Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 30 2013

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:2013 10 05 12-12Rallye France, Parc assistance Colmar, Mikko Hirvonen.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Mikko Hirvonen, Finnish WRC rally driver. --Florival fr 18:56, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Eyes out of focus --Kreuzschnabel 12:20, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Kreuz. Mattbuck 15:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. Image is somewhat soft and has low DOF, but great composition, nicely blurred background, rather low noise and high resolution. If downscaled to 2 MPix it would have perfect sharpness, but unvisible eyelashes, which are now not absolutely perfect in focus, but still visible. If we decline such images we will get only steindy-pix in the future: Downscaled to 2 MPix and without EXIF. --Smial 14:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Since you’re right on the composition and general quality (which I never doubted), I re-considered my verdict, but even in the preview on the file page (which is less than half a megapixel!), the eye is still definitely softer than, say, the back logo or the neck part of his vest, and far from "perfect sharpness". --Kreuzschnabel 07:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The eyes are not sharp enough--Lmbuga 00:41, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

File:FIAT Balilla 508 coupè Stanguellini mod. 03.tif[edit]

  • Nomination FIAT Balilla 508 coupè Stanguellini--OppidumNissenae 05:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline  Comment Interesting and nice car but the photo seems to be over-exposed. -- Spurzem 07:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)✓ Fatto Change pic. --OppidumNissenae 09:15, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
    The back of the car with spare wheel is not sharp enough. We should discuss. -- Spurzem 12:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
    The carrozeria Stanguellini did a miracle of elegance, The rear is inscribed in golden rule of proportion.--OppidumNissenae 13:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
    It is a beautiful rare car indeed. But in my opinion the photo is no QI. For the spare wheel and the number-plates are blurred and over-exposed. -- Spurzem 19:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As for spurzem. Also blown highlights and noisy and low resolution. Sorry, nice car, quite low image quality. -- Smial 11:07, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Caltanissetta - Antenna RAI.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination RAI trasmitter in Caltanissetta--OppidumNissenae 03:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline  Support good quality (a bit sharpening would be nice) --P e z i 19:42, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
     Oppose Large S-shaped dust filament in the left half of image, not really sharp --Kreuzschnabel 03:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As for kreuzschnabel. If EXIF are right: f/14 is a very bad choice for a compact camera due to strong diffraction. -- Smial 12:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

File:2013.06.30.-05-Vosswinkel-Distelfalter.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Distelfalter - Vanessa cardui --Hockei 18:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Pretty but lots of posterisation. --Mattbuck 15:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
    Fixed New version. I hope good now. -- Hockei 17:21, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
     Support Good quality -- Spurzem 20:18, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As Mattbuck, sorry not good and not QI IMO--Lmbuga 20:55, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Battistero_all'interno_del_Complesso_Monumentale_di_San_Pietro.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Interior view of Baptistery of St. Peter, San Pietro in Consavia church, Asti (by Marco.odina) --Achim Raschka 12:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Excellent -- Spurzem 21:28, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Very nice, but too much noise IMO--Lmbuga 18:21, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Noise is entirely reasonable IMO. --King of Hearts 18:47, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for QI -- Der Wolf im Wald 15:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Fully agree with Lmbuga. Not reasonable noise to me, sorry. Nice place and light, however.--Jebulon 17:29, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Comment I wish to ask (without wishing to make a personal criticism): What can be unreasonable? What is QI?--Lmbuga 18:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
    where are the rules for deciding what is QI? (cynical question)--Lmbuga 18:57, 24 October 2013 (UTC))
    I think there are no rules for QI. All you need is a feeling for aesthetics. And if you have this feeling you will say: Yes, this photo of San Pietro is not only QI but it is excellent. The little noise you will neglect. -- Spurzem 22:38, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
    wav! incredible!--Lmbuga 00:44, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Love the composition, but too much noise. Have you tried denoising it? Mattbuck 18:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support I don't think the noise is a problem with this particular image. The ISO could perhaps have been reduced if a tripod was used for longer exposure (but they might not be allowed) and the EXIF photoshop data implies it was a stop overexposed. Denoising may lead to over-smoothing of the brickwork -- this has a random pattern that no NR algorithm can distinguish from real noise. Please remember this is a 21MP image. If you reduce it 50% you get a 5MP image that is absolutely fine in terms of noise and finely detailed. So guys, when the QI requirement only needs 2MP, you are simply punishing the uploader for not downsampling. Thou shalt not pixel-peep :-) -- Colin 19:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
     Oppose Some parts are overexposed and seem to have been burned out (no details on the left of the fisrt column just white light), IMO it's not fixable --Christian Ferrer 06:23, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. Mathieudu68 22:25, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support its QI... Gnangarra 05:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Very nice, symetrical composition. I think high noise is ok in this case. Some extra noise was added to image during postprocessing. Jar.ciurus 21:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Fiat 1100 sport Tornatore a Caltanussetta il 14-15 settembre 2013 09.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Fiat 1100 sport Tornatore--OppidumNissenae 10:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support A bit tight crop on the right, but ok --Poco a poco 22:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
    •  Comment Is it really QI? In my opinion the photo is over-exposed. I ask to discuss. -- Spurzem 08:17, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Nice shot (I like the boy’s pose) but at least the man’s shirt & headlights are blown, and the man is motion blurred. --Kreuzschnabel 05:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - I agree with Spurzem, also some CA. Mattbuck 18:52, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Audi Sport quattro concept.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Audi Sport quattro concept at IAA 2013 in Frankfurt, Germany --Der Wolf im Wald 15:36, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Unnatural and unprofitable representation in my opinion. -- Spurzem 17:14, 13 October 2013 (UTC) But obviously some believe that the car is seven or eight meters long as the photo suggests. -- Spurzem 20:29, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Fine for me. --Mattbuck 15:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I ask to discuss. --Spurzem 21:37, 21 October 2013 (UTC) My vote now:  Oppose -- Spurzem 20:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support QI --Christian Ferrer 16:47, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support --King of Hearts 18:46, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support What is "unnatural"? If you stay at the same position like Wolf you will see the car exactly that way independently if you look through a lens or through your own eyes. Technically this shot has a very high quality and should definitely be QI. --Tuxyso 06:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Felix Koenig 20:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

File:The_water_tower_on_Remezov_Square1.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination The water tower on Remezov Square, Tobolsk. --Óðinn 22:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Technically OK but appears tilted CW a bit, and I would really like to see some of the surrounding as well, framing is too tight for my taste. Would like some more opinions on this one. --Kreuzschnabel 16:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
    I think on balance it's ok, though the bottom suffers from unsharpness and haloing. Mattbuck 20:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

File:13-06_Budapest_Dancing_Show_04.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Budapest, XVIII. Danube carnival - American Dancing Show --Achim Raschka 15:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline  Comment I miss the feet of dancers. -- Spurzem 19:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
    Insufficient quality. Framing is not so good - cropped at their ankles. --Danrok 22:06, 19 October 2013 (UTC
    If I remember right decline is not from me. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 20:48, 20 October 2013 (UTC))
    Vote for decline was hidden up to now. -- Spurzem 21:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Miracle_Mile_Shops_Las_Vegas_Showgirl_Bar_2013.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Previously unassessedShowgirl Bar at Miracle Mile Shops in Las Vegas with artifical sky --Tuxyso 16:21, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion I like it, but the sky spoils it. It's noisy yet blurred, and there;s an oddly regular pattern of... something, Dots. --Mattbuck 10:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
    IMHO quality is OK with regard to lighting conditions. Haha, the "oddly regular pattern of... something, Dots" is the fixation for the sky because it is an indoor photo and the sky is artificial :) I would like to hear further opinions on the photo. --Tuxyso 12:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
     Support Good quality for me. The dots in the sky obviously are parts of the decoration but no problem of the photo. -- Spurzem 20:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support QI IMO --P e z i 15:25, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • There is no FOP for sculptures in the US... --Dschwen 21:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
    • That is no classical sculpture imho - it is integrated into the bar. If you take a look on the decription the motive is the apperance of the bar not the plastic girl. --Tuxyso 08:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

File:2013.06.27.-45-Ahrensberg-Ochsenzunge.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Ochsenzunge - Anchusa officinalis --Hockei 15:23, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Oversharpened and suffering from artifaction. --Mattbuck 10:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Comment I cannot agree, wish to discuss. --Hockei 22:56, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose bad lighting --Archaeodontosaurus 06:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Info New version with changed brightness. --Hockei 14:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Auto Union Bergrennwagen, Bj. 1939 (museum mobile 2013-09-03).JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Auto Union car from 1939 for hillclimbing at museum mobile -- Spurzem 18:49, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
     Comment I don't dare to decline. It's a good image, but CAs, overexposition, noise or chromatic noise in dark areas (floor), the upper left area is disturbing IMO--Lmbuga 19:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
    New version uploaded. Better now? -- Spurzem 20:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
     Neutral Better, but not QI for me because CAs and overexposition; but it's a good picture--Lmbuga 02:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
     Oppose due to CAs. Mattbuck 20:43, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
     Comment Laughable! But OK! -- Spurzem 22:09, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

File:13-06_Budapest_Dancing_Show_06.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Budapest, XVIII. Danube carnival - American Dancing Show --Achim Raschka 15:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline  Comment The faces could be sharper. Perhaps other users should discuss. -- Spurzem 19:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose DoF not sufficient - sharpness is on the background and not on the female dancers. Probably f8 had improved the situation. --Tuxyso 05:09, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Europäisches_Trucker-Treffen_in_Passau_-16.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination The Mercedes-Benz star over the hood of a vintage Mercedes truck from the 1950s. --High Contrast 13:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Comment The star is OK but the trade mark below in my opinion is not sharp enough. We should discuss. -- Spurzem 19:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
    It was my intention to leave the trade mark unsharp. The Mercedes star is the main subject to be sharp --High Contrast 19:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Ok for me, because the open aperture makes nicely blurred background. -- Smial 20:24, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support the star is set in front of the dark window, therefor its well highlighted and thats the main focus. Imo its ok to leave the rest unsharp -- Qflieger 19:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

File:131013 Nakasatsunai Art Village Hokkaido Japan02bs.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Nakasatsunai Art Village --663highland 12:35, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:50, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
     Oppose CAs at the leafs and a remarkable sky area of overexposure. --Tuxyso 13:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
     Oppose In what world is this QI? Mattbuck 20:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

File:SM_Kępno_Ratusz_(9)_ID_651409.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Kępno Town Hall --SMilejski 19:44, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose very beautiful in preview, but artifacts on the sky, strong chromatic aberrations, really pity --A.Savin 20:13, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I think this could pass if the aberrations were removed and the image was downscaled to hide the artifacts. (but still 2 MP or more, to fit QI criteria) --Azusa 08:55, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I uploaded a new version, without downscaling.--ArildV 10:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Still CA and sharpening haloes at the right, but in general it looks better now --A.Savin 19:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
      • CA should be gone now, but I dont know how to remove the sharpening haloes without having access to the original file.--ArildV 19:54, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Very nice, the haloes aren't too strong. --King of Hearts 10:24, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support --Iifar 06:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose ouch, Photoshop accident. The CA correction removed colours out of the roof, the bushes etc. --Carschten 17:28, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Carschten, obviously.--Jebulon 19:22, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Notable halos around the tower etc and artificially looking borders around the fountain water columns. --Cayambe 14:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Massive CA correction accident: how this building really looks like. --High Contrast 11:58, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --Cayambe 18:59, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Europäisches_Trucker-Treffen_in_Passau_-03.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination A Scania R500 truck at a Trucker meeting. --High Contrast 19:24, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline In my opinion it is not a good prospect to demonstrate a truck. Further there is a strong reflexion in the name of owner left at the top. Therefore I ask to discuss. -- Spurzem 21:23, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
  • My vote now:  Oppose -- Spurzem 20:23, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support To fully display a truck requires multiple images, not a single image. In my opinion, this is good. Do not secure what the intentions of the photographer, please--Lmbuga 21:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Overexposed reflections, disturbing surroundings and background. -- Smial 21:07, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Cayambe 13:56, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Trois jours d'Aigle - 1.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Cycling, madison. -- Ludo29 09:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Is the slow shutter speed deliberately chosen to create motion blur? I'm not sure I get the point. --ArildV 16:05, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Of course.... Ludo29 21:01, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
      • Very nice idea, but at least one should be almost entirely sharp, I don't care about the rest of cyclists. I'm sorry because this is difficult, but imo you must do a correct panning to only one cyclist and then get the rest, blurry or not, in the frame. --Kadellar 17:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Sorry, to me its a very good photo with nice blurry. --Ralf Roletschek 09:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support Good, dynamic picture. --Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --ArildV 19:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Enduro indoor barcelona-2011 (4).JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Barcelona indoor enduro --alberto-g-rovi 07:43,7 de october de 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion I think the framing is too tight, I’d prefer to see their bikes entirely. Would like some more opinions → Discuss. --Kreuzschnabel 12:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support somewhat disturbing person in foreground, crop is ok. -- Smial 20:51, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

 Support -- Spurzem 20:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)