Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 05 2021

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:2016_Powiat_raciborski,_Bieńkowice,_Kościół_Wszystkich_Świętych_05.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination All Saints church. Bieńkowice, Silesian Voivodeship, Poland. --Halavar 09:08, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:34, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Poor lighting (wrong shooting time) -- Alvesgaspar 14:04, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support There is no wrong shooting time for QI so long as the right equipment is used (camera with sufficient dynamic range, tripod if necessary). Picture could be sharpened a bit but good enough for QI imo. --Trougnouf 16:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment No paraphernalia helps when light is coming from the wrong side... -- Alvesgaspar 20:44, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not sharp enough. The light comes from the wrong direction.--Jebulon 09:41, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support. It is usually not a big problem to move such a church to the southern hemisphere in order to be able to photograph a north façade in the sunshine in a QIC-compliant way. The shaded areas in this photo still show details everywhere, I can't find any technical defects worth mentioning. For my taste, the rectification of the perspective is a bit too strong. Although all the verticals seem to have been forcibly verticalised in a geometrically correct way, the church tower looks rather top-heavy as a result. I prefer a correction to about 90%. This is not a fixed value, but depends on the motif. As a rule, however, this looks much more natural, even if it contradicts the very theoretical concept of "photographing as the architect would draw". The architect is free to choose his viewing location, the photographer is not. The viewer of a scene who is personally on site cannot do that either, by the way. I would also like to see a little better sharpness. Perhaps the denoising has blurred some details. -- Smial 16:25, 24 October 2021 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
  • ✓ Done I uploaded a new version with more sharpness and more lightening. Hope it's better now:) --Halavar 16:50, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support per Smial. I agree that it’s easy to move the church or the sun but one could also like shadows, why not?
  • Unsigned vote removed.--Peulle 06:46, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose with Alvesgaspar --Augustgeyler 08:42, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Goodquality. --Steindy 19:32, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 08:01, 4 November 2021 (UTC)