Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 22 2021
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
-
- Nomination Building at 90 Grand'Rue in Ribeauvillé, Haut-Rhin, France. (By Krzysztof Golik) --Sebring12Hrs 22:14, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:07, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Building at 3 Rue de la Fraternité in Ribeauvillé, Haut-Rhin, France. (By Krzysztof Golik) --Sebring12Hrs 22:14, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:07, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Hazratbal Shrine in Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir. By User:Adeelyousuf00 --Hulged 16:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Resolution too low.--Alexander-93 16:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC) - Decline
- Nomination Hazratbal Shrine in Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir. By User:Adeelyousuf00 --Hulged 16:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Isdera Imperator 108i at IAA Mobility 2021.--Alexander-93 16:23, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:07, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Mercedes-Benz at IAA Mobility 2021.--Alexander-93 16:23, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:07, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Mobileye Autonomous Shuttle at IAA Mobility 2021.--Alexander-93 16:23, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 18:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination The church of Michael the Archangel in Kapetaniana, Crete. --C messier 16:03, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Good. --Johannes Robalotoff 19:46, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Nomination A very high quality image By User:Gbrocker --Contributers2020 14:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Below minimum size requirments. --C messier 16:04, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Nomination Premature baby nutrition at Laquintini Hospital in Cameroon (by Max MBAKOP) --Adoscam 11:30, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Sorry! Overall not sharp. --Steindy 15:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Laquintini Hospital - Neonatology Department (by Max MBAKOP) --Adoscam 11:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Sorry! The photo is outblown at the window and not shap (look at the faces). --Steindy 18:37, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Certificate of honor from the 1930 poultry show „Moselland-Befreiungsschau“. --Palauenc05 10:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Steindy 14:57, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Nomination Beach rose hedge at the ”Südwester Kiosk” on Föhr
--F. Riedelio 09:38, 19 November 2021 (UTC) - Promotion Support Good quality. --Steindy 15:05, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Nomination Beach rose hedge at the ”Südwester Kiosk” on Föhr
-
-
-
- Nomination Passenger train hauled by 705.913 ČD in Bohušov station, Czech Republic --Cmelak770 07:54, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 09:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Nomination Neues Schloss in Bayreuth, Bavaria, Germany. --Tournasol7 05:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality --Llez 06:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Altes Schloss in Bayreuth, Bavaria, Germany. --Tournasol7 05:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality --Llez 06:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Wahnfried house in Bayreuth, Bavaria, Germany. --Tournasol7 05:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Hulged 05:29, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Building at Kanzleistrasse 7 in Bayreuth, Bavaria, Germany. --Tournasol7 05:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality --Llez 06:46, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Dokkum, old lock at Noordergracht.
--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:22, 19 November 2021 (UTC) - Promotion Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 05:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Nomination Dokkum, old lock at Noordergracht.
-
- Nomination Dokkum, bridge over the Driepykstergracht in the Hanspoort.
--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:22, 19 November 2021 (UTC) - Promotion Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 05:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Nomination Dokkum, bridge over the Driepykstergracht in the Hanspoort.
-
- Nomination Nilnag lake in Budgam district of Jammu and Kashmir. By Sofisuhail007. Hulged 05:14, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Michael Jausner, goalkeeper coach of Floridsdorfer AC. --Steindy 00:16, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Alexis Lours 13:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Miles Müller, footballplayer of Floridsdorfer AC. --Steindy 00:16, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Alexis Lours 13:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Mirnes Becirovic, footballplayer of Floridsdorfer AC. --Steindy 00:16, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Alexis Lours 13:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Grossostheim, Bahnhofstrasse 19 --KaiBorgeest 22:28, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:18, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Fields near Lelowice-Kolonia village in Lesser Poland Voivodeship --Jakubhal 19:59, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 09:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Old houses in Małoszów, Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship, Poland --Jakubhal 19:59, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Genesis G70 at Auto Zürich 2021.--Alexander-93 18:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Opel Manta GSe Elektromod at Auto Zürich 2021.--Alexander-93 18:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination The former elementary school in Ano Viannos, Crete. --C messier 17:38, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Good. --Johannes Robalotoff 20:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Ruf CTR at Motorworld Munich.--Alexander-93 17:07, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Dome of the church of Anthony of Padua - Aquileia --Commonists 16:05, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Nomination Excursion ship Colonia 6 - FGS - 04025490 from above
--F. Riedelio 11:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC) - Promotion Support Technically OK. --Augustgeyler 18:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Nomination Excursion ship Colonia 6 - FGS - 04025490 from above
-
- Nomination Bentley Van den Plas tourer, capacity: 4.5 l, yar of manufacture: 1927 from above
--F. Riedelio 11:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC) - Promotion Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Nomination Bentley Van den Plas tourer, capacity: 4.5 l, yar of manufacture: 1927 from above
-
- Nomination Exterior of Pienza Cathedral, Italy --Lo Scaligero 10:32, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Good. --Johannes Robalotoff 20:07, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Facade of the building "Palazzo Comunale" in Montepulciano, Italy --Lo Scaligero 10:32, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Unnatural perspective correction -- Alvesgaspar 22:05, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Nomination Marktplatz 38 in Lauf an der Pegnitz, Bavaria, Germany. --Tournasol7 06:53, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Building at 1 rue Klobb in Ribeauvillé, Haut-Rhin, France. (By Krzysztof Golik) --Sebring12Hrs 06:10, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Land Rover Defender P525 at Auto Zuerich 2021 IMG 0432.jpg at Auto Zürich 2021.--Alexander-93 16:14, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion
Looking at the column in the middle it is tilted, and will also need a perspective correction --Poco a poco 18:56, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Comment Uploaded a new version.--Alexander-93 19:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC) Support Not perfect, but acceptable, will also oversee the slight CA --Poco a poco 23:22, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Lexus NX 450h+ at Auto Zuerich 2021 IMG 0432.jpg at Auto Zürich 2021.--Alexander-93 16:14, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion
CA is here more noticeable, it should be fixed --Poco a poco 18:53, 16 November 2021 (UTC) Comment Fixed it.--Alexander-93 19:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC) Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:22, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Rows of Altocumulus floccus seen in the morning --Vitaium 13:49, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Compressure artefacts overall, apparent posterization -- Alvesgaspar 22:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination São Tomé sunbird (Anabathmis newtonii) female --Charlesjsharp 13:18, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Too agressive sharpening -- Alvesgaspar 22:21, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Evangelical Church of St. Matthew Hetzelsdorf (Jurassic Dome) --Ermell 10:46, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion
I'm not convinced here as part of the facade is hidden behind the wall, why didn't you take the picture over the wall or at the right to avoid it? --Poco a poco 18:53, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
I'd like to get closer, but I'm already at 8mm with the wide angle. If you go to the right, the trees cover the building. Little space there. --Ermell 22:10, 16 November 2021 (UTC) Support Ok --Poco a poco 23:22, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Ruins of a tower of Inverlochy Castle, Scotland --Domob 14:24, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --F. Riedelio 08:56, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Quad je jeux de conduite se font dans le désert en algérie avec moto (by BRAHIM DJELLOUL) --Adoscam 15:26, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Quite good shot, you should clone out the human figura in the dunes - Alvesgaspar 22:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Marble head of a female. 2nd c. BC. Casa Romana, Kos, Greece --Ввласенко 13:27, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Sorry: insufficient
DoF --F. Riedelio 08:49, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination View from Eisenberg castle (Allgäu, Germany) towards the village Weissensee and the Alps. --Johannes Robalotoff 17:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion
Question Am I right, the focus is sitting between foreground and background? --Augustgeyler 13:01, 15 November 2021 (UTC) Comment No. The focus is sitting on the background. Look at the wires of the power transmission lines. Even those can be clearly distinguished. And the trees on the higher alps are also sharp, though in a haze. It would be even difficult to have them unsharp at f/11. --Johannes Robalotoff 08:15, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Now I got it. Even the wooden fence in the left foreground became sharp. I am just wondering if the composition could be improved when some parts of the unsharp foregroundwall were cropped. What do you think? --Augustgeyler 10:05, 16 November 2021 (UTC) I think, it is a matter of taste. I did not find it disturbing that the foreground is not completely sharp. Also: When viewed at 60% or less no one will probably notice it. However I see your point if I imagine the image to be printed on a big poster. Then the crop would help to make the unsharp part less dominating. On the other hand, I like the overall composition more with the wall. So it's a tradeoff. I it is a real problem for you, I could live withdrawal. Just tell me.--Johannes Robalotoff 08:07, 18 November 2021 (UTC) Comment I see your point. I will not promote or decline your nomination and ask other reviewers to give their vote. --Augustgeyler 10:18, 18 November 2021 (UTC) Support I have considered the arguments of both of you and I can understand both sides. I like the picture and think it is good quality. --AStiasny 18:47, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination: Tomb Adolf Trautwein (†1914), Muschelkalk, in the monument zone old cemetery in Haßloch
--F. Riedelio 17:11, 13 November 2021 (UTC) - Review needed
- Nomination: Tomb Adolf Trautwein (†1914), Muschelkalk, in the monument zone old cemetery in Haßloch
-
- Nomination: Sunset over Jeleniowskie range in Holy Cross Mountains, Poland --Jakubhal 16:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Review needed
-
- Nomination: Fields and forest near Psary-Stara Wieś, Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship, Poland --Jakubhal 16:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Review needed
-
- Nomination St. Petersburg, Peterhof, Grand Cascade. Statue of Pandora by Fedot Shubin. --Andrey Korzun 06:38, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion
Can you please get rid of the cropped statue on the right --Poco a poco 09:13, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
@Poco a poco:
Done --Andrey Korzun 13:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC) Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:24, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination: St. Petersburg, Peterhof, Grand Cascade. Statue "Perseus with the head of Medusa" by Fedos Shchedrin. --Andrey Korzun 06:38, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Review needed
-
- Nomination Mikhailovsky Palace, St. Petersburg. Left Medici Lion. --Andrey Korzun 06:04, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --C messier 16:09, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Ford Focus Mk IV (Facelift) at Auto Zuerich 2021.--Alexander-93 16:21, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Too unsharp (looks out of focus...) --C messier 16:07, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Des bâtiments de salle de classe au campus de kongola, Maroua Cameroun (by Harouna674) --Bile rene 13:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline
IMHO unfavorable image composition (too much foreground should be cropped), perspective correction is needed. --F. Riedelio 07:31, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Not done within one week. --F. Riedelio 08:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Colombo comercial mall,Lisbon. -- Alvesgaspar 00:11, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline
Visible
chromatic aberration should be removed. --F. Riedelio 08:38, 12 November 2021 (UTC) Not done within one week. --F. Riedelio 08:31, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
_(1).jpg)
_(2).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_01.jpg){kind=small}
_01.jpg)
_7529a.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_Motorworld_Munich_wide_crop_1X7A0054.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_Auto_Zuerich_2021_IMG_0432.jpg)
_Auto_Zuerich_2021_IMG_0444.jpg)
_female.jpg)
_029_2021_08_10.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
,_canal_Fayal-Pico,_islas_Azores,_Portugal,_2020-07-27,_DD_23.jpg){kind=link}
,_canal_Fayal-Pico,_islas_Azores,_Portugal,_2020-07-27,_DD_22.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Consensual review[edit]
File:Haydarpasa,_Istanbul_(P1100163).jpg[edit]
.jpg)
- Nomination Haydarpasa Terminal, Istanbul, during construction --MB-one 14:51, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- Promotion
- Support Good quality. --Milseburg 17:04, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose I am sorry, but I think this image is too soft for QI. --Augustgeyler 23:30, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support Sharp enough, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 07:55, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support Somewhat soft, but good enough to be printed to A4 size or even larger. --Smial 12:44, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Commonists 21:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → 
Promoted --Augustgeyler 22:00, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Promoted --Augustgeyler 22:00, 21 November 2021 (UTC)File:Tiburón_azul_(Prionace_glauca),_canal_Fayal-Pico,_islas_Azores,_Portugal,_2020-07-27,_DD_23.jpg[edit]
,_canal_Fayal-Pico,_islas_Azores,_Portugal,_2020-07-27,_DD_23.jpg)
- Nomination Blue shark (Prionace glauca), Faial-Pico Channel, Azores Islands, Portugal. --Poco a poco 07:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline
- Oppose Overall unsharp, noisy and undetailed -- Alvesgaspar 11:06, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Agree that other images are better, but after some improvements I believe that it's over the bar --Poco a poco 17:57, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Poor quality, bad POV. --Kallerna 08:23, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → 
Declined --Peulle 21:18, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Declined --Peulle 21:18, 21 November 2021 (UTC)File:Tiburón_azul_(Prionace_glauca),_canal_Fayal-Pico,_islas_Azores,_Portugal,_2020-07-27,_DD_22.jpg[edit]
,_canal_Fayal-Pico,_islas_Azores,_Portugal,_2020-07-27,_DD_22.jpg)
- Nomination Blue shark (Prionace glauca), Faial-Pico Channel, Azores Islands, Portugal. --Poco a poco 07:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline
- Support Good quality. --Ermell 10:31, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose I disagree, image quality is quite poor when compared with the other pictures of the series, and far from our QI standards. Alvesgaspar 11:04, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment "Far from our QI standards"? I hope you don't expect the same standard in underwater photography like for a studio image. I've uploaded a new version. Poco a poco 17:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment No, I don't. I'm well aware of the difficulties caused by the lack of natural light, which decreases exponentially with depth, the way light becomes more blue with depth (because it is the last to be absorbed), the turbidity of water and the motion of the animals. Still, there must be a threshold of quality below which candidates to QI should not fall. Browsing through the gallery of QIs of fish, where the vast majority was taken by you, it is clear that it is possible to get much better pictures than the present one. Maybe conditions were not favorable. So what? Maybe no QI is possible in such situation. Why do you continue to submit so many photos of the same subject with the same weaknesses?-- Alvesgaspar 20:18, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- This assessment along with many others is just wrong, you are still applying the same standards from underwater photography like to everything else. Of course that conditions could be in most of the cases better: more clear water, shallow depth, non or slow moving subject, strong sun providing better visibility. All those conditions are given seldom in the Atlantic Ocean and if in 90% of the occasions it isn't the case, at the latest then you have to understand that standards are not comparable. It's like saying that QIs are only accepted if the sky is blue. Over the surface you have different posibilities to mitigate difficult lighting but I can hardly use a tripod below the water. I will provide in the future sharp images underwater but of a resolution of 2 MPx, then I'll fulfill all QI criterias and everybody will be happy. Poco a poco 23:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Alvesgaspar. --Kallerna 08:24, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined --Peulle 21:17, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Declined --Peulle 21:17, 21 November 2021 (UTC)File:SC_Wiener_Neustadt_vs._SV_Stripfing_20190817_(135).jpg[edit]
.jpg)
- Nomination Patrick Haas, footballplayer of SV Stripfing. --Steindy 00:04, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline
- Support Good quality. --Commonists 11:45, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry for bringing this to discussion. The image is sharp and well done. But the result seams to have strong compression artifacts. --Augustgeyler 23:41, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support I can see some artifacts at 100% on my 23.5-inch monitor but not on my 13-inch monitor. I think it's quite good enough for QI. -- Ikan Kekek 05:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I double checked it with my smallest laptop and could see it again at 100 %. --Augustgeyler (talk) 06:59, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose sorry, but the compression artifacts are too heavy --Sandro Halank 13:57, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment @Augustgeyler: @Sandro Halank: Thank you for your professional assessment! Is it still conceivable that you made a mistake in your assessment? If not, then I would ask you to note in the photo where these compression artifacts should be. If there really were such errors, then the individual hairs on the hands and legs would have to be blurred and not visible. But maybe it also helps to read the article about Compression artifact. regards --Steindy 18:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- I checked it again. It's most visible at the persons face (skin) and on his hair. --Augustgeyler 06:58, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose I see them too. They almost look like the kind of compression artefacts you get when shooting with a mobile phone. I don't know how it happened, as other images shot in these series don't all seem to suffer from the same problem. Perhaps a redevelopment from raw file might fix the issue? --Peulle 09:23, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support I can't see any problems that would justify an oppose vote. --Palauenc05 14:22, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment There are no relevant JPG compression artifacts. The strange image impression is created when you combine massive noise reduction with excessive post-sharpening. Exactly what is the default setting in many cell phones. But since I'm not up for Steindy's toxic comments, I'm not voting, of course. He'll deny my analysis anyway. The situation as such is not badly captured photographically. But the processing, well... --Smial 18:02, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for helping in getting an idea where this effect might come from. I just was able to recreate such an effect in darktable with a similar image by setting it up like you described it. --Augustgeyler 01:29, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I have been using NeatImage for years to reduce annoying noise in my photos. It's also available as a plug-in for Photoshop. How stable the Linux version is, I do not know, not yet tried, because I do not know whether my ancient Windows license is still valid for it. With NeatImage, you can control the degree of noise reduction and the post sharpening that is always required afterwards very finely to get a visually pleasing result. This exactly does not mean that image noise is completely removed, but only lowered to a level that allows the most natural representation possible. --Smial 11:46, 16 November 2021 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
- Thank you for helping in getting an idea where this effect might come from. I just was able to recreate such an effect in darktable with a similar image by setting it up like you described it. --Augustgeyler 01:29, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with the interpretation of Smial regardind the combination of noise reduction and sharpening. Whatever the real reason might be, it is certain that a better picture can be taken of the some subject with this camera. -- Alvesgaspar 20:59, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined --Peulle 21:17, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Declined --Peulle 21:17, 21 November 2021 (UTC)File:Mount_Vesuvius_with_fog_and_sea.jpg[edit]
- Nomination Mount Vesuvius with fog and sea --Commonists 18:27, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- Decline
- Oppose Sorry: visible JPEG artifacts --F. Riedelio 08:55, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Where? Thanks--Commonists 17:02, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment On the boats (in full resolution). --F. Riedelio 07:12, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- Where? Thanks--Commonists 17:02, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Chroma noise, weird oversharpening. I'm pretty sure the post-processing could be improved. Since I don't know the software used, I can't say where the lever should be applied to avoid the overall unbalanced image impression. (Colours, lighting, and composition are very nice). --Smial 09:10, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- Weak Support: this is a really beautiful composition with a Japanese-influenced aesthetic. I see the same artifacts the others see at full size, but full size is quite big. It would be a lot better if you could make the photo look better at full size, but on balance, I give this weak support. -- Ikan Kekek 14:51, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan --Kritzolina 17:28, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment F. Riedelio and Smial I have reduced the contrast, better? Thanks --Commonists 20:32, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment IMO not really better (the JPG artifacts on the sailboat are still present) --F. Riedelio 07:57, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- weak pro --Palauenc05 22:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- weak contra I'm on the other side of the fence, although I too appreciate the nice composition. Since QIC is just about judging the image quality, though, I don't feel like I can support this one. Even cropping out the boat on the bottom wouldn't get rid of those artefacts all over the image. On the other hand, it's a lovely scene that would have my vote as a VI.--Peulle 11:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. --Milseburg 17:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Weak oppose This is a very well composed artwork. I suggest redoing the post processing. Otherwise I have to agree with Peulle. --Augustgeyler 10:03, 18 November 2021 (UTC)- Oppose Poor technical quality for the reasons exposed above. -- Alvesgaspar 21:02, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment @Commonists: you know, you might be able to get this photo promoted if you get rid of the oversharpening artifacts. I agree with F. Riedelio that reducing the contrast didn't improve the photo. In fact, it might have been better before. -- Ikan Kekek 05:32, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek I loaded the original without any modifications (except for 2 dust spots) and I don't know more than that. Thank you. --Commonists 11:52, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined --Peulle 21:14, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Declined --Peulle 21:14, 21 November 2021 (UTC)