Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 2009

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

Contents

Consensual review[edit]

Image:Video_projector_lamp.jpg[edit]

Video projector lamp.jpg

  • Nomination UHE lamp for a digital video projector --Mr.checker 15:34, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beleuchtung ist gut aber die Schärfentiefe ist zu gering. --Berthold Werner 16:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ich finde, die Schärfe liegt genau richtig und lenkt den Blick aufs Wesentliche, ganz ausgezeichnete Sachaufnahme, die mir wirklich gut gefällt. -- Smial 22:31, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice and very useful photo, but I have to agree with Berthold about the DOF, which is a pity. -- H005 23:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 10:09, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Krokusse violett.jpg[edit]

Krokusse violett.jpg

  • Nomination purple crocuses. -- Wolf im Wald 23:14, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good.--Mbz1 23:31, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated. --kallerna 10:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I have decreased the saturation. -- Der Wolf im Wald 12:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good quality IMO, colours are natural -- George Chernilevsky 11:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now is good --Archaeodontosaurus 12:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? Eusebius 10:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Jaguar XF SV8 front.jpg[edit]

Jaguar XF SV8 front.jpg

  • Nomination Jaguar XF SV8. -- S 400 HYBRID 14:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very well done (a second time) -- 320td 17:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Front too noisy, very badly processed over the roof. --Eusebius 22:45, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support too noisy? By me it's not too noisy!? -- S 400 HYBRID 14:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
    As the creator and nominator of the picture, you may not vote. Yes, the flanks and front of the car are noisy, and I think it is a bit too much. But this thing over the roof is what mainly prevents your file from being promoted. --Eusebius 15:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Something on the roof. --Makele-90 00:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background manually blurred, but with very bad result, not only above the roof. -- Smial 17:17, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? Eusebius 10:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Nová radnice (New townhall), Náchod 04.JPG[edit]

Nová radnice (New townhall), Náchod 04.JPG

  • Nomination: Tower of New Townhall, Náchod --Kozuch 10:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Review
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment a little tilt to the right --Pudelek 16:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes? Eusebius 10:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Extra 300L Góraszka 2008.JPG[edit]

Extra 300L Góraszka 2008.JPG

  • Nomination: An Extra 300 with Robert Kowalik holding the stick. Photo by myself. --Airwolf 23:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Review
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are at least five visible dust spots (marked on the image page) and the main subject is far from sharp. Like the composition and angle though - Peripitus 03:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
    Huh, there's got to be something wrong with my monitor, I can barealy see those spots. But I'll try to get rid of them, thanks. Airwolf 06:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment After correction i will support this photo --George Chernilevsky 07:54, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes? Eusebius 10:52, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Pano rive droite Ubayette.jpg[edit]

Pano rive droite Ubayette.jpg

  • Nomination mountains north of Ubayette Valley --Berrucomons 17:41, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Overprocessed? Sky too dark, most other parts blurred from noise reduction. -- Smial 23:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The sky looks natural to me. Plenty of detail available too. Very scenic. However... there are dust spots in the sky, so I can't support yet, can these be fixed? --99of9 23:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I guess if you fix it you can renominate. 99of9 10:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline? Eusebius 10:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Airbus 320-200 Wizz Air.JPG[edit]

Airbus 320-200 Wizz Air.JPG

  • Nomination WizzAir's Airbus A320. Picture re-nominated, previously declined due to a licencing misunderstanding, photo by myself.--Airwolf 19:14, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion Isn't it slightly tilted to the right? --Tupungato 23:21, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I can see why you're asking, but I don't think so. Look at the wheels, the nose gear just has to be above the main undercarriage. Airwolf 23:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. --Cayambe 19:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Perhaps have a look at the building, perhaps it is a question of perspective correction --Mbdortmund 05:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? Eusebius 10:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Stamps with reproductions of the paintings by Ivan Aivazovsky.jpg[edit]

Stamps with reproductions of the paintings by Ivan Aivazovsky.jpg

  • Nomination Stamps with reproductions of the paintings by Ivan Aivazovsky --Mbz1 21:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, unsharp, bad reflections and (I think) unsure composition. --Eusebius 22:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
    Maybe reflection, but unsharp? It sharp enough IMO.--Mbz1 23:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
    I don't think so, but reflection is the primary motivation for my opposition anyway. --Eusebius 23:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose fine deatails, but the reflections and some CA kills it imo, sorry --Mbdortmund 16:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I uploaded a new version over an old one.--Mbz1 18:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
    I maintain my opposition, the right part of the stamp is still ouf of focus (can't be corrected I'm afraid). --Eusebius 11:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Mbdortmund 16:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

File:BrushtailPossum.jpg[edit]

BrushtailPossum.jpg

  • Nomination Another brushtail possum in Australia --99of9 06:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    *Symbol support vote.svg Support Some noise, but I love this image.--Mbz1 15:40, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
    *Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp enough for me. --Eusebius 11:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Should I revert the edit where I denoised? Did I lose too much sharpness? --99of9 13:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
I think the original lacks sharpness anyway, but other reviewers might disagree. --Eusebius 15:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support night work in vivo. Good for me - Archaeodontosaurus 18:27, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 12:02, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

File:CoA_Comune_di_Borgiallo_2.svg[edit]

CoA Comune di Borgiallo 2.svg

  • Nomination Coat of Arms of Borgiallo. --Fale 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment too simple for QI --George Chernilevsky 19:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with George. --99of9 06:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If the picture is correct I think it can be QI. I dont mind simplicity.Korall 14:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too simple for me too, I don't think it is in the spirit of the project (although the guidelines were designed for photographs) to promote such trivial designs (which does not mean it is not well executed). --Eusebius 17:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC))
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is fully possible to promote a picture of an everyday object taken with fully automatic settings of the camera if the result is fine. And hard-to-take shots like flying insects and rare birds get declined if the result is not of good quality. Its the result, not the effort that matters in photography. I cant see why SVG:s should be judged by a different standard. So here we have an image that describes the subject correctly, in the right file format and is properly described. Why not promote?--Korall 18:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • We have no good rules about .svg as QI. Therefore I have abstained from vote, only comment. However it is too trivial drawing from a few lines. --George Chernilevsky 13:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose George is imo right --Mbdortmund 17:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 12:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

File:TomatenRot Böhringer 5.JPG[edit]

TomatenRot Böhringer 5.JPG

  • Nomination Tomate --Böhringer 12:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good.--Mbz1 15:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice picture, but too much noise. --Eusebius 11:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Eusebius. --kallerna 11:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 12:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Petra Jordan BW 26.JPG[edit]

Petra Jordan BW 26.JPG

  • Nomination Jordan, Petra, a bedouin girl --Berthold Werner 13:19, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice image, could you please remove dust spots from the sky?--Mbz1 21:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
    Done ;-) --Berthold Werner 13:11, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it --Mbdortmund 15:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality is ok, but I find the second person distracting in the composition. --Eusebius 11:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now good -- Smial 12:44, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine with me.--Mbz1 01:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 12:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Thomas_Bresson_-_cables_(by).JPG[edit]

Thomas Bresson - cables (by).JPG

  • Nomination Wires in an old NATO station --ComputerHotline 17:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unusual but a quality image to me --Herbythyme 16:33, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMO the light is too harsh. --kallerna 10:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support by Herbythyme.--Mbz1 21:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 11:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Image:Boojum Tree.jpg[edit]

Boojum Tree.jpg

  • Nomination Boojum tree (Fouquieria columnaris) --Bgag 15:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good. With a slight regret for the small file size. --Cayambe 12:43, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Main subject not so sharp, signal processing issues in the sky, not corrected by the downsampling. --Eusebius 22:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Eusebius + CA. --kallerna 16:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 11:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

File:TexasIndianPaintbrush-0820.jpg[edit]

TexasIndianPaintbrush-0820.jpg

  • Nomination Texas Indian Paintbrush (Castilleja indivisa) flower. --Loadmaster 23:07, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment should imo be cropped on the left side and on the top --Mbdortmund 12:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Done. --Loadmaster 23:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK --Mbdortmund 20:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, overexposed red channel, it is an issue for a red flower. --Eusebius 22:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy, unsharp, overexposed red channel, composition doesn't convince me. --kallerna 16:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 11:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

File:P1160243 Calopteryx splendens.jpg[edit]

P1160243 Calopteryx splendens.jpg

  • Nomination Banded Demoiselle (Calopteryx splendens). Male. - Darius Baužys 13:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent photo --George Chernilevsky 13:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Posterized & noisy. --kallerna 11:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very very good! -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund 17:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus 18:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp, beautiful. Huwmanbeing 12:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Mbdortmund 17:22, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Rapana_Black_Sea_2009_G4.jpg[edit]

Rapana Black Sea 2009 G4.jpg

  • Nomination Veined rapa whelk Rapana venosa. A Black Sea beach at sunset --George Chernilevsky 08:46, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Supportuseful topic, good picture, lack the size of the subject --Archaeodontosaurus 10:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overexposed parts on the main subject. --Eusebius 11:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Darius Baužys 17:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Mbdortmund 20:30, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Radio mast near Aabey.jpg[edit]

Radio mast near Aabey.jpg

  • Nomination Radio mast near Aabey, Lebanon - Peripitus 09:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like the colors and the lighting - well done! However, when zooming in, I see some strange artifacts mainly on the needles. Maybe too strong JPEG compression or maybe it is just my monitor or eyes. I would request a second opinion concerning the "needle artifacts". --MattiPaavola 11:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
    (response) - Unless viewing at 100% you may see the artifacts from the mediawiki jpeg compression. I cannot see the artifacts - Peripitus 21:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I see the "rasterization" at 100% view. BTW, have you tried this image with less agressive JPEG compression. Anyway, let's open this for discussion. --MattiPaavola 11:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good composition & quality --Ianare 05:32, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't see any major problem. Good picture. -- MJJR 20:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 06:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Moderna galerija Ljubljana by night.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Gallery of modern arts, Ljubljana, by night. Yerpo 19:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A big greenish spot on the right in sky. Some CA. --MattiPaavola 17:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I erased the dust spot and corrected purple fringing a bit. Better now? Yerpo 18:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, but now there are (two) black spots instead and there's still CA e.g. on the statue. Anyway, before wasting your time more, I would like to ask someone else more familiar with the QI criteria to judge if the perspective and the composition meet the high criteria. --MattiPaavola 23:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment; I cloned out the spot instead of painting over it with black (which was pretty stupid now that I think of it), and CA is barely noticeable IMO, now that the purple is out of the picture. Yerpo 08:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This does also need perspective correction, I suggest you try ShiftN. --99of9 10:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
I didn't want to edit too heavily, but here goes. Better? (btw, it might take some time for the thumbnail to get updated) Yerpo 17:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the perspective is better, but Matti is right that there wasn't enough buffer around the right to work with. Unfortunate. --99of9 11:50, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I know that you have spent so much time with this one and now the sky and the perspective are perfect, but I'm sorry to say that now the crop is a way too tight on the right for a QI IMO. Please nominate this for a Valued Image - I think it deserves it. --MattiPaavola 23:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline? Eusebius 08:30, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Puebla - Museo Amparo - Tampon lapin Mexica 1500dC.JPG[edit]

Puebla - Museo Amparo - Tampon lapin Mexica 1500dC.JPG

  • Nomination Aztec stamp of a rabbit, 1500 CE --Éclusette 14:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Very noisy and strong compression artefacts. As it is a very interesting object, could you upload a version as it came out of the camera (full resolution etc.), so someone could try to enhance quality? -- Smial 12:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It actually comes out of the camera I used, an Olympus Camedia C-2500L from the Ancient Ages of Digital Photography (1999). Maybe it would better suit another category of promoted images such as the valued images ? - Éclusette 14:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
    Sorry, I did'nt look at the camera model. If this is the full resolution, I'll try to enhance it a bit. Maybe this evening. -- Smial 15:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
thanks! - Éclusette (talk) 18:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose; sorry, but I have to agree with the comment about noise. This image should really be nominated for a valued image instead. -- Yerpo 14:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose White balance. (Maybe you could take the reference white from the number plate (four).) --MattiPaavola (talk) 21:14, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? Eusebius 08:30, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Soufresicile2.jpg[edit]

Soufresicile2.jpg

  • Nomination Sulphur - Floristella Mine, Italy - (12.5x10.2cm). --Archaeodontosaurus 17:11, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. (I expose this to discussion only since others seem to be more sensitive to noise. I personally don't mind little noise.) --MattiPaavola 17:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very illustrative composition, perfectly black background, nice shining yellow stone. --Ikiwaner 13:27, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good and useful. --Cayambe 13:28, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree --George Chernilevsky 14:30, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Changed to promotion--Schlurcher 00:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 14:30, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Frankfurter Römer.jpg[edit]

Frankfurter Römer.jpg

  • Nomination Frankfurt city hall -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline NICE. --OentOent 20:50, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've removed this promotion, it is virtually the only edit of someone now blocked for puppetry --Herbythyme 09:48, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Needs perspective correction. Also, is the left hand wing strangely distorted in real life? --99of9 12:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Falls back --Schlurcher 00:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Mallard Duck female.jpg[edit]

Mallard Duck female.jpg

  • Nomination Yet another female mallard duck. --99of9 01:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too tight composition, unsharp (especially because it's such an easy subject). Yerpo 07:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is rather QI for me, but minor correction need. I dislike dots with CA at water reflection of Sun --George Chernilevsky 09:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Removed red halos on sun reflections. --99of9 02:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support With a slight regret for the tight crop at left.--Cayambe 12:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The focus is not on the head, I know it is difficult but here I find it disturbing that the head is not the sharpest part of the picture. --Eusebius 22:21, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Archaeodontosaurus 08:06, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote? Eusebius 09:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Ruka ski jumping hill autumn 2009.JPG[edit]

Ruka ski jumping hill autumn 2009.JPG

  • Nomination Ruka ski jumping hill, Finland. --MattiPaavola 22:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice --Archaeodontosaurus 18:16, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice landscape, but too noised photo. Correction need before promotion --George Chernilevsky 07:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Yes, I had to go for ISO 400 since I didn't have a tripod and the sun was setting. Anyway, I have now denoised it a little bit. I didn't want to be too agressive for not to kill all the details. I also corrected CA and slightly compensated the peripheral illumination. I know it isn't perfect, but let's see if it is enough for a QA. Thanks for the feedback. --MattiPaavola 11:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
    Better now, so Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --George Chernilevsky 12:46, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --99of9 12:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? Eusebius 20:55, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Phellinus_igniarius_Oak_2009_G1.jpg[edit]

Phellinus igniarius Oak 2009 G1.jpg

  • Nomination Phellinus igniarius on a dead Oak Quercus robur --George Chernilevsky 12:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The direct angle kind of flattens the subject. --MattiPaavola 23:33, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No distortion, perfect quality for work in vivo. -- Archaeodontosaurus 07:12, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - agree with Archaeodontosaurus - Darius Baužys 14:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe 18:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good.--Mbz1 17:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? Eusebius 20:55, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Cathédrale de Tours - verrière de Saint Martin 1.jpg[edit]

Cathédrale de Tours - verrière de Saint Martin 1.jpg

  • Nomination Gothic stained glass window in Tours cathedral. --Eusebius 18:34, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can IMHO be tighter cropped --Berthold Werner 18:54, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
    I wanted to keep a 3:2 ratio. --Eusebius 19:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What's the story with the blacked out faces? --99of9 22:26, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
    The three pictures I have taken of this window show this. Maybe it is a shadow from something outside, but I think the window is stained or damaged (it is about 700 years old). --Eusebius 22:39, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
    Intriguing, it seems almost deliberate! Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm with BW regarding the crop, I don't see any reason for 3:2 in this case. Users can extend with however much black they want. --99of9 02:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
    Feel free to nominate a cropped DW instead, but for me I'll keep this format, I think it is more balanced than a tight crop. --Eusebius 07:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Should be cropped IMO too. The black parts do not add anything. Otherwise good. Thanks for the helpful annotations. --Cayambe 11:17, 5 December 2009 (UTC).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this 3:2 version is aesthetically nicer. --MattiPaavola 19:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- We know how difficult it is to take a photo like this. Schnobby 16:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I actually agree with the crop suggestion. However on a quality basis the image is good (& useful). Don't think Eusebius can be help responsible for damage caused 700 years ago ;) --Herbythyme 13:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just to clarify, my oppose was not for the damage, I was just asking about that for curiosity. My oppose was for the crop. --99of9 02:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Mbdortmund 20:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Basilique Santa Maria in Trastevere campanile Vierge.jpg[edit]

Basilique Santa Maria in Trastevere campanile Vierge.jpg

  • Nomination Mosaic at the top of the church tower of Santa Maria in Trastevere in Rome, Italy. --Myrabella 14:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline The left part of the tower shouldnt be cut.--Lipedia 17:40, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
    A wider view would have make the mosaic very tiny in the picture... The intent was to depict both the mosaic and the Romanesque character of the campanile. --Myrabella 20:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentThat makes sense. Maybee the other way coud be useful: To concentrate on the front facade, as I proposed in a note on the photo page. This way it's something in between. But I dont object, adding it to the q.i..-Lipedia 23:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
    Here it is. Personally I prefer the first variant. --Myrabella 07:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If it's about the mosaic you have to zoom in heaps from a high viewpoint. If it's about the tower you need the whole width of the tower. I don't see any way around this. --99of9 10:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A valuable image, but sorry, I don't find the composition being of high quality in either version. --MattiPaavola 10:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 15:59, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Les orgues basaltiques Thueyts 1.jpg[edit]

Les orgues basaltiques Thueyts 1.jpg

  • Nomination This shows some detail of the basalt columns close to the town of Thueyts in the Ardèche region. --Herbythyme 13:34, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion The motive is not very interesting.--Lipedia 17:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
    *Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality and EV in this image.--Mbz1 18:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I do find the comment that this is "not very interesting" a little odd? These are a well known set of basalt "pipes", the result of volcanic activity. If it is not a quality image fine but why not would be helpful :) Thanks --Herbythyme 18:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentI just ment to say, that the motive is not shown in a very interesting way - unlike the other two pictures.--Lipedia
    *Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentWell,IMO the two images (this one and File:Coulées Basaltiques at Jaujac 3.jpg add value to each other. While the other image shows only columns themselves, this one shows a rock and the columns gently developing from the rock, which is interesting. @Herbythyme, IMO it might be a good idea to add each image to the other_versions tab for these two.--Mbz1 20:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good --George Chernilevsky 18:58, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 05:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

File:HMCS St. John's Gdynia.JPG[edit]

HMCS St. John's Gdynia.JPG

  • Nomination HMCS St. John's. Photo by myself. --Airwolf 21:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good --George Chernilevsky 11:57, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy. --Eusebius 13:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Noisy?! It's just great.--Lipedia 13:21, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good lighting, good composition, adequate resolution. --Ikiwaner 21:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? Ikiwaner 21:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Towards crater at Jaujac 4.jpg[edit]

Towards crater at Jaujac 4.jpg

  • Nomination This shows the crater of one of the younger inactive volcanoes in Europe. This is in France in the Ardeche region close to the town of. The edge of the town can be seen in the foreground. --Herbythyme 12:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC).
  • Promotion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are two dust spots in the sky, just to the right of the vertical white stripe :-). Otherwise very good. -- Cayambe 22:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
    Careless of me :(, thanks - now "dusted" :) --Herbythyme 13:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok now :-). --Cayambe 18:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sky too obviously overexposed, sorry. --Eusebius 21:11, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hum - there was a small amount of clipping which I had missed (:(). Re-uploaded having recovered it. Thanks --Herbythyme 14:27, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 05:51, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Image:Ciutadella Park fountain.jpg[edit]

Ciutadella Park fountain.jpg

  • Nomination Fountain of Ciutadella Park, Barcelona --Bgag 02:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice view, but not a QI IMO. JPEG compression is too agressive and the composition, being otherwise really good, shows only a fraction of the pond's edge at the bottom. I think it should be either cut away completely or more of it should be boldly shown. Sorry. --MattiPaavola 19:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't see any JPG artifacts (and file size ratio seems bearable). Pond edge is probably a deliberate choice - I would have gone with Matti's suggestion, but for me it doesn't fail QI for that. --99of9 21:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me. --Cayambe 13:32, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good -- Archaeodontosaurus 14:11, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question It looks good, but could something be done about the CA on the palmtree? --Eusebius 20:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have imported a better version. --Bgag 23:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Better indeed. --Eusebius 06:28, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? Eusebius 20:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Balancing boy.jpg[edit]

Balancing boy.jpg

  • Nomination Boy in Venice, balancing on a walking adults rucksack--Lipedia 21:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Without the explanation you don't see what is so special. Also a bit too bright. --Schlurcher 17:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentYou dont see he's balancing - what else could he be doing? The hand must be very bright, lest the face shouldn't be dark.--Lipedia 18:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No clear view of the balancing act. --99of9 12:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per 99of9 I'm afraid --Herbythyme 15:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blown highlights, cropped feet and adult's head. Sorry. --Cayambe 16:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? H005 19:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Chapelle Sainte-Avoye[edit]

The chapel image we discuss

  • Nomination Chapelle Sainte-Avoye. --Eusebius 13:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me --George Chernilevsky 14:38, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunately I must disagree with this. About 1/3 on the bottom is covered with trees which cover the main subject almost completely. The centered composition and the rather dull lighting make the image look substandard to me. Technical image quality is good. --Ikiwaner 21:20, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikiwaner --Pudelek 22:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 07:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Image:Old men near Kukes.jpg[edit]

Old men near Kukes.jpg

  • Nomination Typical old Albanians--Lipedia 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentCould you fix the white balance? It seems to be too blue IMO. --MattiPaavola 17:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentDone. There was too much blue indeed.--Lipedia 20:19, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Rather over exposed/washed out I think --Herbythyme 16:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with --Herbythyme. The colour cast is still there in my opinion (see the wall). Sorry. --Cayambe 16:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 07:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Image:KFOR in Dragas.jpg[edit]

KFOR in Dragas.jpg

  • Nomination KFOR post in Kosovo landscape--Lipedia 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Over exposed and a strange colour cast to me --Herbythyme 12:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment How about cropping the tire from left, little adjusting the white balance and maybe downsampling to get rid of the film grain? This is a really valuable image, but I have to agree that it is not of high quality as is. --MattiPaavola 13:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentDone.--Lipedia 20:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I cannot support the composition. --Eusebius 21:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Thanks for the WB correction. The colors are now better. However, the sky is still overexposed. To fix that and the film grain, maybe you would need to rescan the original negative (instead of the print) and start from the beginning: apply gaussian blur and downsample etc... Probably it is not worth it if you are only after the QI stamp since like Eusebius said the composition is not perfect. The helicopter is unfortunately cut. Anyway, I think this is a really valuable image regardless of its technical perfectness. Thanks! --MattiPaavola 01:17, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I fully agree both with MattiPaavola and Eusebius --Ikiwaner 21:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose rare, very interesting, but low quality. Per Herbythyme. :((( --George Chernilevsky 05:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 07:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Zlin 143LS Góraszka.JPG[edit]

Zlin 143LS Góraszka.JPG

  • Nomination A Zlin 143LS. Photo by myself. --Airwolf 15:37, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good. --MattiPaavola 16:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Chroma noise. --Eusebius 20:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Noise not a problem in print resolution or fullscreen. Composition and lighting good, illustrative image. --Ikiwaner 20:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good IMO --George Chernilevsky 05:54, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 07:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Mimurotoj5496.JPG[edit]

Mimurotoj5496.JPG

  • Nomination: Pagoda in Japan --Jnn 13:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Review Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like this image a lot. Unfortunately, the branches overlap the main subject. Without those branches this would be a really good shot. --MattiPaavola 19:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overlapping branches. --MattiPaavola 10:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline? MattiPaavola 10:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Lagerfeuer.jpg[edit]

Lagerfeuer.jpg

  • Nomination: Campfire -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Review Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice interesting image but I don't feel able to promote it. Bot completely clear and the odd light spots in the background seem a little distracting. --Herbythyme 13:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes? Eusebius 22:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Smallfall in Golden Gate Park.jpg[edit]

Smallfall in Golden Gate Park.jpg

  • Nomination: A small fall in Golden Gate Park. --Mbz1 15:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Review Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interesting subject. However, I'd like to see a slightly wider view without the left and right end of the fall being cut. --MattiPaavola 11:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
    Agree. Thank you.--Mbz1 14:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice picture. I don't really like the horizontal crop (left part), and it is slightly overexposed. --Eusebius 22:24, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes? H005 20:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Abbotsbury stitch.jpg[edit]

Abbotsbury stitch.jpg

  • Nomination A stitch showing the historic village of Abbotsbury in Dorset. Again fairly large so full res may be best! --Herbythyme 14:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What about a crop which excludes the left part of the image? There is no sky there and nothing remarkable, I think. --Kiban 20:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
    *Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't really understand this. The whole village is historic and has many old buildings (and gets a lot of tourism). What would be gained by cutting off some of the village - anyone wanting to use the image may crop it. How does this affect QI? --Herbythyme 08:44, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me. The crop can indeed be done by anyone who wants to use the image. --Cayambe 16:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Archaeodontosaurus 18:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? H005 19:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Image:Poor man reading.jpg[edit]

Poor man reading.jpg

  • Nomination Homeless man at a silent place under Skopje trainstation bridge --Lipedia 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment White balance off. --MattiPaavola 13:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
    Brighter now.--Lipedia 21:12, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too much blue, sorry --George Chernilevsky 06:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
    Sure, you saw this newly uploaded version? The colors are still cold, indeed, but that's intended.--Lipedia 11:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Part of the beard and of the book's white sheets are blue. These are unnatural colours. Sorry. --Cayambe 16:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? H005 19:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Image:Logical connectives Hasse diagram.svg[edit]

Logical connectives Hasse diagram.svg

  • Nomination The operations of propositional logic, or set theory respectively, in one diagram. --Lipedia 13:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Does anyone know about this stuff? I find it disconcerting that the red and white boxes are not more clearly paired with the big circle nodes (they sort of float below, but get crossed by all kinds of connecting lines). But I probably don't know enough to see the reason it's that way. --99of9 06:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentI tried different versions, but to me it looked ugly, when the boxes mobbed the circles. There had to be some space in between. The connection lines are unavoidable, as they indicate, which set is a subset of an other set. I made them luminescent, not to interfere with the boxes and letters.--Lipedia 11:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC).
    Pictogram voting question.svg Question Could the connectors start from the bottom of the boxes and go into the top of the next circles? --99of9 12:06, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Information would get lost this way, as this is a geometric object as well:
Hypercubeorder.svg
If the edges wouldn't meet in the center of the nodes, it wouldn't be a rhombic dodecahedron anymore. But that's important, to show, that this diagram is a shadow of the four dimensional cube. --Lipedia (talk) 12:23, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Ok, so maybe the circles and the rectangles should be combined inside another shape, which is then considered the node? Anyway, I think I'm just saying that I can't promote it as it is because the rectangles look misfit to me. --99of9 12:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This nominated diagram shows en:Boolean logic, but far better description need. Strange non-typical symbols used --George Chernilevsky 21:17, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
    • en:wikibooks:Electronics/Boolean Algebra most native symbols --George Chernilevsky 21:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
      • I agree with George here, the symbols used are definitely not standard. I recognize the six basic operators, of course (AND, OR, IMPL, RIMPL, IIF) and the Sheffer stroke (NAND), but the en:XOR symbol (vel with a dot) looks odd (normally, "⊕" is used), and most literature uses the symbol "¬" instead of the word "not". Ideally, the diagram would use the standard symbols and also put the name of each operator right next to the symbol. It also, as George has pointed out, needs to be made clear that this diagram is about en:Boolean logic (in the context of en:Propositional calculus) only and doesn't cover three-state logic or any extensions of PC such as predicate logic or higher order logics of any kind. -- JovanCormac 07:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Temporary oppose after comment by JovanCormac. Standardization and good description need, sorry. --George Chernilevsky 08:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline? Eusebius 09:03, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Lough Derg Station Island Basilica SE 2009 09 17.jpg[edit]

Lough Derg Station Island Basilica SE 2009 09 17.jpg

  • Nomination St. Patrick's Basilica on Station Island, Lough Derg, County Donegal. --AFBorchert 20:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline --Lipedia 20:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose CCW tilt? --Eusebius 21:43, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilt/perspective correction needed but the colour looks a little odd too? --Herbythyme 16:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 06:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

File:NeuschwansteinSouth.jpg[edit]

NeuschwansteinSouth.jpg

  • Nomination Neuschwanstein castle, Germany -- Schlurcher 22:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is a strange colour on the castle (blue) to me and too much dark foreground? --Herbythyme 17:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC) I adjusted the picture from the original data. I like the foreground, but this is only my opinion. --Schlurcher 22:36, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This picture has been stopping me now several times when I have been browsing through the candidate page. Sometimes I like it a lot and sometimes some unidentified thing bothers my eye. Anyway, I think this picture with the shadow has huge potential, but how to reveal it? Today an idea came to my mind: maybe you shouldn't cut the shadow, but instead crop the sky so that both the shadow and the sky would fill approximately one third each - to fulfill the rule of thirds. For sure you have been playing around with the crop a lot with this one, but have you tried that?--MattiPaavola 16:45, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
    Tried another crop. Now the shadow covers the complete botton. --Schlurcher 00:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support I think it is fine now. Unordinary but nice composition IMO. --MattiPaavola 00:38, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bottom is completely black and there is a bit too much sky. The shadows are harsh od the contrast too high. --Ikiwaner 21:14, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Ikiwaner. IMO, part of the dark bottom and also of the sky should be cropped away. --Cayambe 17:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the black foreground adds mucht to the special mood and makes it stand out of the crowd. -- H005 22:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This was my favourite castle in the whole world when I was 11, but I have to agree with Ikiwaner. --99of9 03:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose-- Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline? Eusebius 09:03, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Chalcanthitefrance.jpg[edit]

Chalcanthitefrance.jpg

  • Nomination Chalcanthite - Canaveille mine - Pyrénées Orientales France (20x16cm)-- Archaeodontosaurus 16:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --Cayambe 22:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems too unsharp to me. --Eusebius 22:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentPictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Accor after discussing with Eusebius, I'll redo a picture --Archaeodontosaurus 17:45, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

File:StJohnsAshfield_StainedGlass_MaryJesus.jpg[edit]

StJohnsAshfield StainedGlass MaryJesus.jpg

  • Nomination Stained glass Mary and child. --99of9 06:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice but too unsharp for me --Pudelek 13:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hum, I don't see it to be that unsharp. Let's discuss it. :-) --Cayambe 21:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Ok for me. --Cayambe 15:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't think the photograph is unsharp. It is a photograph of a painting! --null 18:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per Pudelek. -- H005 20:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unsharp. --Eusebius 22:37, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 10:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Mimurotoji5553.JPG[edit]

Mimurotoji5553.JPG

  • Nomination Shrine in Japan --Jnn 13:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Really dark shadows here as well. --MattiPaavola 19:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. Good subject matter but underexposed too I think --Herbythyme 12:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment much better to me. Would not oppose now and will think about it. Thanks --Herbythyme 15:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gamma and perspective adjusted, please review -- Smial 20:08, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 10:21, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Devil's Golf Course in Death Valley NP 2.jpg[edit]

Devil's Golf Course in Death Valley NP 2.jpg

  • Nomination Devil's Golf Course in Death Valley NP--Mbz1 21:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment CW tilted? --99of9 09:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure. It is kind of hard to tell. Let's put it for the discussion. Thank you for your comment.--Mbz1 17:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment if source photo much cropped at left then not tilted. Если отрезано больше слева, то наклона нет. Людмила, сравните со своим оригиналом --George Chernilevsky 15:35, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for you comment George. The image was not cropped.--Mbz1 21:22, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Finally rather QI for me. Fine detail, tilt are not actual or too small --George Chernilevsky 21:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 07:31, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Sokółka - House 01.jpg[edit]

Sokółka - House 01.jpg

  • Nomination House in Sokółka. Yarl 21:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Overexposed clouds. --Eusebius 21:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not overexposed to me. --Herbythyme 10:59, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm fine with the clouds - this image is about the house after all. But there's strong CA in some parts and sharpness is not really sufficient. -- H005 18:31, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 06:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Saint-Malo - le Fort National à marée basse.JPG[edit]

Saint-Malo - le Fort National à marée basse.JPG

  • Nomination The Fort National in Saint-Malo. --Eusebius 18:01, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Too much foreground for me if the subject is the fort. --Herbythyme 10:59, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info I understand. The idea of the picture was to show that the fort was on a tidal island, and therefore linked to the shore at low tide. --Eusebius 11:28, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I understand what you are trying to do - I do try and get ones that show context as well the the item. However there is more context than fort here to me. --Herbythyme 13:49, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Fort AND low tide are QI for me -- Archaeodontosaurus 13:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok for me as such --Cayambe 19:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 05:56, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Dolina Starolesna, Ostry Szczyt.jpg[edit]

Dolina Starolesna, Ostry Szczyt.jpg

  • Nomination Ostrý štít in the Tatra Mountains --ToSter 01:21, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality about ok, but I don't really like the composition (summit too centred, half-cropped cloud). --Eusebius 22:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for me composition is ok --Pudelek 10:35, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ok for me. --Cayambe 19:19, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 20:20, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Devonport Leat Cross.jpg[edit]

Devonport Leat Cross.jpg

  • Nomination 20th Century cross on Dartmoor --Nilfanion 12:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Centered composition and top-down perspective make it look a bit static and not as impressive like the alternative image --Ikiwaner 18:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Don't understand this oppose. They are different crosses so the fact that another cross is here should not affect the QI decision on this one. --Herbythyme 09:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great landscape, well exposed. composition is ok for me. -- Cayambe 20:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Airwolf 14:36, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 15:06, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Florida Viceroy Limenitis archippus in Loxahatchee.JPG[edit]

Florida Viceroy Limenitis archippus in Loxahatchee.JPG

  • Nomination Viceroy in evening light, --Korall 03:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)22 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn I withdraw, not very good quality.--Korall 21:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)--Mbdortmund 03:24, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
    Was this withdraw meant for a different image? This is not your image. Changing to discuss. --99of9 11:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC) I withdrew. signatureshould have been mine.--Korall 21:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes? George Chernilevsky 07:48, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Wadi Rum BW 4.JPG[edit]

Wadi Rum BW 4.JPG

  • Nomination Wadi Rum, the "Seven Pillars of Wisdom" rock formation --Berthold Werner 09:25, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good image - clean and clear --Herbythyme 12:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Clean and clear? In my view not: in many parts blurry and unsharp (e.g. lower half of the image). --High Contrast 19:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment OK lets try this. The main subject is sharp and clear (the "Seven Pillars of Wisdom" rock formation) so to me QI, however if the foreground is a real issue then cropping about 10/15% off should sort that. --Herbythyme 13:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me -- Archaeodontosaurus 07:10, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? Eusebius 09:13, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Embraer ERJ-145MP SP-LGM 1.JPG[edit]

Embraer ERJ-145MP SP-LGM 1.JPG

  • Nomination: Embraer ERJ-145. Photo by myself --Airwolf 10:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Review
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice! --Leviathan1983 11:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC)