Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 20 2018

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:American_bittern_(Botaurus_lentiginosus)_hiding_in_tall_grass.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination American bittern hiding in tall grass --Carlowenby 10:45, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Blurry image, disturbing foreground --Basile Morin 02:58, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The motive (American Bittern) is recognizable but not a QI for me, sorry --Fischer.H 08:16, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
The purpose of this photo is to show the subject, an American bittern, [in perfect focus] effectively camouflaged in tall grass. Given the long focal length and large aperture, it is difficult to have every blade of grass in sharp focus.
  •  Support I'll go along with this one. Normally, disturbing surroundings and/or foreground objects can serve as distractions, but here they are part of the composition: it's not just a photo of a bird, but a photo of the bird hiding. Since this is also specified in the file name, I'm in favour.--Peulle 12:01, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support As Peulle. Fascinating example of camouflage. --Smial 12:41, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Took a while to find the bird. O.K. for me.--Ermell 14:04, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support per Peulle. This photo shows the bird hiding very effectively. -- Ikan Kekek 04:06, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 15:20, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Karlovy Vary. The Tepla river. Czech Republic.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Karlovy Vary. The Tepla river. Czech Republic --Ввласенко 09:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support good quality --Christian Ferrer 11:47, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  OpposeI'm sorry, but apart from the nice scene I search for sharpness and find a lot of chromatic noise. Maybe the ISO 500 were a bit too high. --PtrQs 20:06, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Weak support Seems still acceptable. --Basotxerri 18:32, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per PtrQs--Sandro Halank 12:49, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, per PtrQs --Michielverbeek 22:32, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality; see no noise. It has the look of a painting. DonFB 07:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Pretty good composition, but I'm not swayed by the sharpness. That the right side is in the dark is OK, but even the left side has some problems with the level of detail.--Peulle 12:05, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 15:21, 19 March 2018 (UTC)