Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 17 2015

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Common_blue_butterfly_(Polyommatus_icarus)_male_2.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Common blue butterfly (Polyommatus icarus) male --Charlesjsharp 20:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose I never opposed this, please don't vote for me Christian Ferrer 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)Good DoF and nice compo however the yellow color is clipped and a bit disturbing --Christian Ferrer 21:57, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
    *  Support I've had a good look at the flower and it seems OK to me. Others? --Charlesjsharp 08:58, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support Very good composition with nearly complementary colors. -- Spurzem 12:12, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support --Palauenc05 17:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Cayambe 16:32, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

File:2014-07-02 Forschungszentrum caesar, Ludwig-Erhard-Allee 2, Bonn-Hochkreuz IMG 2111.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Research center, Bonn, Germany (by Hasenläufer)--Leit 17:00, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  SupportCool photo of a cool building --Daniel Case 17:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree, I don't see nothing there in focus --Ezarate 11:22, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Comment Are we looking at the same building? It is really sharp enough. My support will be given as soon as the dust spot is cloned out (see my notes). And please consider to clone out the green in the top left corner - it does not become to the image and it is the only thing where I could say, the sharpness is missing. --Cccefalon 06:05, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support for the new version. Good quality. --Cccefalon 07:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Is the main building really so distorted? -- Spurzem 07:51, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
I thought, it was not exactly vertical according to one of the architectural photos (see here), but if I am wrong, then perspective correction should be applied of course. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:59, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Cayambe 16:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Iglesia_de_San_Pedro,_Riga,_Letonia,_2012-08-07,_DD_19.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Coat of arms in the church of Saint Peter, Riga, Letonia. By User:Poco a poco --XRay 04:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Hubertl 08:15, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Top feathers unsharp despite sharpening and too strong denoising. Then, chromatic noise.--Jebulon 16:56, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support the dark side left is not disturbing OK for QI.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 20:11, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • {{o}} As Jebulon--Lmbuga 22:25, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'll upload a new version tomorrow, latest on Monday Poco a poco 10:12, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Waiting, thanks--Lmbuga 19:55, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Waiting time over: ✓ new version uploaded Poco a poco 21:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 weak support tendent to neutral. Good picture with ISO 1600, but the feathers do not convince me fully--Lmbuga 11:27, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Opposition removed, but I don't support...--Jebulon 20:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Jebulon 20:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Sheep Campilhas March 2015-1.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination White and brown sheep in Alentejo, Portugal. Alvesgaspar 23:02, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. IMO overexposed. --XRay 04:29, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I can't see any significant overexposure in any of the channels. On the contrary, the darker animals are slightly underexposed. Alvesgaspar 09:21, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • @Alvesgaspar: Overexposure does not necessarily mean blown channels/clipping, and I agree with both of you – most of the landscape is overexposed and the faces of the dark animals in the shadows are underexposed. Contrasty scenes like this can be difficult to capture, but playing with the shadows/highlights sliders in any current post-processing software could potentially work wonders here. For now it's an  Oppose from me. --El Grafo (talk) 09:49, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Cayambe 16:09, 15 April 2015 (UTC)