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
That looks better imo, struck out weak. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 19:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Important parts of the building are in shadow. IMHO that not really helps for a good overall impression of the photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Luz Metro Station of São Paulo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2014 at 01:25:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Luz Metro Station of São Paulo
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Wilfredor, can you explain your intentions with this picture, because clearly it isn't a standard exposure and if the station was actually that dark, people might fall onto the track. I see from other images in the category, that the platforms get very busy with people waiting (something that is barely visible on the right hand side here). It's hard to appreciate the architecture of the roof. -- Colin (talk) 11:58, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your comment Colin (I send a hug o/). I wish to convey the admosfera this terminal on a Sunday afternoon, I wanted to convey the feeling of loneliness, give a picture of this terminal as it was 100 years ago when everything was calm and relaxed, I used the technique of backlighting for obscure details of our current society, the bright colors were too expensive at the time. This photograph is an invitation to stop time in a terminal that always looks in motion, this photograph is a reminder of what once was this terminal. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark for any emotions. --Yikrazuul (talk) 20:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Fugro Explorer.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 23:45:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:2014 Nysa, Bazylika św. Jakuba i św. Agnieszki, witraż.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 22:06:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too soft and no wow for me --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Mercado Central, Valencia, España, 2014-06-30, DD 116.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 22:02:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior view of the dome of the Central Market (Mercado Central), a 100-years-old modernist building located in Valencia, Spain. The market contains 400 stores that employ approx 1500 people, and is the biggest in Europe dedicated to fresh products.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Interior view of the dome of the Central Market (Mercado Central), a 100-years-old modernist building located in Valencia, Spain. The market contains 400 stores that employ approx 1500 people, and is the biggest in Europe dedicated to fresh products. All by me, Poco2 22:02, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 22:02, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! Mesmerizing! ArionEstar (talk) 22:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Some minor quibbles—a little light bleedthrough in one of the windows, and the crop is just a hairsbreadth away from being too tight for me. But sometimes true art is that which stops just short of perfection. (And I like that it looks like a giant watch, without hands or numbers, this way). Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Daniel Case. Maybe some chromatic noise in the darker part at left. I like very much the short descriptions provided in the nomination, always interesting.--Jebulon (talk) 09:23, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done, among other improvements, thanks Poco2 10:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Baños Romanos, Bath, Inglaterra, 2014-08-12, DD 39-41 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 21:56:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Great Bath, part of the Roman Baths complex, a site of historical interest in the city of Bath, England. The baths, based on the local hot springs, were built during the Roman occupation of Britain and has become a major touristic site.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of the Great Bath, part of the Roman Baths complex, a site of historical interest in the city of Bath, England. The baths, based on the local hot springs, were built during the Roman occupation of Britain and has become a major touristic site. Note that this picture is a HDR needed to increase the range due to tricky lighting conditions. All by me, Poco2 21:56, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 21:56, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I'm not sure if I like this angle that much as the water loses its colour because of the reflections, but it's well captured. Especially as you managed to get a view of it without any tourists in the view! Amazing. I've been there 3 or 4 times now and it's always been extremely crowded. Is the timestamp correct or did you forget to change it when you were in the UK? :-) I didn't know it was open so late. Diliff (talk) 05:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    The time stamp is correct. There were a bunch of tourists, but probably very few in comparison to the normal visiting hours, since nobody expects that it's open then. We also got late to Bath and were surprised that you could get in until 9 pm and stay until 10 pm! as you can see here. The problem about going late is the lighting combined with the fact that they will not let you use a tripod, so you have to be imaginative about how to solve that :) Regarding the POV I have to say that before getting there the shot from this angle was my favourite and after taking photographs everywhere in the site I think that I was not mistaken. Poco2 08:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment First of all category has to be corrected ;-) --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done, thanks for the hint! Poco2 08:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 09:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition and colors. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:View of Angers on the Maine river from the castle.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 22:01:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Angers on the river Maine in France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moroder - uploaded by Moroder - nominated by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 22:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 22:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:09, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • nice view, but not really sharp --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to the lack of sharpness which could not be compensated with a stricking composition (the wall in the foreground is disturbing). I wonder whether it would have been possible to the picture further to the left to have a better view of the river and even show a nicer perspective a bit for of the scenery on the left Poco2 11:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • There Is nothing wrong with the sharpness of the photo even if you can't read the number plates of the cars. Technically speaking there is no blur, the focus is correct the aperture is good (f/9), the exposition time is 1//500. I can't comment on the composition, mostly a matter of taste--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Sorry Wolfgang, but I agree with Wladyslaw. It may not be a focus problem but it’s so soft for its 12 mpix I wouldn’t even call it a QI. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 04:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Et plus que l'air marin la douceur angevine (Joachim du Bellay (1522-1560). Yes, but too soft for me too.--Jebulon (talk) 16:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • I might be a bad looser but u are pixel nerds ;-))

--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Hereford Cathedral Choir, Herefordshire, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 21:27:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hereford Cathedral Choir
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 21:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 21:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 08:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Always great and very beautiful. @Diliff I'm curious, the undulations of the shadows in the ribbed vaults are deformations of accommodation of the arches? -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 15:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Winchester Cathedral High Altar, Hampshire, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 21:26:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winchester Cathedral High Altar
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 07:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Arcalino (talk) 16:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Very, very impressive... May I ask, how many partial images have you combined in order to achieve the final outcome? If you don't mind disclosing your arcane secrets, that is... --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)

File:Savannah Anole.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 18:59:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by 0x010C - uploaded by 0x010C - nominated by 0x010C -- 0x010C (talk) 18:59, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 0x010C (talk) 18:59, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor detail (due to severe noise reduction I suppose), still very noisy background. Would prefer to see the entire animal too. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 20:35, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Acqueduct arch, Alcazaba gardens, Almeria, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 16:33:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

arch, alcazaba gardens, Almeria, Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 16:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In the gardens of the Alcazaba of Almeria, Andalusia, Spain. The arch is a remain of an ancient arab aqueduct-- Jebulon (talk) 16:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems underexposed, and I really am not excited by the composition. Daniel Case (talk) 19:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With Daniel. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose maybe I have missed s.th, but this is a partial visibel ordinary gate covered with plants and grass, see n.th. special in the object or composition. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • @ Tuxyso: Clin --Jebulon (talk) 13:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Jebulon: may you comment also the other oppose-votings or am I s.th. very special? --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
        • The question is to answer it. But you are s.b., not s.th. --Jebulon (talk) 15:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
          • you seem to need some coaching: please make a difference between "to be s.th. special," but: "to be s.b." thx --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Certainly a nicde moment having been captured but the pic is by no means outstanding. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Stift Göttweig Kaiserstiege Fresko 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2014 at 15:36:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling fresco of the Imperial Staircase of Göttweig Abbey by Paul Troger (1739): Apotheosis of Emperor Charles VI.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Ceiling fresco of the Imperial Staircase of Göttweig Abbey by Paul Troger (1739): Apotheosis of Emperor Charles VI. Photographed, uploaded and nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 15:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 15:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 16:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although I feel like the lower right corner is darker than it needs to be, i.e. that it is darker doesn't seem to be intended by the artist. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:17, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is the north-east corner of the fresco, so maybe it is due to uneven illumination. However, as far as I can remember, the light was quite diffuse there. The same effect is visible on all photos I took, and also on photos from other sources. Unfortunately I cannot check on-site in the near future, but I will do further investigations and apply a correction, if necessary. --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Tallinn Toompea Upper Old Town 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 19:47:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tallinn Toompea Upper Old Town
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Ivar (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:40, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Northamerica1000 (talk) 14:02, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love that this is a moonrise photo. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pugilist (talk) 19:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Xicotencatl (talk) 22:30, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice POV of the old town. Looking at it I almost have the impression that it is in the middle of a forest isolated of the civilization Poco2 11:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice light, good view, high quality. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 13:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "The composition isn't very compelling, with the tree obscuring the most interesting part of the scene." Jee 02:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

File:GandM Purist-Grace match cricket balls.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 18:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

GandM Purist-Grace match cricket balls.jpg

File:Panorama Egmond aan Zee Leuchtturm 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 14:26:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view over Egmond aan Zee with J.C.J. van Speijk lighthouse
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 14:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 14:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice stitch and very impressive resolution and overall quality. The Leuchtturm is leaning a bit to the right. Is it leaning in reality also? (difficult to find good vertical alignment points on the conically shaped mast). -- Slaunger (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • IMHO OK as it is. If you draw a vertical line through the red top the line reaches exactly the middle of the lighthouse. I've vertically aligned to the buildings at the background and the pano head was perfectly adjusted. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Weird, it does not reach the exact middle on my monitor.Smile First I got, an impression of leaning by just seeing it in thumb. Then I thought it could be some kind of perceived leaning, so I checked by panning over an approximate 50% view and look at the edges of the base of the tower and where the corresponding vertical lines intersected the top. The intersection points are not symmetrical, which I think they should be. I will try to indicate with an annotation, although it is hard to get sufficient precision in drawing the box. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:49, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree that the remaining building like the church have very good vertical alignment, but the lighthouse protudes much higher and it is really not possible to properly insert vertical alignment points as there are no vertical lines in the lighthouse to align with, and it is my experience that this can easily lead to extrapolation errors although the base align well vertically. Its difficult, its difficult. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed, Slaunger. It took me a lot of time but you had been right, something was wrong there. The problem is that near the light house there are only very few (and short) vertical lines in the background. The solution was to manually add a vertical line with manually estimated coordinates (without having such a long vertical line there). IMHO it is better now, please take another look. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done! I send you a mail shortly after my initial comment offering to send a crop showing it, but you found out yourself. It was subtle to see, I agree.-- Slaunger (talk) 21:17, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very little barrel distortion, the sea at the edges is at a higher elevation. I agree that the lighthouse seems leaning. But all the others verticals are straight, so for me it is leaning in reality. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not sure if it is barrel distortion, but I have now fixed the sea level at both sides. Please take another look, Christian (if you have time) and give me a feedback if the elevation issued is fixed for you. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
At full resolution I moved the cursor of the window from a side to the other : The sea at right is straight but is higher than the sea of the left. The level of the sea at left is more straight than the first version but is always a bit leaning especially near the land. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 06:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done It had been only a few pixels, Christian - should now finally corrected. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Perfectly straight, however the right is always a bit higher than the left... -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:54, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
IMHO only pixels, with regard to the size of the pano neglectable. Probably a rounding error in Hugin :) --Tuxyso (talk) 08:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:36, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Something I forgot to ask, when I got distracted by the lighthouse leaning, which is now fixed... The sky alternates between blue and more white: Did you use a polarization filter? -- Slaunger (talk) 08:21, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Slaunger, using a polarizing filter with Panos is a no-go. If you take a look on the EXIF data you can see that the angle of view is very wide - about 270° - the setting sun is left to the left edge, and right to the right edge thus this is the explanation for the alternating brightness. Exposure time was identical with all shots, light situation did not change during the shot. The brighter areas in the middle are imho due to the opposing sun. Don't expect a 100% homogeneous sky with such a wide view. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
      • (ec) I agree completely. I had actually looked for FOV information but overlooked it in the EXIF. I just wanted to be sure it was not due to using a polarization filter as that could have given such an effect with smaller FOV. With a FOV of 270° the effect as shown here is as expected and is unavoidable. -- Slaunger (talk) 08:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
      • (EC) Add: If you take a look on this 360° pano by Böhringer you can observe a similiar effect: You have two bright spots: The direct sun (and the areas around there) and a brighter area exactly opposed to the direct sun (180° to the direct sun). In my pano the brighter areas around the direct sun are visible at the left and right border, the area 180° from the direct sun is visible in the middle of my pano. All in all I see no problem there. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
so ist es --Böhringer (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:28, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:21, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Frankly, I'm sorry but I'm not sure this ordinary (IMO) landscape deserves a so huge work. The technical performance is probably very high, but I feel no wow in any way (and I prefer remain silent about sharpness...).--Jebulon (talk) 20:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Every motive deserves huge work, but time is often limited, Jebulon. If you are on vacation you can take the time, wait for golden hour light and make a highres pano of an (imho) not ordinary landscape. BTW: A panorama of a similiar position with overexposed sky and bad light was sold in the local shops for 300 euros :) Now a much better pano is freely available. Isn't it a benefit? I do not understand your last sentence: "and I prefer remain silent about sharpness". If you see seriously problems with sharpness I can answer: The pano shown here is an unscaled (!!) sensor resolution version - imho the optical performance of the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 I've used here is impressive. Normally panoramic views (also all of my former panos) are normally downscaled (default setting in Hugin is e.g. 70%) thus they look surely sharper at 100% view. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Tuxyso, I think, on sharpness, that Jebulon's comment is saying he would prefer not to engage in yet another FPC discussion over "pixel-peeping" reviews and whether to downsize for FP. Let's agree to disagree on that one and move on. [but I agree with you that the picture is impressively sharp for a non-downscaled pano] -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Colin, got the point now. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Thanks, Colin, that is exactly what I meant (sorry Tuxyso for the misunderstanding, actualy this part of my comment was not for you)--Jebulon (talk) 13:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 00:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose n.th. featureable --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:39, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 13:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Cheetah at Sunset.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 07:30:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Cheetah silhouetted against a fiery sunset, in the Okavango Delta, in Botswana.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me-- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Truly stunning, but given the marginal resolution, it should be razor-sharp at full resolution, which it really is not. I think the softness is because you have hit the diffraction limit with an aperture of f/17. Would have been better with a larger aperture, ISO 100, and a shorter shutter time. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 09:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Changed my mind after considering the creators reasonable comments on my talk page regarding my original assessment and the conditions of the shot. The timing and atmosphere of the shot mitigates to some extend the not so impressing technical quality and the "thumbnail" resolution. -- Slaunger (talk) 13:54, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I think it worth quoting what Arturo wrote on Slaunger's talk page (which is a reminder imo of the usefulness of saying something when nominating: "By definition, a picture of a wild predator after sunset has important technical challenges, mainly the almost inexistent light, and the fact that a cheetah on the prowl will stay on top of the termite mound for a second, not even two. You are lucky if you see it, compose and fire. There is no time to change settings. Honestly, I think this image is unbelievably atmospheric, one of the most powerful in my portfolio - you can almost hear the crickets, smell the savannah, feel the determination of the hunter. And as such, I expected it to be evaluated on its artistic strength, the story it tells, the feelings it conveys, not by the sharpness you would expect in an arquitectural image." I agree that it is one thing to expect a careful consideration of shutter/aperture/iso for an architectural image, but when capturing a fleeting and magical moment like this, one never gets a second chance and fiddling with one's camera may just lose everything. In terms of the "'thumbnail' resolution", Slaunger mentions, I think there are mitigating factors for wildlife photography. The image was taken at an effective (fully-frame equivalent) focal length of 200mm with a 10-year-old camera. The image resolution is about half the sensor resolution. I don't know if this image is cropped, but heavy cropping is more likely in a wildlife photo than one taken in other circumstances. -- Colin (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 20:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A silhouette is more about recognisable shape than fine detail. Sure, one can find flaws, but it is a great moment captured from just the right angle of view. -- Colin (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you Slaunger for changing your mind, and thank you Colin for your comments. I have uploaded a full-res file, at 4000px, instead of 1920px as before. I think this will improve resolution but some border softness remains as the light was really almost inexistent when the cheetah showed up. The image is very slightly cropped, perhaps only 5% or so. --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Since you have gone all in now! -- Slaunger (talk) 06:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol support vote.svg Support What a great picture! Very nice! --mathias K 07:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, though a bit soft due to the circumstances --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Colin --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --· Favalli ⟡ 00:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is a great one! The settings are though pretty awkward for a telephoto shoot (f/17?) Poco2 11:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks everybody for recent support votes... To Poco, you are of course right, the settings were very awkward indeed... and not on purpose. I think I have never been shooting in the bush at F17... you rarely need more than F10 with wildlife subjects (except macro, or closeups of animals with very long snouts...), and you rarely have enough light for that at dusk... This cheetah took me completely by surprise, I was driving back to camp, almost at night already, when I saw it on the mound. I could only stop the car, grab the camera and shoot. I had probably changed the aperture by accident when leaving the camera on the seat....
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think sharpness can be ignored in a case like this. Excellent shot. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 06:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Lüdinghausen, Burg Lüdinghausen -- 2014 -- 5502.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 06:14:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Burg Lüdinghausen in Lüdinghausen (Germany) at the blue hour
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 06:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 06:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice composition and sky. The photo appears to be exposure fused from more than one image as there are ghosts on the right hand side from vegetation being placed differently in different captures. Also, the glare from the sidelamps on the path to the building are disturbing, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 09:50, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your review. A small remark: It's a tone mapped image from a HDR image. IMO it's nearly impossible to take a HDR image of branches in the nature without movements. But the branches are not illuminated and IMO they are not disturbing.--XRay talk 10:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • OK, HDR mapped and not exposure fused:) Anyway, the same effect regarding the ghosts. I agree you cannot avoid such effects unless you are in conditions of no or very low wind, and I also agree this aspect is not that important. I would also not have opposed due to that little detail in itself. For me the biggest issue is the glare from the lamps. --Slaunger (talk) 14:19, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Perspective looks strange Jiel (talk) 11:31, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is nothing special. There is a long bridge in front of the castle. It's the normal view.--XRay talk 05:25, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice idea and well done. The glares could be a bit less dominating but that doesn’t impair the image too much. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:09, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 13:24, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 15:32, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger, sorry. + halos along the roof (oversharpening ?), and green CA near the right chimney. The sky looks unnatural to me. Excellent composition though, and very nice place.--Jebulon (talk) 20:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Green CAs are reduced/removed. Thanks for your advice.--XRay talk 15:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support For the nice atmosphere and interesting subject and in spite of quality flaws and a centered corridor (would have preferred that the POV is not in the middle of the corridor bridge) Poco2 12:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:View from Imperia Tower Moscow 04-2014 img12.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 05:25:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mercury City Tower

Proposed category : Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for nominating. Yes, there is going to be FoP in Russia from October 1, yes it is also retroactive, and yes it does not require taking the photo from the street. --A.Savin 13:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question There is a section (see annotation) in the middle, which looks "weird" to me (but not necessarily "wrong"). What is it? Is the image a crop or have you downsampled? -- Slaunger (talk) 14:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    Hi. See note. I'm not sure. The only big modifications I did was the removal of some glass reflections. --A.Savin 14:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the reply. It is good. Regarding FoP: Should we just pretend it is October 1 now? The sun does rise sooner as compared to my location, but I did not know you were days ahead:) -- Slaunger (talk) 14:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the FoP question, I had of course the option to wait with the uploading, but other views I took then were all general cityscapes and with this single one I didn't want to delay several months. Again, FoP is retroactive; even if the file was deleted, it had to be undeleted after 10-01. Regarding the nomination, I'm not the nominator and I would have waited of course; but there are few days left, so in the end it's just a hairsplitting. --A.Savin 15:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment – The image description should identify the dominant subject (Mercury City Tower?), not just where it was taken from (Imperial Tower). Quality image of half a building. --Kbh3rdtalk 14:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Done. --A.Savin 15:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:35, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:35, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent, maybe the horizon in the middle is not a perfect illustration of the rule of thirds. But let's celebrate the new FoP in Russia ! (The strange thing annotated appears on many other pictures -see Google- of this skyscraper, there is no wrong manipulation or so).--Jebulon (talk) 20:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, at least for now, due to the bottom crop, it's too abrupt for my taste. The building has for sure FP potential, actually some pictures on the web are pretty amazing. Do you have a way to show more of it at the bottom? If not, why? Poco2 11:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
It was taken from a glazed visitor's deck; the lower part is not visible there. --A.Savin 16:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
That's too bad, the crop ruins it for me Poco2 09:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:2014-09-07 10-57-15 Le-sculpteur.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 18:50:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Le sculpteur.

File:2014-09-07 10-37-55 La-Resurrection.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 18:48:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

La Résurrection.

File:DFC Sete v FNC Douai Coupe de la Ligue 2014 t140222.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 17:20:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

DFC Sète's Dražen Kujačić dribbles the ball in their quarter-final against FNC Douai of the 2014 League Cup at the Georges Vallerey swimming pool in Paris.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jastrow - uploaded by Jastrow - nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 17:20, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really nice picture with a high educational value and good dynamic -- Pleclown (talk) 17:20, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There is allways something special in Jastrows photographs. -- Smial (talk) 06:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great image ! -- Jiel (talk) 11:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 14:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support indeed great sport action (by @Jastrow: again!) --PierreSelim (talk) 05:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Smial.--Jebulon (talk) 19:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:India - Actors - 0258.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 16:12:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Jorgeroyan - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 19:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kbh3rdtalk 03:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 06:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Fine image. Kleuske (talk) 08:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:28, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 15:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. Humans ! --Jebulon (talk) 20:55, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 00:48, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support To be consistent with my recommendation in QIC :) Poco2 11:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support Such a great and memorable people shot ... we need more of these to balance out the landscape and building images that dominate here. However, I'd feel even better about it if something could be done about the CA on the outer fringes of the garments. Daniel Case (talk) 19:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Puente Pulteney, Bath, Inglaterra, 2014-08-12, DD 51.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 14:17:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 14:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 14:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hey, nice finding! :) Thanks Tomer Poco2 14:22, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 15:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 1bumer (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 17:58, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I'll ignore the clipping and Symbol support vote.svg Support. :) — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:28, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me a good photo with a good composition, but I find the light rather dull, and there is something artificial looking with the texture of the brick surface of the Puente. Not among the very best IMO. Maybe too aggressive luminance noise reduction? -- Slaunger (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    No aggresive denoising was applied here. I see your point, but making out of it an oppose is pretty tough Poco2 19:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    Thanks for info. The light is for me the biggest issue. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Schwetzingen BW 2014-07-24 10-50-59.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 13:40:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Germany, Baden-Württemberg, Schwetzingen castle
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 13:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 13:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit soft regarding the relatively small size but well composed and lit. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:55, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Good, but only a half bush at the right. And only a small Wow.--XRay talk 06:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looks underexposed to me. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 11:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good QI, but not outstanding enough for me. --DXR (talk) 15:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have to agree with DXR, sorry, Poco2 12:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Flickr - ggallice - Wax-tail hopper (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2014 at 05:13:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wax-tail hopper

Proposed category : Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods

File:Jardim Botânico Fanchette Rischbieter em Curitiba 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2014 at 23:06:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Bubo September 2014-4a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2014 at 22:24:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An European Eagle-owl (Bubo bubo) in a falconry centre, Portugal. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Tricky. It’s certainly not bad but there are some issues I dont approve of: 1. crop (too much space on top, too little on right); 2. perspective (seen from above makes the bird look smallish and a bit funny); 3. motion blur in plumage. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:59, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • You are quite right about the crop. I have nominated an alternative version below. Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The quality is impressive, getting sharp feathers at this resolution is really something. That being said, I also dislike the point of view from above. It's essentially a portrait, and taking it from significantly above eye level doesn't work in my opinion. The background is a little distracting (but not too much), the light is ok. For the crop, I would probably prefer it if the bird would be looking into the picture (i.e. more space on the right than on the left). — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Alternative version[edit]

Bubo September 2014-4.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - Same picture as above, not cropped. Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I’d still crop a bit off on the left and top to de-center the subject and make it look into the image. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 08:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Tarnobrzeg, Zamek Tarnowskich 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2014 at 09:40:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Vihula mõisa tuuleveski 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 18:10:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vihula manor windmill
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Ivar (talk) 18:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good. --Kadellar (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see nice clouds, a not very impressive wind mill in my eyes and a grassland, good quality, top QI, but no wow to me --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:52, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good light -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 10:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 13:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Too much empty/useless grass in foreground, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 09:06, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The grassland takes about 1/3 of the image height, I don't want to crop it. --Ivar (talk) 09:40, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
      • The grassland takes about 1/3 of the image height This is one reason why this image composition isn't so succeed. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:11, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice ! Jiel (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Nice lighting and clouds. But this is an example of a case where (in my opinion) the rule of thirds should not be followed. If a third of the picture is empty space, that's too much. I would crop some of the grass and perhaps a little bit on the right as well. --King of ♠ 05:18, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Agree with the right crop too.--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better. --King of ♠ 01:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral for the time being. Per King and Jebulon. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:42, 12 September 2014 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support ok now --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arcalino (talk) 12:08, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:34, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New crop uploaded. --Ivar (talk) 15:51, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 19:46, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 13:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Happy to see that crop suggestions were followed, and provided subsequent supports ! As for me, I see a very better picture, but I'm still not convinced by the subject--Jebulon (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Duvbo Metro station September 2014 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 17:58:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Duvbo Metro station, Stockholm. Expsoure fusion from a single exposure. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice perspective, image impression and motion capture. maybe you can improve the signs a little bit? the letters are not so sharp as they could be (as non moving parts) --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The motion blur of the train is great, but personally I don't like the slight blur of the people in the picture, especially the guy with the camera. Either they should be sharp or more blurry with movement. -- KTC (talk) 22:41, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
    • As a photographer you don't have a choice, people are moving in a subway station. The only way to avoid blur of the people is to use a very high ISO, but that will affect the quality negative. Longer exposure (with very small aperture=diffraction) is no guarantee for more blurry people (a person can stand still, another only move his head once, and so on). --ArildV (talk) 23:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
      • As a photographer, you do have a choice. You have the choice to wait and wait and wait until all the stars align perfectly and you get the shot. ;-) I say that as a joke, but it's also true. There does have to be a practical limit though, if this is the best result of half an hour of waiting then fair enough, you did your best. I suppose the biggest obstacle to this photo is getting the two trains coming in at the same time and everyone still at the same time. I can imagine that would be very tricky. Diliff (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Fair enough Diliff. I stayed a long time at the station, and only once came two trains simultaneously. I know many of my pictures of Stockholm subway is relatively empty of people, I avoid rush hour traffic and photographs often departing train heading towards the city center (fewer people are leaving the train on suburban stations). But the point here was to get the two trains. Regards--ArildV (talk) 22:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 13:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per KTC, sorry. The guy is really eye catching.--Jebulon (talk) 09:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 09:53, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berdea (talk) 16:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jiel (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I don't think the blurry people is enough to put me off. Although if I have to find one criticism (I usually do!), it's that parts of the image are a bit lacking in contrast. The darker parts of the image look fine, but the seating area, the lighting/air vents at the top and the signs could do with darker blacks and more contrast IMO. Just a minor issue. Diliff (talk) 22:27, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is already about as empty as a metro station can get. --King of ♠ 05:19, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arcalino (talk) 12:09, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 1bumer (talk) 16:33, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

File:2014.06.07.-03-Kirschgartshaeuser Schlaege Mannheim---Tagpfauenauge-Raupe.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2014 at 15:33:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I'm not sure because of the stem in the foreground. But I'll never know what you think when I don't dare a try. ;-) All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hockei (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support visualy the stem is not so disturbing : the first time I opened the image I was so much attracted by the caterpillar that I did not seen the stem... -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I uploaded a version with a changed crop. It can be that it looks better. If not, I'll revert it to the first version. --Hockei (talk) 16:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment if I may: the right stem should stay for three reasons: The other stem (unfocused) stands out too much; sheet looks unfinished, loose; the stem helps to identify the blurred in the context. I would cut off only the right side of stem (keep the bud). -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 20:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Certainly you may. :-) Thank's for your advice. You say about what I think. So I changed the crop again. --Hockei (talk) 14:33, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems underexposed, and of course is in the shadow of the leaf so not best lit. I don't see anything here that raises this photo above the many other photographs of the caterpillar, or among our best. -- Colin (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Appearance is not reality, Colin. This picture is not underexposed. This caterpillar is black. And this photo shows the animal in it's real living environment. Maybe I should take and set it on a stem into the sun next time? --Hockei (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I am aware the caterpillar is black. You could present us with a completely black picture and claim this is what it looks like in the real living environment at night. So that's not a strong argument. The level of exposure and lighting are chosen to display the subject to best effect. I think neither are optimal here. But my main concern is that at FPC one needs to compare the image to its peers. And when one does that the picture doesn't stand out. -- Colin (talk) 21:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
        • I look at a picture, see and decide if it is excellent or not and I never compare with others. This is the right way IMO. I don't consider this here as a competition. --Hockei (talk) 19:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Hockei, the definition of this forum is: "Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons." This isn't a Flickr "fave" or a Facebook "Like!" but a serious judgement of whether this picture is considerably better than its peers and deserves to sit among other such images as our finest work. Therefore if you don't compare with others, you really aren't doing your job. The world is full of "nice" pictures. File:2014.05.25.-05-Kirschgartshaeuser Schlaege Mannheim--Tagpfauenauge-Raupe.jpg is better lit, though a less interesting pose. The lighting issue with this photograph is easily resolved by the use of a reflector (even a white card would do) which is pretty standard kit for such photography. -- Colin (talk) 19:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
            • Colin, Please stick to facts and don't suggest the people here I would be active in flickr or facebook just because of my point of view you don't like. --Hockei (talk) 20:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
              • I have absolutely no idea what you are taking about. -- Colin (talk) 20:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
                • I said it due to your comparison of my reviews with the facebook-"like"-button. We should leave it at that. This leads to nothing. --Hockei (talk) 06:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice details, precious moment, ty -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 22:17, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose underexposed --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:26, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
it's a little better but it's easy to do more. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)