Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 26 2021

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Zerlegung_einer_ausgebauten_Stahlnietenbrücke_in_Leipzig_Anger-Crottendorf_(Dia).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Oxyacetylene cutting at night to scrap an old railway bridge from 1912 in Leipzig. --Augustgeyler 01:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --The night rainbow 06:18, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree, sorry! The photo has too much noise and too small DOF. It seems to me that this is a scan of a slide or a paper photo. --Steindy 15:54, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Please see the decription at the file! The subject of oxy.-cutting is in focus. So why is there a DoF-Problem? --Augustgeyler 22:29, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Above 6 MPixels, excellent quality, considering the difficult lighting situation. --Smial 13:09, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Quality is good enough for film. Striking motif. --Argenberg 12:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose There is too much noise in the photo. --Fischer.H 18:05, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support An impressive photo. Under these conditions and with this resolution some noise is acceptable --KaiBorgeest 00:33, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support I agree with KaiBorgeest. Impressive shot, and the noise is not disturbing to me. --Lion-hearted85 16:47, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose is this a quality photo?--Commonists 13:00, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I would hesitate if this were FPC or VIC. But nor in QIC, where the criteria is solely image quality -- Alvesgaspar 21:57, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
This scan of a slide has excellent image quality. -- Smial 13:09, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others. --Tagooty 06:36, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I am wondering about the complaints, there might be to much noise. There is no noise, but grain. And grain of that size is a very typical thing for photographs shot in ISO 100 reversal film. It was developed with standard time. So the grain is the same as it would be at day time. --Augustgeyler 17:36, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 Comment Agree. Please have a look at the discussion page, "Evaluation of scanned photographs on conventional film material". (I don't know how to use a permalink here) --Smial 10:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support ok for me --Christian Ferrer 21:23, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Disturbing luminance noise. --F. Riedelio 07:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Agree that, given the source material, this is a good quality image. --Lrkrol 15:46, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Yeriho 12:01, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Total: 8 support (excluding the nominator), 6 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 19:38, 25 December 2021 (UTC)