Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 27 2014
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
-
- Nomination St.-Paulus-Dom, Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 03:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 04:50, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Nomination view of the gothic entrance of the Torre de l'Homenaje, Alcazaba, Almeria, Spain.--Jebulon 19:30, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 19:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Nomination Udayagiri Caves, India --Bgag 18:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 19:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Tower Bridge, London, England --Poco a poco 16:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion
Support Good quality --Halavar 20:30, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Palace of Westminster, London, England --Poco a poco 16:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 19:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Clarence House, London, England --Poco a poco 16:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --P e z i 21:10, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Stonehenge, Wiltshire, England --Poco a poco 16:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Cccefalon 20:48, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Admiralty Arch, London, England --Poco a poco 16:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Cccefalon 20:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Shelter "Dom Śląski" --Jacek Halicki 16:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality --DKrieger 16:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Shelter "Dom Śląski" --Jacek Halicki 16:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Florstein 16:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Równia pod Śnieżką --Jacek Halicki 16:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Florstein 16:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination European larch (Larix decidua) along the footpath between Grimentz and Vercorin.
Famberhorst 15:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC) - Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 16:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Nomination European larch (Larix decidua) along the footpath between Grimentz and Vercorin.
-
- Nomination Wayside cross at the Halterner Straße, Hausdülmen, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 15:28, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 16:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Fürstbischöfliches Schloss Münster, Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 15:28, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 16:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Altar of the chapel “St. Anna”, Haltern am See, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 15:28, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 16:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Plaque on the entrance porch of Château Chesnel, Cherves-Richemont, Charente, France. --JLPC 15:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 15:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Facade and garden of Château Chesnel, Cherves-Richemont, Charente, France. --JLPC 15:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 16:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination West view of Château Chesnel, Cherves-Richemont, Charente, France. --JLPC 15:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 16:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Jürgen Trittin, german politican --Ralf Roletschek 13:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Decline Insufficient quality. Sorry. Face too unsharp, white line at the left. (Eyes should be sharp.) --XRay 15:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
+1, and I don't understand why a portrait with such an unfavourable expression must be published. It is totally disrespectful to the depicted person, and there are surely better photos available on Commons. (And no, I'm far away from being a fan of German Green Party...) --A.Savin 19:26, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Fiaker in Vienna --Ralf Roletschek 13:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --XRay 15:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Tram in Vienna --Ralf Roletschek 13:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --JLPC 14:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Street performer in Vienna --Ralf Roletschek 13:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion QI -- Spurzem 21:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Nomination Germany, Baden-Württemberg, Schwetzingen castle, temple of Apollo --Berthold Werner 08:57, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion OK --JLPC 14:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Nomination Fuchsia 'Bicentennial'.
Famberhorst 04:46, 24 September 2014 (UTC) - Promotion Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 08:08, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Nomination Fuchsia 'Bicentennial'.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Nomination Bank building Stadtplatz 20-22, Steyr, Upper Austria --P e z i 21:39, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. But did this image have perspective distortion in it's original form? --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 21:54, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment Thanks for review/promotion. To your question: Slightly leaning in of verticals was corrected. --P e z i 10:24, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Nomination Royal Albert Hall, London, England --Poco a poco 16:53, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. --JLPC 14:34, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Cross on the Church of St Mary Immaculate and St. John Berchmans --Livioandronico2013 15:15, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion
Comment I think perspective needs to be corrected (raws of bricks). --JLPC 18:58, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Done Thanks for review --Livioandronico2013 19:27, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
JLPC can you check now? Thanks --Livioandronico2013 21:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
OK now.--JLPC 14:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
-
- Nomination: Transit to the Ferry to Texel (Harbour Den Helder) --Tuxyso 20:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
- Review Quite low DOF, maybe fixable with sharpening --MB-one 22:15, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
I cannot see any DoF problems. The image is imho very sharp at every part. Realized the high res of the image? BTW: DoF issues can never be fixed by sharpening. --Tuxyso 06:28, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Oslo Harbour --Ralf Roletschek 10:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Support Good quality. --XRay 15:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Nomination 444s at Portsmouth Harbour. Mattbuck 06:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Comment. Dark with too strong shadows. No QI for me. Perhaps we should discuss. -- Spurzem 07:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC) Brightened Mattbuck 18:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC) Support --Christian Ferrer 11:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination The Town Hall in Kellinghusen is the cultural monument number 2 with the address "Am Markt 9" --Nightflyer 21:44, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Comment Please check your image. It's tilted CCW.--XRay 16:09, 20 September 2014 (UTC) Comment What is CCW? --Nightflyer 09:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
"counterclockwise", "gegen den Uhrzeigersinn"--XRay 15:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC) Done Rotatet 0.73 degrees --Nightflyer 22:03, 22 September 2014 (UTC) Support It's OK now.--XRay 15:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Monument to Admiral Makarov in Kronstadt --Florstein 17:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC) Comment Not really sharp Pleclown 11:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Support ok IMO --Christian Ferrer 17:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Nomination Monument to Admiral Makarov in Kronstadt --Florstein 17:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Inscription on the Vatican obelisk --Livioandronico2013 15:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 15:44, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
A translation could be helpful...--Jebulon 10:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't know latin :P --Livioandronico2013 12:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Flowers of Fireweed (Chamerion angustifolium), Sivas - Turkey --Zeynel Cebeci 14:48 (UTC)
- Promotion Support --Florstein 17:05, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
_langs_het_voetpad_tussen_Grimentz_en_Vercorin_06.JPG)
-_Fireweed_-_Yak%C4%B1otu_4.jpg)
Consensual review[edit]
File:Goggomobil Coupé (2014-09-03 7049 b) Heck.jpg[edit]
_Heck.jpg)
- Nomination Goggomobil Coupé, a very small car with 250-cm³-engine -- Spurzem 15:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Decline
Oppose Sorry, the white car of the corner is disturbing. Not Qi for me.--Lmbuga 23:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC) Comment. I saw promoted images of oldtimer meetings with much more disturbing things than a part of another car in the foreground or otherwise. --
Comment I understand you. It may be that I am wrong. Let others think: "discuss" --Lmbuga 22:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC) - Comment The car is fully visible. I think it is ok here for a QI. However, before promoting, the defringing amount for magenta has to be raised to get rid of the CA's. --Cccefalon 07:03, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline? --Jean11 22:11, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
File:Plate_on_fontaine_near_Porta_del_Popolo.jpg[edit]
- Nomination Plate on fontaine near Porta del Popolo --Livioandronico2013 15:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Promotion Support --Cccefalon 17:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
{{o}}Sorry, right side is out of focus and noisy (see note). Too sharpened IMO and too much contrast. I don't like the detail--Lmbuga 23:03, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Can you check another time Lmbuga? Thanks --Livioandronico2013 07:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
{{Neutral}}Better with the crop, but too sharpened and too much contrast IMO--Lmbuga 22:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support crisp and no sharpening artifacts, good quality --MB-one 19:57, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose As for Lmbuga. -- Smial 13:18, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose New review: too sharpened and too much contrast--Lmbuga 03:47, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes? --Jean11 22:09, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
File:Tejo September 2014-3a.jpg[edit]
- Nomination: River Tagus, Portugal -- Alvesgaspar 22:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- Review Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. A nice image, but in the middle too dark. --XRay 08:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC) -- The dark silhouette is deliberate -- Alvesgaspar 22:20, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Weak Support Needs perhaps a bit sharpening. -- Smial 22:57, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose As XRay--Lmbuga 03:51, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? --Jean11 22:07, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
File:Japonaise au bain James Tissot 1864.jpg[edit]
- Nomination La Japonaise au bain, James Tissot. Painting in Musée des beaux-arts de Dijon --Yelkrokoyade 17:58, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Sorry,no very sharp. --Livioandronico2013 20:58, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Is it not? We should discuss. -- Spurzem 22:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC) - Oppose Not sharp.--Jebulon 16:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? --Jean11 22:05, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
File:2014_Kapliczka_w_Wolanach_02.JPG[edit]
- Nomination: Chapel in Wolany --Jacek Halicki 12:58, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- Review Oppose JPEG artifaction in the trees. --Mattbuck 00:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC) Support QI for me. We should discuss. -- Spurzem 22:32, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Weak Support. Sharpness could be better, but I realy cannot find JPG artifacts. Good lighting and composition. -- Smial 14:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, while I agree with Smial on the facts, the missing sharpness, for me, is a dealbreaker here. The roof shows very little detail and the trees are completly blurred. It might be art but it's not "good quality". F4.8 was probably the wrong choice for this shot. --MB-one 16:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes? --Jean11 22:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
File:Cologne_Germany_St-Kunibert-11.jpg[edit]
- Nomination Cologne, Germany: Basilika St. Kunibert (east side) --Cccefalon 13:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- Decline The perspective correction in my opinion is not good. -- Spurzem 15:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC) Comment The sky is overexposed. --Ivar 17:25, 7 September 2014 (UTC) Oppose I concur with Spurzem and ivar. Mattbuck 18:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC) Done @Spurzem: I uploaded another version. To overcome the problem, that some people have with the pure vertical depiction and the view of the tiltshift lense, I added a ratio correction. Don't complain about the verticals; I intentionally added a small incline to get a more natural view for you. @Iifar: Already before post processing, this photo was not overexposed and showed a regular histogram. What you complain is an original grey - and not a remapped to grey - sky. --Cccefalon 18:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
@Mattbuck: We had an edit conflict. I just uploaded a new version. --Cccefalon 18:40, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Ok, then CR. --Cccefalon 18:49, 13 September 2014 (UTC) - Hello Mattbuck, Ivar and Spurzem: A new version of the file is available and waiting for your reconsideration. --Cccefalon 09:01, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, but the tower left is distorted respectively on the left side it is higher than on the right. -- Spurzem 09:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- That is just perspective when not standing exactly in the symmetrie point. For the same reason you can see more of the right towers left side than of the left tower. --Cccefalon 10:19, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? --Jean11 (talk) 21:59, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
File:Heads_of_lions_in_quartiere_coppedè.jpg[edit]
- Nomination Heads of lions in quartiere coppedè --Livioandronico2013 20:19, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- Decline Overexposed. --Mattbuck 00:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Is simple fixable,how do you decline for a simple thing like this??? Then,Mattbuck, do not complain that someone has problems with you,have a nice day
--Livioandronico2013 07:09, 13 September 2014 (UTC) Oppose Overexposure generally is not fixable. The problem is a loss of information, you can remap it to grey but that won't bring back the detail. As for my FP nomination, I think there's a difference - if you take a photo of a light source, it will be overexposed. Mattbuck 13:45, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
DoneYes, it is different, the problem, in my opinion, is your way to make hasty, I take the only sensible thing you've said "generally", in fact if it is possible to fix a photo, by at least a chance. --Livioandronico2013 14:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC) - Support. Good light and good image. @ Mattbuck: We can not only take night photos on sunny days. -- Spurzem 19:52, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Lions heads overexposed --Christian Ferrer 18:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
_Heck.jpg){kind=link}
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? --Jean11 21:50, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
File:Gummer's How MMB 19 Lake Windermere.jpg[edit]
- Nomination: Lake Windermere. Mattbuck 06:29, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
- Review Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. It's too dusty. --XRay 08:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
I've done some recolouring, let me know if it's any better. --Mattbuck 13:40, 13 September 2014 (UTC) - Support acceptable IMO --Christian Ferrer 11:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Per XRay --LivioAndronico talk 10:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support Reworked version is still somewhat soft, but all in all ok. -- Smial 22:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes? --Jean11 14:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
File:London MMB «W5 Canary Wharf.jpg[edit]
- Nomination Canary Wharf. Mattbuck 06:29, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
- Decline
- OpposeInsufficient quality. Sorry. Nice image, but IMO the foreground is too dark. --XRay 08:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
I did that purposefully - the buildings look good as near-silhouettes IMO. --Mattbuck 13:40, 13 September 2014 (UTC) - Oppose Dark --LivioAndronico talk 10:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- Weak Support Nice composition, sharpness not overwhelming. Not too dark imho, as it is intended. -- Smial 22:32, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support Convinced !--Jebulon 13:57, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose: Buildings are dark and the sky isn't lucky (it's almost grey). --Brateevsky 09:43, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Jean11 14:29, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → 
Declined --A.Savin 22:28, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Declined --A.Savin 22:28, 26 September 2014 (UTC)File:Münster,_Historisches_Rathaus_--_2014_--_6852.jpg[edit]
- Nomination Historical town hall, Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 03:29, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- Decline Oppose Unsharp in the upper part (hardly fixable), CAs, tilted --Uoaei1 06:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC) Fixed Thanks for your reviews. Some of your advices are fixed.--XRay 16:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Still quite unsharp in the upper parts - I would like to ask for other opinions --Uoaei1 17:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC) - Comment Probably effect of perspective correction by software. This has limits. -- Smial 23:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support sharp enough IMO --Christian Ferrer 07:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Agree with Uoaei1, sorry. Not sharp, remains of CA. And it needs a crop below, until the bicycle, IMO.--Jebulon 17:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
- (Nearly) fixed Some issues are improved. Other aren't possible. May be it's not QI, but it's better now.--XRay 11:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose As Uoaei1. Not fixable unsharp parts in the upper area. -- DerFussi 17:20, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Too dark at bottom --Lmbuga 03:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? --Jean11 14:34, 26 September 2014 (UTC)