Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 07 2013

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

Contents

Consensual review[edit]

File:East Midlands Parkway railway station MMB 07.jpg[edit]

East Midlands Parkway railway station MMB 07.jpg

  • Nomination Ratcliffe-on-Soar Power Station Mattbuck 20:10, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very unusual for a QIC but I like the idea, the compo, the shoot: OK to me. --Myrabella 21:39, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
    May I ask what you find unusual about it? Mattbuck 21:41, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
  • It is not a flat documentary image taken in a bright sunny day. I find it inspired. You manage to capture the fleecy winter athmosphère, strengthened by the melting clouds of steam, and it matchs well with this industrial subject, treated in a rather graphical way. --Myrabella 10:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
    This was a very early morning where, due to being a student, I was awake the entire night so decided to go out in the snow. Mattbuck 17:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I think that it needs other opinions. Perhaps good to FP, but out of focus IMO--Lmbuga 21:55, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
    Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm not sure, but I think that it needs other opinions--Lmbuga 16:51, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good photo. --Ralf Roletschek 15:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Certainly a very atmospheric and inspiring image but lacks quality: I’d expect a 5.6 MP QIC to be crisp sharp, and without chroma noise in all the gray areas. However, well done, beautiful shot and composition. --Kreuzschnabel 18:36, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Was the camera's shake reduction switched on? -- Smial 22:23, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good compo and good idea, but blurry and noisy. Good for an "artistic picture" maybe, but not for QI, IMO. --Jebulon 22:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)...And very bad name.--Jebulon 22:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
    It was taken at East Midlands Parkway (the power station is right next door) and it was my 7th there. The name is fine. Mattbuck 22:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
    Sorry Matt, but I find your naming of images often confusing, too. The name, from my point of view, is supposed to describe the subject of the image rather than the location of the camera. --Kreuzschnabel 19:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:51, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:1982-BOS-2.JPG[edit]

1982-BOS-2.JPG

  • Nomination Commonwealth Avenue (by user:Ingfbruno) --Yarl 22:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Nice, but please add the name of the city in the description, not only in categories (I guess there are many "Commonwealth Avenues" almost everywhere in the anglo-american world...). Thank you.--Jebulon 22:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not really sharp, leaning in on left, slightly odd colours, rather bright. Mattbuck 18:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As for Mattbuck. Also rather high colour saturation. -- Smial 22:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:50, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Friedrichshafen_-_Bootshäfen_-_Fähre_002.jpg[edit]

Friedrichshafen - Bootshäfen - Fähre 002.jpg

  • Nomination The ferry port of Friedrichshafen. View through the trail bridge to the ferry. --Mummelgrummel 10:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Tilted clockwise about half a degree. Mattbuck 21:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    ✓ Done I tilted the picture and hope it is o.K. --Mummelgrummel 14:28, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
    Better, but could you sharpen it please? Mattbuck 10:44, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Yes - I have done it. But in my opinion it was sharp. --Mummelgrummel 10:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
    Sorry, still unsharp around the edges. Mattbuck 18:33, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:49, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:13-08-09-hongkong-by-RalfR-092.jpg[edit]

13-08-09-hongkong-by-RalfR-092.jpg

  • Nomination typical air conditions at windows in Hongkong --Ralf Roletschek 15:13, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Ralf, it's clearly tilted. Improve the description, bitte (can we say "common" or "usual" instead of typical?). --Kadellar 15:43, 22 August 2013 (UTC) lo siento, pero no entiendo :-( --Ralf Roletschek 15:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
    Ich versuche auf deutsch. Es scheint gekippt aus, das soll verändert werden. Die Beschreibung des Bildes ist zu kurz und sagt nichts über das Bild, nur "Wikimania", es sollte noch etwas sagen (building, windows, facade or something). Besser jetzt? --Kadellar 18:11, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Subject of this photo in my opion are the air conditions at the windows. What should be said more? It is a impressive photo in good quality for me. -- Spurzem 13:28, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
    Tilted, bad description by now. --Kadellar 17:19, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kadellar (tilt and names).--Jebulon 09:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Do not conform QI standards. --Nino Verde 13:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Description is changed. The image must tilt, everything else is unnatural. This i do not distorting. --Ralf Roletschek 13:50, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for changing the description, but I don't understand why it must be tilted. I think those green lines could be perfectly vertical, just rotating a little bit. --Kadellar 19:31, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
      • left, it is exactly vertical. Since the camera was directed upward, and the rest must be wrong. more correctly it would be if converging lines on both sides would --Ralf Roletschek 10:13, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:48, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Avenue des Champs-Elysées from top of Arc de triomphe Paris.jpg[edit]

Avenue des Champs-Elysées from top of Arc de triomphe Paris.jpg

  • Nomination Avenue des Champs-Elysées, from top of Arc de Triomphe de l'Etoile in Paris, France.--Jebulon 17:24, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Not too bad but why f/18? The image is distinctly not quite sharp at 100 percent view due to diffraction, despite its relatively small size. f/8 @ 1/500 s would have triggered a sure promotion. It’s on the border of being overexposed too. I’ll put it into CR. --Kreuzschnabel 18:33, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree that f/18 is not the best idea, but sharpness is passable for QI IMO. --King of Hearts 01:43, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me, I agree with King of Hearts. Cloning out the nearest cars was a good idea too.--Kadellar 17:24, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI. --VT98Fan 21:22, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Kokerei_Zollverein_IMGP5089_wp.jpg[edit]

Kokerei Zollverein IMGP5089 wp.jpg

  • Nomination Kokerei Zollverein, Essen, Kammertüren weiße Seite --Smial 12:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    CA around overexposed areas Poco a poco 18:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline QI -- Spurzem 20:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    Not like this, please, let's discuss --Poco a poco 17:45, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distorsion, and unacceptable massive CA.--Jebulon 09:49, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support The CAs are there, but I find them acceptable.--Dirtsc 17:40, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Please, try to avoid this kind of unofficial assessment templates, in "Commons" pages, the bot does not recognize it. Thank you. (corrected)--Jebulon 09:09, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose chromatic aberration is easy to fix and there are inaceptable in any case --Wilfredor 13:33, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:44, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Chartreuse_de_la_Verne_2013_01.JPG[edit]

Chartreuse de la Verne 2013 01.JPG

  • Nomination Charterhouse Chartreuse de la Verne, Massif des Maures, France. (left side) --VT98Fan 09:16, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK. Heuschrecke 18:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - looks a bit blurry to me. Mattbuck 18:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC) ✓ Done New version sharpened --Christian Ferrer 19:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
    New version is better, but the treeline shows artifacts, and sky seems a bit noisy. Mattbuck 20:15, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Reworked --Christian Ferrer 04:27, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
    The treeline's now a bit blurry in places, but it is a lot better. Mattbuck 21:44, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Confirming support. After two revisions, much better. Heuschrecke 10:28, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me--Lmbuga 21:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon 10:07, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:27, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Balzende Senfweißlinge, Leptidea sinapis 04.JPG[edit]

Balzende Senfweißlinge, Leptidea sinapis 04.JPG

  • Nomination Balzende Senfweißlinge, Leptidea sinapis --Böhringer 10:51, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blurred and noise --Wilfredor 06:13, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me. Mattbuck 21:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support idem --Christian Ferrer 21:09, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JDP90 12:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:25, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:2013-08-15_16-24-09-Acanthosomatidae.jpg[edit]

2013-08-15 16-24-09-Acanthosomatidae.jpg

  • Nomination Acanthosoma haemorrhoidale --ComputerHotline 18:14, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportExcellent. --Mattbuck 21:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The lower part (membrane) is blurred. f7 is not a good choice --Archaeodontosaurus 18:38, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The such DOF is possible for macro. --Nino Verde 16:52, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:24, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Lüdinghausen, Burg Vischering -- 2.jpg[edit]

Lüdinghausen, Burg Vischering -- 2.jpg

  • Nomination Burg Vischering in Lüdinghausen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 04:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 09:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Several dust spots, perspective distortion. All fixable imo --A.Savin 16:34, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Problems fixed --XRay 17:48, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
      • Still there are spots, but all in all the quality is acceptable for QI imo --A.Savin 23:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
        • ✓ Done Thanks for your hint. I've removed two dust spots. Now I can't find anymore. --XRay 16:00, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem 11:08, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:23, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Senden, Venner Moor -- 2013 -- 1.jpg[edit]

Senden, Venner Moor -- 2013 -- 1.jpg

  • Nomination Venner Moor in Senden, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 04:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 09:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose chromatic aberrations --A.Savin 16:32, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done chromatic aberrations fixed --XRay 17:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
      • But there are visible haloes instead. Not sure if such strong CA's are fixable w/o loss on quality otherwise --A.Savin 23:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
        • Thanks for your advice. You're right. May be better looking for another image of this series.--XRay 05:19, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Spurzem 15:14, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above.--null 19:33, 31 August 2013 (UTC)--Jebulon 19:49, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, CA remain on leaves (top left corner) and grass (bottom left). Heuschrecke 19:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above.--Lmbuga 21:29, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:21, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:13-08-09 Taubertal Jennifer Rostock Jennifer 3.JPG[edit]

13-08-09 Taubertal Jennifer Rostock Jennifer 3.JPG

  • Nomination Jennifer Rostock at Taubertal Festival 2013 (by User:AllSystemsRed) -- Achim Raschka 18:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Nice photo with good level of detail, but imho a bit too dark especially in the center (see note). Should be fixable. --Tuxyso 14:22, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Seems OK to me, though it's apparently surprisingly cold there given her goosebumps. Mattbuck 21:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Why "discuss"?? I have not declined previously but only commented. IMHO you should at least wait what the uploader says to my comment. Especially here it is not a big deal to correct it. --Tuxyso 05:10, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality --High Contrast 23:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I also think it's a bit underexposed. --Kadellar 18:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. No underexposure. The bandeau on her head is even somewhat overexposed though ineglible due to the very small area. I see a small problem with chroma noise esp. in the face which could be improved. The lighting situation is not the best, the result under these conditions imo acceptable for QI. -- Smial 20:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak {{o}}. No underexposure IMO, but chromatic noise, sorry, It's a good picture IMO. Improvable IMO--Lmbuga 21:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
@Lmbuga: Ok. Peace? -- Smial 18:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Please--Lmbuga 19:57, 4 September 2013 (UTC) I wish your company--Lmbuga 20:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Fine, let's work together again ;-) -- Smial 22:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support agree with smial. I actually think it is a great photo. --AngMoKio 08:00, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've uploaded a version with reduced chroma noise level, please review (purge). -- Smial 09:28, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. The new version is very good IMO, and nice--Lmbuga 10:22, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:20, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:San_Benito,_el_santo_negro.jpg[edit]

San Benito, el santo negro.jpg

  • Nomination San Benito, el santo negro --Wilfredor 17:52, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Not fully sharp I think. --Mattbuck 21:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC) Main subject is focused --Wilfredor 12:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:19, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Sand July 2013-1.jpg[edit]

Sand July 2013-1.jpg

  • Nomination Sand, rock and water in contre-jour. Porto Covo, Portugal -- Alvesgaspar 23:46, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting, but too much overexposure for me. --Mattbuck 21:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Of course, that is the sun reflected on the surface... Alvesgaspar 22:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Of couse this is a very difficult to photograph due to the high contrast. And to be honest, I don't have a clue how to make it better. But let's speak about the image as it is. The lights are burned out so you have especially on the left part a flat white space instead of sparkles on the waves. On the other side there is this structureless dark backside of the rocks, which is clearly underexposed. Additionally you cut that potential eye catchers at the bottom. So I have to say this is not QI for me. --LC-de 08:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'd suggest a new raw-developement with an underexposure by about 1 f-stop to get some details in the clear white areas at the left side. Combined with some s-curving this would do for QI. As we do not have cameras or film that can handle contrast of 20 f-stops, the dark rocks then would be black - but this would be acceptable for me as graphical element. I do not agree the image has a bad composition, those waves and reflections are not so bad. -- Smial 11:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:18, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Zamek w Kończycach Małych.JPG[edit]

Zamek w Kończycach Małych.JPG

  • Nomination Castle in Kończyce Małe, Poland --Halavar 09:58, 25 August 2013 (UTC) Halavar
  • Decline Nice image --Fbnpch 11:24, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose poor sharpness, oversaturated --A.Savin 11:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too unsharp. --Nino Verde 16:55, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above.--Jebulon 19:50, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Ak Orda Presidential Palace.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Ak Orda Presidential Palace, Astana, Kazakhstan --Stomac 07:38, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Very good. -- Felix Koenig 09:13, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
    No FoP in Kazakhstan --A.Savin 09:18, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A.Savin is right.--Jebulon 19:52, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Birmingham MMB 02 Grand Junction 43207.jpg[edit]

Birmingham MMB 02 Grand Junction 43207.jpg

  • Nomination 43207 at Grand Junction. Mattbuck 08:15, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp and a bit blurred --Christian Ferrer 16:40, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
    Blur of the surroundings is due to the train's movement, and even at 1/200 you won't get it unblurred. Mattbuck 22:24, 25 August 2013 (UTC) Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I change my vote because I'm not very competent with movements --Christian Ferrer 07:44, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support One more I change my vote, because of movements condition --Christian Ferrer 14:54, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:15, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Helsinki July 2013-18.jpg[edit]

Helsinki July 2013-18.jpg

  • Nomination Boat in the South Harbour, Helsinki -- Alvesgaspar 22:35, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blurred. --Mattbuck 09:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I disagree, subject is perfectly sharp. Please notice the size of the picture. -- Alvesgaspar 09:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • For me it's ok if you correct tilt and perspectives --Christian Ferrer 11:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Alvesgaspar 19:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    • Please crop the black frame at top --Christian Ferrer 18:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done -- Sorry for the lousy job... Alvesgaspar 11:57, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seems to have some very(!) small amount of motion blur, but not really disturbing. --Smial 19:17, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfectly sharp, really not, it's just ok --Christian Ferrer 21:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
    • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Really sorry but at reflexion and with time I'm not very convinced --Christian Ferrer 15:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. Pleasant light. Heuschrecke 19:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:12, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Morane-Saulnier MS.317 HB-RAO.JPG[edit]

Morane-Saulnier MS.317 HB-RAO.JPG

  • Nomination Morane-Saulnier MS.317, at the Prangins Fly-in (Switzerland) --Gzzz 20:55, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Tilted and a bit overexposed. --Mattbuck 09:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Luminosity and tilt corrected, better now ? --Gzzz 11:02, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Les "trucs" à gauche, sur le sol, sont gênants (voir note).--Jebulon 16:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:11, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:2013-Fort de la Miotte 02.JPG[edit]

2013-Fort de la Miotte 02.JPG

  • Nomination Miotte fortifications and tower. Bourgeois.A 21:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeDustspot in the sky, close to the upper margin. --Cayambe 07:11, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Better now ? Bourgeois.A 09:26, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI to me.--Jebulon 21:36, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ok now. --Cayambe 10:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. Heuschrecke 19:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:10, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Micromeria_myrtifolia_LC0048.jpg[edit]

Micromeria myrtifolia LC0048.jpg

  • Nomination: Micromeria myrtifolia, Thasos, Griechenland(det. Benutzer: RLJ) --LC-de 20:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Review
  • Unsure, subject is rather hard to make out. Mattbuck 20:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DoF seem just for an entire plant IMO --Christian Ferrer 05:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
    • If I remember correctly, I never oppose, it was just a comment --Christian Ferrer 15:21, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I think this was a contra, just to come to an end here... --LC-de 10:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Out of date clock icon 2.svg Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --A.Savin 18:08, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Merops_leschenaulti_by_N.A._Nazeer.jpg[edit]

Merops leschenaulti by N.A. Nazeer.jpg

  • Nomination Chestnut-headed Bee-eaters in India --Innotata 19:40, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline

*Symbol support vote.svg Supportvery nice, candinat for FP for me No anonymous vote, please sign with the four tilde, thank you. If you are the nominator, you cannot vote.--Jebulon 09:15, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice birds and composition, but too muvh noisy IMO --Christian Ferrer 07:58, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In my opinion not too noisy. Good quality for me. -- Spurzem 12:00, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As nice as the composition and motive are, it's too noisy imo. Julian Herzog 12:55, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, noise is a problem, but i think this picture should still be a QI. --AmaryllisGardener 14:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --Kadellar 18:18, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose idem.--Jebulon 19:54, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice composition but too noisy for me too, and a bit too dark. --Kreuzschnabel 21:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Please avoid to use this kind of unofficial assessment templates, the bot does not recognize them, therefore it could be confusing in the final count of votes. Thanks. (corrected).--Jebulon 09:15, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm curious about the reason for that strong noise level. The 7D is a modern camera and ISO640 not very high setting. With my Pentax k-x or K-5 I do not need or use any noise reduction up to ISO800. Possibly the image had strong underexposure and has been pushed for 2 or even more f-stops? -- Smial 14:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:06, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Navy_Apartment_House.jpg[edit]

Navy Apartment House.jpg

  • Nomination Navy Apartment House in Saint Petersburg --Florstein 16:38, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 16:58, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I don’t like the distortion at the right side caused by straightening the verticals. I’m pretty sure the house has a right angle from front to side, but in the picture it rather looks like a 60 degree angle. --Kreuzschnabel 16:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's the unavoidable result of a rectilinear projection, and I think it's not too bad. Julian Herzog 12:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment To avoid having to make big corrections of perspectives with wild angle you have to avoid at the most tilting the camera downward or to the top. --Christian Ferrer 16:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:05, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:2013-Fort de la Miotte 04.JPG[edit]

2013-Fort de la Miotte 04.JPG

  • Nomination: Miotte fortifications and tower. Bourgeois.A 21:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Review
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportGood quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - many dust spots. Mattbuck 20:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Better now ? Bourgeois.A 13:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Out of date clock icon 2.svg Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --A.Savin 18:04, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Conopid July 2013-20.jpg[edit]

Conopid July 2013-20.jpg

  • Nomination A small Conopid fly (Physocephala pusilla) -- Alvesgaspar 22:49, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mostly out of focus. --Mattbuck 20:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
    • In macro shallow dof is inevitable when photographing living animals. In this case the aperture is already a bit too closed (F/16) because of diffraction problems. -- Alvesgaspar 21:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
      • No there is no problem of diffraction. You can close to f29 or f32, you have only one light problem. Increases the power of your flash. --Archaeodontosaurus 09:55, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --A.Savin 18:03, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Kloster Maria Engelport (2013-07-09 01) Kirche.JPG[edit]

Kloster Maria Engelport (2013-07-09 01) Kirche.JPG

  • Nomination Church of monastery Maria Engelport in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany -- Spurzem 15:21, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Some CA should be removed. -- Smial 17:23, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Done. -- Spurzem 18:19, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry, I can't see an enhancement. Look at the small figurines at the right wall, they still have red and green CA, also the loudspeaker and the window above. We should ask for a third opinion. -- Smial 22:29, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can't see an improvement either, sorry. --Kadellar 12:16, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
    I ask for discussion. -- Spurzem 13:07, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I'm with the others but will revert my vote if you are able to eliminate CA -- Alvesgaspar 20:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The CAs are visible at lamps, windows and pillars. Without them it can be a good image. --Dirtsc 06:55, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
The shine of coloured glass in the windows is no CA. The others I will try to reduce. -- Spurzem 11:20, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Please look now. -- Spurzem 20:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I see just the same, sorry. --Kadellar 13:38, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
That must be a problem of your eyes or your intention. -- Spurzem 20:29, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I uploaded new version. Please another look --Rjcastillo 12:46, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I believe the rework by Rjcastillo now is acceptable for QI. -- Smial 13:49, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Still some CA (column at left, for example) and visible chromatic noise but acceptable, considering the difficult situation. Alvesgaspar 14:07, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now its QI. --Ralf Roletschek 14:36, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 18:01, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:2013-Fort de la Miotte 07.JPG[edit]

2013-Fort de la Miotte 07.JPG

  • Nomination: Miotte fortifications and tower. Bourgeois.A 21:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Review
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp, tilted --A.Savin 08:47, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Better Now ? Bourgeois.A 09:26, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
  • For my part, sharpness is hardly better; but feel free to replace "Decline" by "Discuss" if you want third opinion. --A.Savin 17:22, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry Bourgeois but the image seems overprocessed to me: oversaturated (these colors don't look natural) and oversharpened. Alvesgaspar 21:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
    They are, however, the colorimetry SONY NEX compare with other outlets on the same premises. Bourgeois.A 22:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Saturation is rather high yet not unnatural in my eyes, and I don’t see any oversharpening, the housing in the background looking quite normally blurred. QI for me. --Kreuzschnabel 12:51, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me. Pleclown 11:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Out of date clock icon 2.svg Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --A.Savin 18:00, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Brucéro,_Rencontres_de_l'imaginaire_de_Brocéliande_2013,_Paimpont,_France.jpg[edit]

Brucéro, Rencontres de l'imaginaire de Brocéliande 2013, Paimpont, France.jpg

  • Nomination Brucéro, french illustrator. --EdouardHue 21:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dark line growing from the head is disturbing. Crop to closeup and the it can get through. --Yndesai 12:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not quite convinced by this objection, I'd appreciate other opinions. --EdouardHue 20:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I agree that the line is a bit disturbing (it can be easily removed) but that is not a big deal. Good enough for me. Alvesgaspar 21:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Line is a bit but not very disturbing, not need to be perfect, widely QI for me --Christian Ferrer 07:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moire in the hair but otherwise good imo. Julian Herzog 13:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The line is not really disturbing, otherwise very good. -- Felix Koenig 11:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --King of Hearts 03:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Hårstadnebba_and_Langrabbpiken_above_Dalavatnet_in_Litldalen,_Sunndal,_2013_June.jpg[edit]

Hårstadnebba and Langrabbpiken above Dalavatnet in Litldalen, Sunndal, 2013 June.jpg

  • Nomination Dalavatnet in Litldalen, Møre og Romsdal, Norway, in 2013 June. --Ximonic 11:20, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 11:55, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
  • {{o}} Sorry, perhaps I'm not right, but the shadows are a bit clear and the blues -see note- are too much saturated (oversaturated), unnatural IMO--Lmbuga 23:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok, thanks for your opinions--Lmbuga 11:35, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I think that Lmbuga has a point. Still those colors could be natural. Only the author can say! Xomonic?... -- Alvesgaspar 21:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The image shows Norway near the middle of summer. Intense colors and clear views are possible if you have good weather. But it would be good to hear a comment of the author if the colors have been enhanced. --Dirtsc 07:03, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the colors could be natural and don't look unrealistic or oversaturated to me. Julian Herzog 13:36, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Julian Herzog. Looks good to me. --High Contrast 23:36, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --King of Hearts 07:17, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

File:East_Stonesdale,_Keld,_North_Yorkshire.jpg[edit]

East Stonesdale, Keld, North Yorkshire.jpg

  • Nomination East Stonesdale viewed from Keld, Swaledale, North Yorkshire --Kreuzschnabel 17:25, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Do you see the possibility to darken the bright areas and especially the sky a bit? --Dirtsc 19:20, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I don’t see any reason to do so. The sky was overcast by fine clouds, hence the bright light. --Kreuzschnabel 21:38, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'd like to see more opinions. I like the image, but maybe it's too "overexposed" for a QI? --Dirtsc 20:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There are a few dozen pixels possibly clipping, see interim version, but these are imo negligible. -- Smial 08:42, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- It is true that lighting is not the best. Not probably because the sky is partially clouded (there are strong shadoes!) but due to the position of the sun. That is one minus. The other one is the composition (which is part of image quality): what a shame that that little house in the foreground is just on the middle! -- Alvesgaspar 21:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
    • I’ll remember to push the sun into the right place next time, thanks for the hint :-) As for the composition: point taken. I focused on the valleys folding in the background but could have panned a bit to the right. --Kreuzschnabel 13:31, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's typical English sky exactly as it looks in life; I don't observe any overexposure/need for darkening. I completely agree with Alvesgaspar concerning the centered house, but despite of that I find it's a QI, and not the worst one. Heuschrecke (talk) 23:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --King of Hearts 07:17, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Aragonit_-_Fluorescence.gif[edit]

Aragonit - Fluorescence.gif

  • Nomination Fluorescence of Aragonite --Llez 05:37, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Posterisation due to file format. --Mattbuck 16:17, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
    Yes, JPEG was better, but animation is only possibble as GIF, and unfortunately you have a (unavoidable) loss of quality in transforming a JPEG into an animated GIF! --Llez 17:27, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality is enough considering the "special" character of this picture, IMO. (But I'm not sure the german museum geocode is relevant for a stone from Sicily, I don't know...)--Jebulon 00:41, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine with me. --King of Hearts 07:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --A.Savin 17:56, 7 September 2013 (UTC)