Commons:Segnalazioni per la vetrina

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

Shortcut: COM:FPC

Passa alla lista di candidati Passa alla lista di candidati per la vetrina Passa alla lista di rimozione dalla vetrina Passa alla lista di candidati per la rimozione dalla vetrina

Queste immagini sono candidate per la vetrina. Fare attenzione a non confondere questa pagina con le immagini del giorno.

Guida[edit]

Candidare un immagine[edit]

Linee guida per candidare un'immagine[edit]

È importante leggere le linee guida prima di candidare un'immagine.

A seguito è riportato un riassunto dei punti essenziali per candidare e valutare le immagini candidate:

  • Risoluzione - Le fotografie con una risoluzione inferiore a 2 milioni di pixel vengono generalmente rifiutate e rimosse ad eccezione di motivi contrari di particolare importanza. Si noti che le immagini con risoluzione 1600 x 1200 hanno 1.92 Mpx, appena inferiore al limite minimo di 2Mpx.
Ricordiamo che le immagini caricate su Commons vengono visualizzate non solo su schermi tradizionali di PC ma sono utilizzate anche per stampa e visualizzazione su schermi ad alta risoluzione. Non possiamo certo prevedere quali tecnologie verranno utilizzate nel futuro quindi è importante che le immagini scelte per la vetrina abbiano una risoluzione quanto più alta è possibile.
  • Scansioni - È consigliabile seguire la guida alla scansione, che propone suggerimenti per l'ottenimento di immagini ottimali
  • Fuoco - ovviamente ogni oggetto significativo dell'immagine deve essere ben definito e a fuoco.
  • Primo piano e sfondo - Oggetti in primissimo piano o di sfondo possono distrarre dalla vista dal oggetto principale dell'immagine. È il caso di controllare se qualche elemento in primo piano non copra nessun elemento importante e che lo sfondo non distolga l'attenzione e renda confusa l'immagine (per esempio evitare che vi sia una luce forte alle spalle di un viso)
  • Qualità generale - le immagini candidate devono essere di alta qualità tecnica.
  • Le manipolazioni digitali non devono essere effettuate per ingannare, ma vanno usate solo limitatamente e con cura per correggere difetti fotografici. Le manipolazioni comunemente accettate sono il ritaglio e la correzione di prospettiva, focale, colore ed esposizione. Manipolazioni più estese, come può essere la rimozione di un elemento di distrazione dello sfondo, vanno chiaramente descritte nel testo di descrizione per mezzo del template {{Retouched picture}}. Manipolazioni non descritte o descritte in modo insufficiente non permettono la candidatura alla vetrina.
  • Valore - il nostro principale obiettivo è eleggere le immagini con il maggior valore rispetto a tutte le loro simili. Le immagini devono essere in qualche modo speciali, perciò fai attenzione:
    • quasi tutti i tramonti sono esteticamente piacevoli, infatti molte immagini sono simili alle altre,
    • gli scatti notturni sono gradevoli ma generalmente le foto scattate di giorno mostrano molti più dettagli,
    • non tutte le belle foto hanno in realtà un valore che non sia esclusivamente personale.

Per quanto riguarda l'aspetto tecnico abbiamo come parametri l'esposizione, la composizione, il controllo del movimento e la profondità di campo.

  • L'esposizione si riferisce alla combinazione tra tempo di esposizione e diaframma. Questa combinazione permette generalmente di avere una curva di tono che è in grado di rappresentare ombre e luci con un dettaglio accettabile. Questa curva viene detta latitudine di posa. Un'immagine può essere nella banda bassa, media o alta. Le fotocamere digitali (e le loro foto) hanno una latitudine di posa più stretta delle macchine a pellicola. La mancanza di dettagli nelle zone d'ombra non è necessariamente una caratteristica negativa. Infatti questa può essere parte dell'effetto desiderato, mentre ampie zone eccessivamente sovraesposte possono distrarre la vista.
  • La composizione si riferisce alla distribuzione degli elementi nell'immagine. La “Regola dei Terzi” è una buona linea guida per la composizione e eredita molto dagli studi di disegno. Il concetto principale considera l'immagine divisa con due linee orizzontali e due verticali, che dividono l'immagine in tre parti. Generalmente se l'oggetto viene centrato si ha un effetto poco interessante, mentre se l'oggetto viene posizionato in uno dei punti di interesse, ovvero l'intersezione delle quattro linee, si ottiene un effetto decisamente migliore. Le linee dell'orizzonte infatti non dovrebbero essere posizionate nel centro, perché taglierebbero la foto a metà; è invece preferibile scegliere una delle linee orizzontali. Complessivamente bisogna tendere a creare un'immagine dinamica.
  • Il controllo del movimento si riferisce al modo viene rappresentato il movimento nell'immagine. Il movimento può essere bloccato (seguito dalla fotocamera) oppure può essere lasciato scorrere, tuttavia l'oggetto principale dell'immagine deve essere visibile. Nessuna delle due tecniche è migliore dell'altra, la buona riuscita dipende esclusivamente dal tipo di effetto ricercato. Per esempio, fotografando una vettura da corsa che appare statica in relazione allo sfondo, che invece scorre sul retro, si ottiene l'oggetto principale in una condizione statica mentre lo sfondo crea il senso di movimento. (questa tecnica è chiamata "panning"). D'altra parte, fotografando un giocatore di basket in salto, bloccato in relazione a tutto il resto dello sfondo, si otterrebbe un buono scatto proprio per la posa innaturale.
  • La profondità di campo (PdC o DOF dall'inglese depth of field) è la distanza davanti e dietro il soggetto principale che appare nitida (a fuoco). Questo parametro viene scelto a seconda delle necessità di ogni immagine e può parimenti migliorare o peggiorare la qualità di una fotografia. Generalmente viene utilizzata una PdC ridotta per mettere al centro dell'attenzione il soggetto principale, separandolo da tutto il resto dello sfondo. Invece viene utilizzata una grande PdC per enfatizzare la profondità di un immagine. Gli obiettivi grandangolari in genere una grande PdC mentre i teleobiettivi ne hanno una decisamente ridotta. In gran parte la PdC dipende dall'apertura del diaframma: aumenta con il diminuire dell'apertura e viceversa.

Per quanto riguarda l'aspetto grafico prendiamo invece in considerazione nitidezza, profondità, colore, superficie, prospettiva, bilanciamento, proporzione, ecc.

  • La nitidezza si riferisce alle linee di contorno del soggetto principale.
  • La profondità si riferisce alla qualità dell'aspetto tridimensionale del soggetto. Ciò si ottiene soprattutto tramite un'adeguata illuminazione laterale (come quella della prima mattinata o del tardo pomeriggio) e non esclusivamente frontale, al fine di evitare l'appiattimento del soggetto.
  • Il colore è un elemento molto importante e non deve essere né troppo né poco saturo.
  • La superficie si riferisce alla qualità della superficie degli oggetti fotografati.
  • La prospettiva si riferisce all'angolazione dalla quale è stata scattata la fotografia. Essa crea una serie di rette immaginarie che seguono gli spigoli paralleli degli oggetti e si incontrano in un punto che può essere dentro o fuori l'immagine.
  • Il bilanciamento si riferisce alla disposizione degli oggetti nell'immagine e può essere equilibrato o porre maggior peso verso una direzione.
  • La proporzione si riferisce alla relazione tra le dimensioni degli oggetti all'interno dell'immagine. Generalmente si tende a rappresentare oggetti con ridotta relazione, ma una buona tecnica è quella di rappresentare gli oggetti di dimensioni minori in modo più esteso, contrariamente a quanto è in realtà. Per esempio, un piccolo fiore che viene rappresentato con le stesse dimensioni di una grande montagna: questa tecnica viene chiamata inversione di scala.
Ovviamente, non tutte le caratteristiche devono essere necessariamente presenti. Le immagini possono essere giudicate sia per una sola caratteristica che per diverse caratteristiche, anche contemporaneamente.
  • Significato simbolico o rilevanza particolare …Le guerre d'opinione possono iniziare!…. Va ricordato che una pessima fotografia di un soggetto difficilissimo da fotografare è sicuramente migliore di un'immagine ordinaria e tradizionale (come un comune tramonto).
Le immagini possono essere scelte da un fotografo o da un osservatore anche per motivi culturali, tenendo però sempre conto del contesto dello scatto e non di quello dell'osservatore. Un'immagine inoltre può "parlare" alle persone e avere la capacità di evocare emozioni, che tuttavia non devono essere necessariamente piacevoli.

Per ottimizzare le possibilità di successo delle candidature delle tue immagini è consigliabile leggere le linee guida complete.

Come candidare un'immagine[edit]

Se credi di aver trovato o creato un immagine che può essere presa in considerazione per la vetrina, che abbia una appropriata descrizione e una licenza adeguata, allora segui queste indicazioni.

Punto 1: copia il nome dell'immagine dentro la casella di testo (includendo anche il prefisso Image: ) a seguito del testo già presente nella casella (per esempio Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:IL-NOME-DELLA-TUA-IMMAGINE.JPG.) ed infine clicca il pulsante candida una nuova immagine.


Punto 2: segui le istruzioni della pagina alla quale vieni collegato e salva le modifiche apportate.

Punto 3: inserisci manualmente un collegamento alla pagina creata in cima alla lista candidati: Clicca qui e aggiungi il testo che segue all'inizio della lista di candidature:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:IL-NOME-DELLA-TUA-IMMAGINE.JPG}}

Votare[edit]

Per votare puoi usare i seguenti templates:

  • {{A favore}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support) per supportare la candidatura,
  • {{Contrario}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose) per opporsi alla candidatura,
  • {{Neutrale}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral) per esprimere un parere neutrale,
  • {{Commento}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment) per esprimere solo un commento,
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info) per aggiungere delle informazioni riguardanti l'immagine,
  • {{Domanda}} (Pictogram voting question.svg Question) per chiedere informazioni.

Puoi inoltre evidenziare che l'immagine non ha possibilità di essere eletta con il template {{FPX|motivo}}, inserendo al posto di motivo le ragioni per cui è chiaramente inaccettabile per la vetrina.

Ogni votante è pregato di motivare il proprio voto con qualche parola, in particolar modo se si vota contro. Ricorda inoltre di aggiungere la tua firma (~~~~). I voti anonimi non sono accettati.

Candidare un'immagine alla rimozione dalla vetrina[edit]

Gli standard della vetrina cambiano col tempo. Può succedere che un'immagine che era stata eletta per la vetrina non sia più adatta agli standard attuali.

Questa lista è perciò composta dalle immagini considerate non più adatte a rimanere nella vetrina. Vota:

  • {{Mantenere}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per far sì che l'immagine rimanga nella vetrina.
  • {{Rimuovere}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per far sì che l'immagine venga rimossa dalla vetrina.

Se consideri che un'immagine non rispetti più i criteri delle immagini in vetrina, candidala per la rimozione copiando il nome dell'immagine dentro questa casella di testo (includendo il prefisso dell' Image:) a seguito del testo già presente in essa:


Nella pagina appena creata includi:

  • Le informazioni sull'origine dell'immagine (autore dell'immagine, autore della candidatura);
  • Un collegamento all'iniziale candidatura per l'inserimento nella vetrina (che va inserito sotto ==Collegamenti== nella descrizione dell'immagine);
  • Il motivo per cui l'hai candidata per la rimozione dalla vetrina e il tuo Nome utente.

Dopo aver fatto ciò devi inserire manualmente un collegamento alla pagina creata all'inizio della lista di rimozione dalla vetrina.

Politica di elezione per la vetrina[edit]

Regole generali[edit]

  1. Il periodo di votazione è di 9 giorni completi, a partire dalla candidatura. I risultato verrà determinato alla fine di questo periodo. I voti aggiunti il decimo giorno o a seguito non verranno considerati.
  2. Sono benvenuti i contributori anonimi.
  3. I contributi di anonimi alle discussioni sono benvenuti.
  4. I voti di contributori anonimi non saranno accettati.
  5. La candidatura non conta come voto. Il voto di supporto va esplicitato.
  6. Gli autori delle candidature possono ritirare le loro immagini candidate in ogni momento. Questo si ottiene scrivendo semplicemente "I withdraw my nomination" (in inglese: ritiro la mia candidatura)
    o aggiungendo il testo {{withdraw|~~~~}}.
  7. Ricorda che l'obiettivo del progetto Wikimedia Commons è di costruire una raccolta di immagini utilizzabili da tutti i progetti Wikimedia, inclusi possibili progetti futuri. Perciò non bisogna pensare che questo sia una raccolta dedicata esclusivamente al progetto Wikipedia e per tanto le immagini non vanno valutate in funzione di ciò.
  8. Le immagini vengono rimosse dalla lista di candidature se non hanno voti a supporto (escluso quello dell'autore della candidatura) entro il quinto giorno dalla candidatura (La regola del quinto giorno)
  9. Le immagini dotate del template {{FPX}} non devono essere rimosse dalla lista entro le 48 ore successive al momento in cui è stato applicato il template, purchè non vi sia nessun voto a supporto oltre quello dell'autore della candidatura.

Regole di ammissione e rimozione dalla vetrina[edit]

Un'immagine candidata viene ammessa alla vetrina se si verificano le seguenti condizioni:

  1. La licenza è adeguata (ovviamente).
  2. Se ha almeno 5 voti a supporto.
  3. Se il rapporto tra voti pro/contro è almeno 2/1 (se ha due terzi di maggioranza).
  4. Non possono essere ammessi alla vetrina diverse versioni della stessa immagine, ne deve essere scelta una sola versione.

I criteri per la rimozione dalla vetrina sono gli stessi per l'ammissione ad essa, compreso il periodo di voto e la regola del quinto giorno (vedi nelle Regole generali).

Ogni utente esperto può portare a termine una votazione: per istruzioni su come compiere questa operazione vedi la guida per portare a termina la votazione.

Infine, sii cortese[edit]

Per piacere non dimenticare che l'immagine che stai giudicando è frutto del lavoro di qualcuno. Evita di usare frasi come è orribile: se devi opporti non fare spiacevoli considerazioni. Inoltre ricorda che è necessario scrivere in inglese se vuoi essere compreso dagli altri utenti e che il tuo utilizzo di questa lingua e quello degli altri utenti può comunque generare incomprensioni se non si ha un'ottima conoscenza, perciò scegli le parole con cura.

Buon voto… e ricorda che.... tutte le regole possono avere qualche eccezione.

Vedi anche[edit]

Indice[edit]

Contents

Candidati per la vetrina[edit]

Aggiorna la pagina: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Veluwse Papiermolen in het Openluchtmuseum van Arnhem.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 22:55:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dutch papermill from 1654 on display in the Arnhem open air museum.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uberprutser - uploaded by Uberprutser - nominated by [[User:Uberprutser}|]] -- Uberprutser (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uberprutser (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Some time ago I tried to get this version featured but unfortunately a lot of people disliked the cut of reflection. So is this one better? --Uberprutser (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Paris Canal St-Martin écluses Récollets 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 18:52:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Canal St-Martin, Paris.

File:Scharfer Korkstacheling Hydnellum peckii jung.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 17:33:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark and hardly any subject isolation. --Uberprutser (talk) 18:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Alise-Sainte-Reine statue Vercingetorix par Millet large.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 12:03:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Chateau Luynes.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 11:57:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Lilium bulbiferum var. bulbiferum 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 10:19:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fire lily (Lilium bulbiferum var. bulbiferum)

File:VIS - Vienna Independent Shorts 2014 Stadtkino Künstlerhaus Jennifer Reeder.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 09:20:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Filmmaker Jennifer Reeder at film festival Vienna Independent Shorts 2014
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Tsui -- Tsui (talk) 09:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tsui (talk) 09:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it seems a bit dark at low resolution, but very nice at full, I like very much the DoF and the focus point -- Christian Ferrer Talk 10:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Sukhoi SuperJet 100 (5114478300).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 04:53:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 10.664 MP, 2.6 MB → can't see anything wrong with that? --El Grafo (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 17:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic to see others seeing SuperJet International's photos are featured quality. Can only support this too. russavia (talk) 17:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Mary, Queen of Scots after Nicholas Hilliard.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2014 at 22:48:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Photo, painting of Mary, Queen of Scots

talk) 22:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I uploaded Hilliards's miniature of Queen Elizabeth I to Commons myself earlier this year. There seems to me to be a couple of issues here: 1 this is a Coetzee bequest image. I'm not sure it's best diplomatic we nominate these images as "Featured" right now 2 are we really going to list every high resolution image of a work of art as "Featured"? They must now run into their tens of thousands if we take account of Google Art Project and galleries such as NGA Washington, Rijksmuseum, and the Prado, to name but just three that come to mind that make available high resolution images, and then both the major auctioneers and others, as well as a host of smaller institutions who take no special steps against stitching their high resolution tiles. I'm inclined to think we should up the bar for art works to "ultra high resolution", such as this one, a van Gogh Sunflowers I recently nominated at Wikipedia Featured Pictures. One interesting thing about Google Art Project images is that fine as they are, they rarely approach the best available from their source museums. This is so for the van Gogh I nominated. That one comes from the Van Gogh Museum as you can readily check by going to the appropriate museum page. It's much superior to the Google Art project version. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 23:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:01 Antequera, Andalusia, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2014 at 16:30:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Royal Collegiate Church of Santa María la Mayor in Antequera, Andalusia, Spain with view of Antequera town on the right.
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Royal Collegiate Church of Santa María la Mayor in Antequera, Andalusia, Spain with view of Antequera town on the right, created by Tupungato - uploaded by Tupungato - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC) (renomination after I accidentally added three active nominations)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tupungato (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine image. No boring straight form the front shot. Although some of the white buildings seem to be a bit overexposed. But thats fine since human eyes probably would have a hard time seeing any details under similar lighting conditions. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:28, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Budapest, St. Stephen's Basilica C12.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2014 at 02:18:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Stephen's Basilica in Budapest, Hungary
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by CLI - nominated by Nikhil -- Nikhil (talk) 02:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 02:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent (BTW, this is marked with a tag suggesting it was taken in the U.S. Perhaps that could be corrected). Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In recent times we had a lot of nominations of church windows (party techincally at a very high level). My everlasting problem with such nominations is, that the personal contribution of the photographer is difficult to recognize in that case. From a technical perspective the photo here is imho only average. It looks rather soft and on the left side there are bright border areas which are distracting. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Agreed with Tuxyso, and I’d like the sides to be vertical (if they are in reality as I suppose). --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Splendid image. Stained glass an accepted 2-D category on Commons. Can't follow "personal contribution". Of course if the editor knows it's not a faithful representation, that's another matter. No reason to suppose that is so here. Straight enough for me. Perfectly straight probably too straight. All these fantastically straight images ultimately tedious IMHO. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:20, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent photo of a beautiful object. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:06, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Kolonáda na Rajstně (Reistenkolonnade) - by Pudelek.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 22:21:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reistna colonnade, Valtice (Feldsberg), Czech Republic

File:Sarah Vaughan - William P. Gottlieb - No. 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 21:02:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sarah Vaughan
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William P. Gottlieb - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Last nomination got six out of the seven supports needed for a quorum. As it is featured on four different Wikipedias, I suspect it's suited for Commons as well, despite the minor flaws of a candid photograph. And it's taken by a notable photographer, so that's a plus. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yes, and a very striking portrait. Lovely. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The flying saucer that is trying to kidnap her is rather distracting. Would editing that out affect EV? Saffron Blaze (talk) 01:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I would support editing it out providing it's a documented separate file linked to the original. I'm not sure it can be within the guidelines. And besides maybe she was really being 'lifted'... It is pretty intrusive I have to admit. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
It's something I'd like to remove, but which would be misleading to. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:5 boerenzwaluwen op een rijtje.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 20:32:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

5 young barn swallows sitting in a nest that was build in a birdwatchers shed.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by baykedevries - uploaded by baykedevries - nominated by baykedevries -- Baykedevries (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Baykedevries (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very "lucky" moment regarding the arrangement of the chicks and good composition. I do not like the frontal flash light and the background though, sorry. Still a nice shot though. --Slaunger (talk) 21:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree, the flash light is a bit harsh. But it was very dark in the shed, the camera had a hard time focusing, and the build in flash was all I had. Maybe I should get one of those softboxes that fit over the build in flash, that shouldn't take up much room in my small camera bag. Next nesting season I will be prepared :) --Baykedevries (talk) 13:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Good idea! For a related FP pose check this gem, especially the detail about the fifth friend gone missing:-) --Slaunger (talk) 14:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Monumento a la Libertad, Riga, Letonia, 2012-08-07, DD 13.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 19:50:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Freedom Monument is a memorial honouring soldiers killed during the Latvian War of Independence (1918–1920) located in Riga, capital of Latvia. The 42m high monument is considered an important symbol of the freedom, independence, and sovereignty of Latvia. It was unveiled in 1935 and is made of granite, travertine and copper.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Freedom Monument is a memorial honouring soldiers killed during the Latvian War of Independence (1918–1920) located in Riga, capital of Latvia. The 42m high monument is considered an important symbol of the freedom, independence, and sovereignty of Latvia. It was unveiled in 1935 and is made of granite, travertine and copper. This is a re-nomination (see first one here) after having addressed the mentioned issues back then. All by me, Poco2 19:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a fine image and I'm happy to support editors who make the effort to upload their images. I do get all that stuff about saturation and frankly I don't give give a damn. And that sky is gorgeous. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 00:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment How about FoP in this case? Latvia is not the "FoPest" place on Earth :) --Kikos (talk) 04:49, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
    We are lucky in this case. Kārlis Zāle, the author of the work, died in 1942, and therefore more than 70 years ago (see section 36 of the latvian copyright law) Poco2 08:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Toris inari 7.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 11:57:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Pundit - I got absolutely fascinated by this shrine complex in Fushimi Inari Torii in Kyoto. What do you think? -- Pundit (talk) 11:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nom/creator. Pundit (talk) 12:00, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good solution to what is evidently quite a difficult composition judging from the category. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm supporting everything orange today.

Good luck. I'll be watching myself. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 17:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice comp, but the green leaves outside look heavily and unnaturally oversaturated to me. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Massively oversaturated (take a look on the histrogram of the red chanel), perspective issues. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
So is Van Gogh's Sunflowers. What exactly is the perspective issue here? It's 18mm on a f3.5 lens, pretty standard. Looks fine to me. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:59, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Take a look at the bottom of the columns at the left side - they look rather distorted. The columns are not fully straight in real but also not that converging as the photo implies (take a look on other photos in the same catgegory). But the main reason for my oppose is the massively blown red channel not the perspective. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Colors are definitely in vivid mode and may be overdone, I'm curious though what could I have possibly do better next time to make the columns more straight? Do you think that the lenses distorted the actual view? Pundit (talk) 09:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Have you used a tripod in combination with a leveler? Have you done any perspective corrections on the computer or is the photo "out of the cam"? --Tuxyso (talk) 11:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I have Nikon Capture NX2 and it's default Distortion control of 10% has a barely noticeable effect on the image. The saturation isn't "massive". It's comfortably within 10% in NX2 I would say and a glance at the category confirms the image is not deceiving the viewer, the FP criterion. There's no such thing as the "right" image in photography (lesson 1) and I'm worried that criticism at this level might be alienating ordinary contributors with realtively unsophisticated equipment or resources. It's essentially elitist in my view, and while it has it may have place amongst established contributors of images on Commons, I do think we should be wary of discouraging new contributors. The image looks great. End of. And my comment about composition is quite right, as you can readily confirm looking through the category. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 14:06, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
There’s no such thing as "the image looks great" (lesson 2), it just may look great for you. Please allow others to have entirely different views and opinions. And de gustibus non est disputandum. For instance, I don’t approve of candy colours at all. My nomination of Pen-y-ghent from the east looks great too for me, but nobody seems to like it. So what? --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 14:21, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Called "wow" here (lesson 3, there really is such a thing). You're not raising issues of taste but technical matters as if they preclude nomination prima facie . And of your two nominations of Pen-y-ghent I supported the first but not the second from the east, which is quite ordinary lacking all wow. What I didn't do was post an "oppose" saying it was nothing special in my own view and opinion to which I'm surely entitled. I would only do that, and probably as a comment, if I felt the image was receiving inordinate praise. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 17:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
No perspective corrections or tripod, I leaned the camera on one of the poles of stability. Pundit (talk) 11:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Colors are over saturated and when you tilt the lens you will gets perspective distortion. When it looks good, what's the problem? Seems like that perspective is the new noise to complain about. --Baykedevries (talk) 13:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. --Baykedevries (talk) 13:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Despite the very short description? :-P --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 14:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
You're right. I apologize for my rant and inconsistencies. I'll try to do better. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strong oversaturation, perspective distortion, CA. --Kadellar (talk) 10:56, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Viborg Kraftvarmeværk NW view 2014-07-06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 23:03:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Viborg Power Station, Denmark
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 23:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 23:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:23, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Very uninteresting foreground, sky and lighting. Lacks wow.Fotoriety (talk) 00:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
    • @Fotoriety: Thanks for the review. Regarding the foregound and surroundings in general I left some space around to allow the building to "breathe". For me the featureless foreground helps the main subject to stand out. Is it correct that you think it should have been cropped tighter? I am sorry you do not like the lightning. I really like it myself and how the sky and coads are partially reflected in the curved ceramic shields surrounding the building. Anyway, there are so many possibilities for taking photos of this building regarding the vantage point, time of day and weather conditions. It is almost like a chameleon to me. If you look at the other photos in Viborg power plant, are there any elements in the framing, light vantage point in some of the other shots which are worthwhile to explore further in your opinion? I live close by, so it is easy to take new shots at it. Or, are you just non-wowed by this building in general? --Slaunger (talk) 06:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
      • @Slaunger: It's hard to say how i would like this photo to be taken because i don't know the dynamics of the environment. However, i agree that a tighter crop would help; as would perhaps lighting such as the bright glow from a sunset also being reflected in the facade. Perhaps also if the photo could be taken at a higher level to give greater depth, that may improve the composition. However, i realise it's a power plant, so room for manoeuvre may be limited. Hope that helped.Fotoriety (talk) 01:07, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent photo! --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Pen-y-ghent from South.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 13:25:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pen-y-ghent as seen from the south
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Pennine Way and Pen-y-ghent from South – c/u/n by Kreuzschnabel -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sorry but what is Pen-y-ghent? Could you please add a decent description? I find a good description very important when making the decision if I find a picture feature worthy. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment On a photograph of a mountain, I think it’s decent enough to give the mountain’s name along with the geocoding and point of view. What else do you expect? For further information just look up its name on Wikipedia. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:35, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was about to say the same. A wikilink in the nom or information page is always handy but my browser has a search box. There's a geocode link too. I'd much rather nominators explained why they think the image is among our finest, which is something I can't find out for myself with a click. -- Colin (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sure I can do a search, but I'm not going to. If you think a picture is feature worthy you can take the time to add a decent description. For me a good description is important and At some point I'm going to ignore pictures without. I'm making a point here. Don't take it personally :) But to many pictures are missing descriptions --Baykedevries (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since I haven’t understood your point yet, let me ask once again: What do you expect? Or maybe point out some of the active nominations that do have descriptions after your liking (most don’t have any at all, just "c/u/n by $NAME", without you complaining, AFAIS). I really don’t know what you mean. The picture shows the Pennine Way climbing a mountain named Pen-y-ghent from its southern side. That’s what my description says, so IMHO it’s a proper description of the photograph. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Baykedevries that often file descriptions (on the file page - it is those that matters) are inadequate as important information is often missing regarding the particular image, but this is not one of those cases. The file page is adequately categorized to e.g. Pen-y-ghent and Pennine Way and if you follow those links, there are interwiki links to articles in several different languages (after I have added them, that is, as they were initially missing). If the nominator were to copy that information to the file page (in how many languages?), it would just be maintenance of redundant information. It would contaminate, not add value. I do think though that it is generally a good idea if nominators check that main categories are adequately linked to wikipedia articles, such that the relevant information can be found fast and efficient. The interwiki links are often missing on Commons categories. --Slaunger (talk) 23:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:54, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a pretty picture of good quality, but it does not stand out for me as extraordinary. Background is a little soft in focus. --Slaunger (talk) 07:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:26, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pleasant composition and a reasonable QI (could be sharper). The 4:3 ratio isn't generally good for landscape IMO and it is too ordinary a result to be featurable. -- Colin (talk) 07:09, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:James Webb Primary Mirror.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 07:25:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"NASA engineer Ernie Wright looks on as the first six flight ready James Webb Space Telescope's primary mirror segments are (prepared) to begin final cryogenic testing at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center."
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA/MSFC/David Higginbotham - uploaded by Originalwana - nominated by Pine -- Pine 07:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pine 07:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fine composition but way too noisy. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Specially the scientist is noisy (it must be a very dark room and it's backlighted) but it has lots of wow and a great composition and EV. --Kadellar (talk) 09:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great image of a interesting subject. The noise doesn't bother me. For a second I thought the guy was standing in front of a giant VCR! --Baykedevries (talk) 17:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 01:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Composition mitigates minor technical flaws. --Slaunger (talk) 07:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 13:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:39, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Tilted, just a little bit but still needs to be fixed. Gidip (talk) 09:59, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Ruhrschleuse Mülheim 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 07:24:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Watergate at the river Ruhr in Mülheim
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:33, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI, but fail to see any special wow, lighting is not particularly interesting, the gate on approx. 1/2 of the frame is rather distracting than any special, the close lantern masts do not do the composition good either. --A.Savin 11:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose An above average picture, but not quite FP level. I agree completely with the comments by A Savin. --Slaunger (talk) 07:29, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Really pity that the photo does not gain support up to now. @ A.Savin and Slaunger: IMHO the composition with its symmetry and repeated elements is good enough for FP (that was the reason for the nomination) but surely I respect your comment. Another reason for nomination was that the motive is somehow different than other nominations. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:15, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing against the subject, but the composition don't work with me -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice perspective, good light. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:03, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Nettipattam of elephant.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:46:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Head Mask of Elephant used in Kerala.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ranjithsiji - uploaded by Ranjithsiji - nominated by Ranjithsiji -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Object tilted, top side unsharp, tight crop, white parts blown. Sorry, wouldn’t even be a QI for me. Besides, the pic lacks wow because I can’t make anything of it. What kind of thing is this, and how is it used? Do elephants wear it? Would be nice to see it in use then. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. --Slaunger (talk) 07:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Object tilted and top a bit blurred -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:17, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Presqu'île du Rouens, Clermont-l'Hérault 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:14:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Presqu'île du Rouens, Clermont-l'Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Presqu'île du Rouens, Lac du Salagou, Hérault, France. All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Benh, thanks to you for this image. After your comment in this page you motivated me to return on the hill. What I made on saturday and I took this photo while waiting for the last hour of the sun to take a picture of the village (it is taken from the same point of view). Unfortunately, as you can see in this image there is some clouds and just after this shoot the sun was hidden, I am quits to go back up again....:) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but unfavorable light, washed out colors, distracting foreground. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:04, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done (for colors) New version with a bit more saturation and contrast. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info I was totaly wrong with the saturation, new version much less satured. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Malheureusement, il manque encore qq chose à mes yeux. La composition est assez simpliste, et le premier plan est en fait malvenu et n'apporte rien (contrairement à la nomination du canal ci-dessus, qui guide le regard). Ça pourrait être compensé par une jolie lumière, comme sur ta nomination précédente, mais ici, ça semble pris à 18h. À cette heure là, en été, la lumière n'est pas assez rasante et ne crée pas assez d'ombre pour donner une ambiance magique. Juste mon avis ! Quelques examples de photo pour illustrer mon propos : [1] ou [2]. Dommage qu'on ne voit pas plus de photos comme ça par ici... - Benh (talk) 21:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Anemone tomentosa 'Albadura' 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:10:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Beautiful swelling buds of Anemone tomentosa 'Albadura' created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request How about a tighter crop on left side to get the main object out of center? Would look more interesting. Altogether it’s a bit dull for me, maybe not the best light. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Tighter crop.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Since you're doing requests, would it be possible to photoshop the spiderweb thread out? They bother me a bit. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Cobweb removed.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:06, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very good composition, but light is too dull for me to support. --Slaunger (talk) 07:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Fleuren.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I really don't like the crop. If you see here an imitation of a face with two eyes - emphasize it by more lead room on the right (if possible) and a tighter crop on the left (and maybe on bottom too). If, on the other hand, it is just a plant with no reminiscence of other things - go for an upright crop that emphasizes the shape of the plant. Gidip (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If I go right off the picture is more or less square (as https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anemone_tomentosa_%27Albadura%27_02.JPG) because the space below is missing.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I really prefer that crop! Gidip (talk) 04:44, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:HMS Belfast with rainbow.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 22:05:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

HMS Belfast with rainbow.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dmitry A. Mottl - uploaded by Dmottl - nominated by Dmottl -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- on this day we've all been treated to gorgeous images of Thames side in London by helicopter Tour de France, very happy to support. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The colors seems not natural, it lacks a lot of blue, not only on the sky and the water. As you can see in this picture the blue parts of the bridge disappeared on your image. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 10:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice for me. Even thought I would have prefer a 16:9 crop --PierreSelim (talk) 11:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic. --Tupungato (talk) 16:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support What a lucky moment. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Natural History Museum, London (long exposure).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 20:02:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Main Hall of the Natural History Museum in London, United Kingdom
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dmitry A. Mottl - uploaded by Dmottl - nominated by Dmottl -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 20:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 20:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Striking, overall good quality, and UW angle provides a good feeling of how big it is. But the ghosts are really an issue here. There's just too many of them. - Benh (talk) 21:33, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral As with Benh. Personally I'm not scared of ghosts. If someone can persuade me that the rest of the world really shouldn't be afraid of them either, I'd be happy to support. Such an excellent image. High, high praise. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is a composition of 12 individual photos :) --Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because of perspective issues --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ghosts, perspective, blur at the sides --A.Savin 11:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Way to many issues with ghosts. --Slaunger (talk) 07:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Did you (or camera) combine multiple exposures?
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the top crop. Daniel Case (talk) 05:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Monday James Hammarby April 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 13:29:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monday James
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nigerian professional football defender and 2008 Beijing Olympic Silver medalist Monday James during game in Sweden. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I think the background is too distracting. I would have recommended a larger aperture to get better separation between subject and background, but you are already at f/2.8, so not much to do there. Otherwise nice. --Slaunger (talk) 07:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Pic de Vissou, Cabrières, Hérault 06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 12:38:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pic de Vissou, Cabrières, Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Pic de Vissou (480m), (Cabrières, Hérault, France), and two paragliders. This hill is known in the all region (and more) for the practice of paragliding and of ridge lift. All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 12:38, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 12:38, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The paragliders helps in making it a bit interesting, but besides that, the light is dull and the composition uninteresting. A minor technical aside: There appears to be a little color fringing on the paragliders and the vegetation in the transition to the blue sky. A little CA perhaps? --Slaunger (talk) 07:48, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    Maybe not perfect but I don't see any CAs and/or the purple fringing -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de los Remedios, Kotor, Bahía de Kotor, Montenegro, 2014-04-19, DD 29.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 11:05:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Roman Catholic Church of Our Lady of Remedy with the city of Kotor and the homonymous bay in the background, Montenegro. The church, located in the slope of the St. John Mountain and only reacheable on foot, dates from 1518. All by me, Poco2 11:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 11:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have a problem with the big white water part it looks blown out. For me it unbalances an otherwise very nice picture. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    That is the reflection of the clouds and according to LR5 there is no real overexposure here. Poco2 19:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Einstein2 (talk) 16:20, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Cypriot statue - Neues Museum.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 08:32:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cypriot statue - Neues Museum
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by MrPanyGoff -- MrPanyGoff 08:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MrPanyGoff 08:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 07:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good work balancing the sometimes jarring contrast between the natural and artificial light one encounters with these (Is that the actual background? Or is it something you swapped in? It just looks so clean). Daniel Case (talk) 04:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the words. As for the background, no, it is not the actual one.--MrPanyGoff 07:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2014 at 21:53:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Benh (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Little attempt while I'm still wandering around... I'm aware it's heavily processed, but I really wanted to enhance the dramatic mood. I also know my venerable 10-22 lens is soft on the corners, and that the three exposures don't overlap very nicely on moving objects (leafs, people). -- Benh (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perspective can be corrected without losing too much of the dramatic effect:
    Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS k201.jpg
    --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:39, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it but I do prefer the original. Shot from a low angle with a u.w. lens I like to see some perspective distortion. Over correcting, like the second picture, looks unnatural to me. --Uberprutser (talk) 10:58, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As always, it is a pleasure to see your photography, which has the wow, but the technical flaws you point out yourself plus a quite noisy sky is too much of an issue for me. I would also appreciate a more faithful representation wrt processing (but I respect that you prefer it heavily processed). For me more a photo targeted at a 500px audience. --Slaunger (talk) 15:58, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please don't correct the verticals, it really spoils it... my composition is on purpose : worm's view is dramatic, and the perspective lines lead your eye to the dramatic sky which enhances the effect even more. I was just trying to check how audience would react, as I'm on a "processing pictures" momentum. I'd like to point out that although it's heavily processed, the original picture already looked like that. HDR only help to brighten up the church (and again, I try to keep a natural look). I'll upload a pic for comparison if I think about it tonight (and I still have to fix the pont du gard picture as I promised). This is a recurring issue, but the noise (which is very small, but can be fixed) and overlapping issues won't be visible until scrutinized at 100%. Even large print would look nice. Similar FP candidates which were promoted before were all downsampled to 2mpix. - Benh (talk) 10:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • "Please don’t"? If you do not want your work to be edited and re-published by others, why do you publish it under a free license which explicitly allows to do so? I did not overwrite any of your work, I just issued an alternative. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 14:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
      • You're right. My comment was more in an FPC context and "please don't alter the nomination" would be a better statement. This is not en:FPC where you can apply this kind of fix, because it's for the sake of encyclopeadic value. If this photo is to be promoted, I would like it to be because people like it the way I meant it. I think commons FPC is more a ground for that. Sorry for any misunderstanding (I do realise my english doesn't help). - Benh (talk) 15:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
        • \\// and no hard feelings :-) --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Kreuzschnabel, the free licence requires that you "must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation." :-) -- Colin (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
            • OK, if the Original Author’s honor or reputation is affected by my humble suggestion, I withdraw it of course. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
            • Relieved that my reputation is safe now ;-) At least I'd have learnt something about the license. - Benh (talk) 20:56, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Are you going for something that might grace the cover of a gothic novel? If so, it isn't nearly dramatic enough. Possibly a strong crop on just the church would help. The trees, wall, path and colour all have a taming effect. The sky isn't particularly foreboding. I agree completely with Benh on the vertical "correction". This isn't an architectural shot and one simply can't correct verticals on a picture taken this close without introducing a ridiculous stretching effect. In terms of sharpness/megapixels, I have recently discovered the wiki software lets you create links to images at any size. So one could suggest that the image be "reviewed for sharpness" at a given size, while still uploading/nominating a larger image if desired. For example, it looks sharp at 50% reduction (2.5MP). At 66% reduction (4.4MP) it looks ok. While those sizes would be underwhelming for an architectural nomination, they might be sufficient for an image with enough wow. -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Agree with everything. Review size should be something automated, but this was discussed a lot already. You may be right for the framing affecting the effect. I've played a little with recroping and the results are interesting. Will think about it (but the picture doesn't seem to attract much interest anyways, so will be for myself :) ). - Benh (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment To show how much the HDR processing differs from the single exposure shot : File:Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS single exposure.jpg. It's already quite underexposed on purpose. - Benh (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment After to have see the single exposure shot, I think the HDR kill the dramatic effect in part because it's maybe a bit overdone -- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment One support other than from the nominator. But not seeing any chance to get featured. Close? Jee 09:03, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Borgo a Mozzano Ponte della Maddalena.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2014 at 10:44:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ponte della Maddalena, also called Ponte del Diavolo, Borgo a Mozzano, Tuscany, Italy.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Myrabella -- Myrabella (talk) 10:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
    As this image of a medieval bridge in Tuscany (the Ponte della Maddalena in Borgo a Mozzano) had some success at the May Photo challenge, I give it a try here.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Myrabella (talk) 10:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My humble opinion: very good composition, very nice light, excellent subject with a lot of value(s). (Maybe) I've removed the electric wires in the sky by cloning out, and (maybe) a little over exposition on the white parts of the second arch (loss of details). Anyway, a FP for me.--Jebulon (talk) 15:32, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp, and Not enough wow because the entire bridge from end to end should have been included in the photo. Sorry. --Graphium 03:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Following Jebulon's advice, I have removed the electrical wires in the sky and treated the brightest areas; I have also sharpened the image a bit. --Myrabella (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tight crop IMO.--Claus (talk) 07:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Claus. That was my first impression on seeing this picture. Can we see a different crop? --Baykedevries (talk) 17:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info From this bank of the river, the view on the right side is obstructed by a parapet and alas, I did not have an ultra wide angle lens yet (you can see the situation in that former FPC). So I did my best to get a composition that emphasizes the harmony of the water reflections in spite of this difficulty. However, from that bank, other compositions are possible, without an UW lens (example). I am so sorry that my photo doesn't manage to charm you, thanks for the reviews anyway :) --Myrabella (talk) 10:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:BEP-GIRSCH-Declaration of Independence (Trumbull).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 22:50:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Engraving based on Trumbull's Declaration of Independence
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bureau of Engraving and Printing - uploaded, restored, and nominated by -- Godot13 (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Bureau of Engraving and Printing engraved vignette of John Trumbull’s painting Declaration of Independence (c. 1818). Engraving by Frederick Girsch. This vignette has been featured on U.S. currency beyond the $2 bill. It was the reverse of the $100 National Bank Note from roughly the 1860s to 1880s. The vignette was also on Certificates of Indebtedness in the early to mid 1900s.--Godot13 (talk) 23:05, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Godot13 (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High value, and of course very good timing (Happy birthday USA !). I'ved cleaned out more spots, but a very good and clear restoration, IMO. --Jebulon (talk) 15:37, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:22, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. Very impressive. --Slaunger (talk) 20:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Loads of wow. Very impressive. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 11:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you give some details of the restoration technique and how was it photographed/scanned? And what did you use as the source? I think all this should be specified in the file. Gidip (talk) 18:55, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Added to the image file.-Godot13 (talk) 20:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Iziko Koekoe resistance beacon.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 12:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An example of some of the beacons that marked key sites in territory at the Cape claimed by the Dutch. Both are made of Robben Island slate and bear the coat-of-arms of the Netherlands (a lion with seven arrows representing the seven Dutch provinces). This beacon was found on the farm Ongegundefontein on the southern side of Olifants River mouth, near present-day Papendorp, and was donated to the South African Museum in 1893.
Pictogram voting question.svg Question Savin, what about this image would have made this image featurable and of quality?
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject... but uneven lighting and unsharp. --Cayambe (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The lighting is a one source light from above, thus the uneven nature of its look. Quality? Its 20mp image. Which part of the image lacks sharpness? In the museum with their limited light sources and the beacon secured in a glass cage, this happens to be the closest to best I could achieve with my camera.
      • The lighting would not really be a problem for me. Uneven lighting in this case enhances the readability. The image *is* unsharp, however. View the image at full resolution to see. Kleuske (talk) 08:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Hans Gadamer.png[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 16:30:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Copyleft portrait of german XX Century philosofer Hans-Georg Hadamer, developer of philosophical hermeneutics, who argued that a artwork's meaning is not reducible to the author's intentions, but is dependent on the context of interpretation.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Oto Vega Ponce - uploaded by Oto Vega Ponce - nominated by Dvdgmz -- Dvdgmz (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Remarkable and impressive portrait of the German philosopher. Similarity well achieved, quality of drawing, encyclopedic approach. - Dvdgmz (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is a good and valuable portrait. The stains on the paper are rather ugly though and I think an attempt should be made to make a digital restoration prior to considering nomination for FPC, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 19:35, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
    • It isn't a deteriorated paper. The author included digitally this background to give texture to the portrait.--Dvdgmz (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

File:01 United States Air Force, Dornier Do-328-110, Larnaca, Cyprus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 10:50:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dornier C-146A Wolfhound (version of Do-328), registration 10-3077. Operating for 524th Special Operations Squadron with 27th Special Operations Wing of United States Air Force.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tupungato - uploaded by Tupungato - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tupungato (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Technically well done but lacks wow to me. Wing aligning with elevator looks a bit puzzling. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:23, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --.AVIA Airplane silhouette.svg Flag of Bavaria (lozengy).svg Bavaria 12:41, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Times Square Time-Lapse Style.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 00:24:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Times Square time lapse
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dan DeChiaro - uploaded by Mono - nominated by Mono -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ordinarily I dislike these artsier-type effects pictures for their tendency to sacrifice encyclopedic value regardless of their quality. But this is an exception that sort of proves the rule: how else do you capture the very Blade Runner-esque qualities of contemporary Times Square, its bustle and color, without them? It conveys the reality of the place more effectively, I think, than even a video would. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 08:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Isn't this a DW of the Inception poster? Is this covered by FOP? Regards, Yann (talk) 12:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
    No, it is considered DM in the same way that it's fine to take a picture of a bunch of skycrapers in France. --King of ♠ 17:22, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not my taste, and not perfect technically. In this case, I don't know where is the border between "artistic choice" and "strong technical flaws". + we have some FoP issues here, IMO (but I'm not a specialist of US copyright laws).--Jebulon (talk) 15:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow and bad time lapse resulting in all the motion blur. --Graphium 15:29, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposes.- -Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dislike the processing and not convinced by the framing either. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:11, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is not that great IMO and the colours are a bit oversaturated. I don't mind the ghost. --PierreSelim (talk) 06:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Big Sur Shoreline.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 00:20:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Big Sur Shoreline
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Vadim Kurland - uploaded by Mono - nominated by Mono -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ranjithsiji (talk) 07:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. --Graphium 15:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose what is the main: the coast or the plants??? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose—per Alchemist—the bright blue patch of sea is distracting—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. And we need a proper identification (even if the plants are not the main subject...)--Jebulon (talk) 15:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Me, I like it (colors, composition, not bad quality) and I can support with an identification of the plants in focus. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, poor composition. Gidip (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Eucera cinnamomea male 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 17:07:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eucera cinnamomea, male


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


Candidati per la rimozione dalla vetrina[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Veluwse Papiermolen in het Openluchtmuseum van Arnhem.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 22:55:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dutch papermill from 1654 on display in the Arnhem open air museum.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uberprutser - uploaded by Uberprutser - nominated by [[User:Uberprutser}|]] -- Uberprutser (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uberprutser (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Some time ago I tried to get this version featured but unfortunately a lot of people disliked the cut of reflection. So is this one better? --Uberprutser (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Paris Canal St-Martin écluses Récollets 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 18:52:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Canal St-Martin, Paris.

File:Scharfer Korkstacheling Hydnellum peckii jung.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 17:33:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark and hardly any subject isolation. --Uberprutser (talk) 18:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Alise-Sainte-Reine statue Vercingetorix par Millet large.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 12:03:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Chateau Luynes.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 11:57:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Lilium bulbiferum var. bulbiferum 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 10:19:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fire lily (Lilium bulbiferum var. bulbiferum)

File:VIS - Vienna Independent Shorts 2014 Stadtkino Künstlerhaus Jennifer Reeder.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 09:20:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Filmmaker Jennifer Reeder at film festival Vienna Independent Shorts 2014
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Tsui -- Tsui (talk) 09:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tsui (talk) 09:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it seems a bit dark at low resolution, but very nice at full, I like very much the DoF and the focus point -- Christian Ferrer Talk 10:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Sukhoi SuperJet 100 (5114478300).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 04:53:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 10.664 MP, 2.6 MB → can't see anything wrong with that? --El Grafo (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 17:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic to see others seeing SuperJet International's photos are featured quality. Can only support this too. russavia (talk) 17:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Mary, Queen of Scots after Nicholas Hilliard.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2014 at 22:48:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Photo, painting of Mary, Queen of Scots

talk) 22:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I uploaded Hilliards's miniature of Queen Elizabeth I to Commons myself earlier this year. There seems to me to be a couple of issues here: 1 this is a Coetzee bequest image. I'm not sure it's best diplomatic we nominate these images as "Featured" right now 2 are we really going to list every high resolution image of a work of art as "Featured"? They must now run into their tens of thousands if we take account of Google Art Project and galleries such as NGA Washington, Rijksmuseum, and the Prado, to name but just three that come to mind that make available high resolution images, and then both the major auctioneers and others, as well as a host of smaller institutions who take no special steps against stitching their high resolution tiles. I'm inclined to think we should up the bar for art works to "ultra high resolution", such as this one, a van Gogh Sunflowers I recently nominated at Wikipedia Featured Pictures. One interesting thing about Google Art Project images is that fine as they are, they rarely approach the best available from their source museums. This is so for the van Gogh I nominated. That one comes from the Van Gogh Museum as you can readily check by going to the appropriate museum page. It's much superior to the Google Art project version. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 23:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:01 Antequera, Andalusia, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2014 at 16:30:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Royal Collegiate Church of Santa María la Mayor in Antequera, Andalusia, Spain with view of Antequera town on the right.
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Royal Collegiate Church of Santa María la Mayor in Antequera, Andalusia, Spain with view of Antequera town on the right, created by Tupungato - uploaded by Tupungato - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC) (renomination after I accidentally added three active nominations)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tupungato (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine image. No boring straight form the front shot. Although some of the white buildings seem to be a bit overexposed. But thats fine since human eyes probably would have a hard time seeing any details under similar lighting conditions. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:28, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Budapest, St. Stephen's Basilica C12.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2014 at 02:18:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Stephen's Basilica in Budapest, Hungary
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by CLI - nominated by Nikhil -- Nikhil (talk) 02:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 02:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent (BTW, this is marked with a tag suggesting it was taken in the U.S. Perhaps that could be corrected). Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In recent times we had a lot of nominations of church windows (party techincally at a very high level). My everlasting problem with such nominations is, that the personal contribution of the photographer is difficult to recognize in that case. From a technical perspective the photo here is imho only average. It looks rather soft and on the left side there are bright border areas which are distracting. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Agreed with Tuxyso, and I’d like the sides to be vertical (if they are in reality as I suppose). --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Splendid image. Stained glass an accepted 2-D category on Commons. Can't follow "personal contribution". Of course if the editor knows it's not a faithful representation, that's another matter. No reason to suppose that is so here. Straight enough for me. Perfectly straight probably too straight. All these fantastically straight images ultimately tedious IMHO. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:20, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent photo of a beautiful object. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:06, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Kolonáda na Rajstně (Reistenkolonnade) - by Pudelek.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 22:21:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reistna colonnade, Valtice (Feldsberg), Czech Republic

File:Sarah Vaughan - William P. Gottlieb - No. 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 21:02:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sarah Vaughan
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William P. Gottlieb - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Last nomination got six out of the seven supports needed for a quorum. As it is featured on four different Wikipedias, I suspect it's suited for Commons as well, despite the minor flaws of a candid photograph. And it's taken by a notable photographer, so that's a plus. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yes, and a very striking portrait. Lovely. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The flying saucer that is trying to kidnap her is rather distracting. Would editing that out affect EV? Saffron Blaze (talk) 01:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I would support editing it out providing it's a documented separate file linked to the original. I'm not sure it can be within the guidelines. And besides maybe she was really being 'lifted'... It is pretty intrusive I have to admit. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
It's something I'd like to remove, but which would be misleading to. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:5 boerenzwaluwen op een rijtje.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 20:32:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

5 young barn swallows sitting in a nest that was build in a birdwatchers shed.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by baykedevries - uploaded by baykedevries - nominated by baykedevries -- Baykedevries (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Baykedevries (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very "lucky" moment regarding the arrangement of the chicks and good composition. I do not like the frontal flash light and the background though, sorry. Still a nice shot though. --Slaunger (talk) 21:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree, the flash light is a bit harsh. But it was very dark in the shed, the camera had a hard time focusing, and the build in flash was all I had. Maybe I should get one of those softboxes that fit over the build in flash, that shouldn't take up much room in my small camera bag. Next nesting season I will be prepared :) --Baykedevries (talk) 13:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Good idea! For a related FP pose check this gem, especially the detail about the fifth friend gone missing:-) --Slaunger (talk) 14:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Monumento a la Libertad, Riga, Letonia, 2012-08-07, DD 13.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 19:50:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Freedom Monument is a memorial honouring soldiers killed during the Latvian War of Independence (1918–1920) located in Riga, capital of Latvia. The 42m high monument is considered an important symbol of the freedom, independence, and sovereignty of Latvia. It was unveiled in 1935 and is made of granite, travertine and copper.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Freedom Monument is a memorial honouring soldiers killed during the Latvian War of Independence (1918–1920) located in Riga, capital of Latvia. The 42m high monument is considered an important symbol of the freedom, independence, and sovereignty of Latvia. It was unveiled in 1935 and is made of granite, travertine and copper. This is a re-nomination (see first one here) after having addressed the mentioned issues back then. All by me, Poco2 19:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a fine image and I'm happy to support editors who make the effort to upload their images. I do get all that stuff about saturation and frankly I don't give give a damn. And that sky is gorgeous. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 00:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment How about FoP in this case? Latvia is not the "FoPest" place on Earth :) --Kikos (talk) 04:49, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
    We are lucky in this case. Kārlis Zāle, the author of the work, died in 1942, and therefore more than 70 years ago (see section 36 of the latvian copyright law) Poco2 08:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Toris inari 7.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 11:57:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Pundit - I got absolutely fascinated by this shrine complex in Fushimi Inari Torii in Kyoto. What do you think? -- Pundit (talk) 11:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nom/creator. Pundit (talk) 12:00, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good solution to what is evidently quite a difficult composition judging from the category. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm supporting everything orange today.

Good luck. I'll be watching myself. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 17:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice comp, but the green leaves outside look heavily and unnaturally oversaturated to me. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Massively oversaturated (take a look on the histrogram of the red chanel), perspective issues. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
So is Van Gogh's Sunflowers. What exactly is the perspective issue here? It's 18mm on a f3.5 lens, pretty standard. Looks fine to me. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:59, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Take a look at the bottom of the columns at the left side - they look rather distorted. The columns are not fully straight in real but also not that converging as the photo implies (take a look on other photos in the same catgegory). But the main reason for my oppose is the massively blown red channel not the perspective. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Colors are definitely in vivid mode and may be overdone, I'm curious though what could I have possibly do better next time to make the columns more straight? Do you think that the lenses distorted the actual view? Pundit (talk) 09:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Have you used a tripod in combination with a leveler? Have you done any perspective corrections on the computer or is the photo "out of the cam"? --Tuxyso (talk) 11:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I have Nikon Capture NX2 and it's default Distortion control of 10% has a barely noticeable effect on the image. The saturation isn't "massive". It's comfortably within 10% in NX2 I would say and a glance at the category confirms the image is not deceiving the viewer, the FP criterion. There's no such thing as the "right" image in photography (lesson 1) and I'm worried that criticism at this level might be alienating ordinary contributors with realtively unsophisticated equipment or resources. It's essentially elitist in my view, and while it has it may have place amongst established contributors of images on Commons, I do think we should be wary of discouraging new contributors. The image looks great. End of. And my comment about composition is quite right, as you can readily confirm looking through the category. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 14:06, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
There’s no such thing as "the image looks great" (lesson 2), it just may look great for you. Please allow others to have entirely different views and opinions. And de gustibus non est disputandum. For instance, I don’t approve of candy colours at all. My nomination of Pen-y-ghent from the east looks great too for me, but nobody seems to like it. So what? --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 14:21, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Called "wow" here (lesson 3, there really is such a thing). You're not raising issues of taste but technical matters as if they preclude nomination prima facie . And of your two nominations of Pen-y-ghent I supported the first but not the second from the east, which is quite ordinary lacking all wow. What I didn't do was post an "oppose" saying it was nothing special in my own view and opinion to which I'm surely entitled. I would only do that, and probably as a comment, if I felt the image was receiving inordinate praise. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 17:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
No perspective corrections or tripod, I leaned the camera on one of the poles of stability. Pundit (talk) 11:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Colors are over saturated and when you tilt the lens you will gets perspective distortion. When it looks good, what's the problem? Seems like that perspective is the new noise to complain about. --Baykedevries (talk) 13:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. --Baykedevries (talk) 13:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Despite the very short description? :-P --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 14:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
You're right. I apologize for my rant and inconsistencies. I'll try to do better. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strong oversaturation, perspective distortion, CA. --Kadellar (talk) 10:56, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Viborg Kraftvarmeværk NW view 2014-07-06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 23:03:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Viborg Power Station, Denmark
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 23:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 23:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:23, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Very uninteresting foreground, sky and lighting. Lacks wow.Fotoriety (talk) 00:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
    • @Fotoriety: Thanks for the review. Regarding the foregound and surroundings in general I left some space around to allow the building to "breathe". For me the featureless foreground helps the main subject to stand out. Is it correct that you think it should have been cropped tighter? I am sorry you do not like the lightning. I really like it myself and how the sky and coads are partially reflected in the curved ceramic shields surrounding the building. Anyway, there are so many possibilities for taking photos of this building regarding the vantage point, time of day and weather conditions. It is almost like a chameleon to me. If you look at the other photos in Viborg power plant, are there any elements in the framing, light vantage point in some of the other shots which are worthwhile to explore further in your opinion? I live close by, so it is easy to take new shots at it. Or, are you just non-wowed by this building in general? --Slaunger (talk) 06:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
      • @Slaunger: It's hard to say how i would like this photo to be taken because i don't know the dynamics of the environment. However, i agree that a tighter crop would help; as would perhaps lighting such as the bright glow from a sunset also being reflected in the facade. Perhaps also if the photo could be taken at a higher level to give greater depth, that may improve the composition. However, i realise it's a power plant, so room for manoeuvre may be limited. Hope that helped.Fotoriety (talk) 01:07, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent photo! --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Pen-y-ghent from South.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 13:25:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pen-y-ghent as seen from the south
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Pennine Way and Pen-y-ghent from South – c/u/n by Kreuzschnabel -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sorry but what is Pen-y-ghent? Could you please add a decent description? I find a good description very important when making the decision if I find a picture feature worthy. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment On a photograph of a mountain, I think it’s decent enough to give the mountain’s name along with the geocoding and point of view. What else do you expect? For further information just look up its name on Wikipedia. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:35, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was about to say the same. A wikilink in the nom or information page is always handy but my browser has a search box. There's a geocode link too. I'd much rather nominators explained why they think the image is among our finest, which is something I can't find out for myself with a click. -- Colin (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sure I can do a search, but I'm not going to. If you think a picture is feature worthy you can take the time to add a decent description. For me a good description is important and At some point I'm going to ignore pictures without. I'm making a point here. Don't take it personally :) But to many pictures are missing descriptions --Baykedevries (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since I haven’t understood your point yet, let me ask once again: What do you expect? Or maybe point out some of the active nominations that do have descriptions after your liking (most don’t have any at all, just "c/u/n by $NAME", without you complaining, AFAIS). I really don’t know what you mean. The picture shows the Pennine Way climbing a mountain named Pen-y-ghent from its southern side. That’s what my description says, so IMHO it’s a proper description of the photograph. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Baykedevries that often file descriptions (on the file page - it is those that matters) are inadequate as important information is often missing regarding the particular image, but this is not one of those cases. The file page is adequately categorized to e.g. Pen-y-ghent and Pennine Way and if you follow those links, there are interwiki links to articles in several different languages (after I have added them, that is, as they were initially missing). If the nominator were to copy that information to the file page (in how many languages?), it would just be maintenance of redundant information. It would contaminate, not add value. I do think though that it is generally a good idea if nominators check that main categories are adequately linked to wikipedia articles, such that the relevant information can be found fast and efficient. The interwiki links are often missing on Commons categories. --Slaunger (talk) 23:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:54, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a pretty picture of good quality, but it does not stand out for me as extraordinary. Background is a little soft in focus. --Slaunger (talk) 07:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:26, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pleasant composition and a reasonable QI (could be sharper). The 4:3 ratio isn't generally good for landscape IMO and it is too ordinary a result to be featurable. -- Colin (talk) 07:09, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:James Webb Primary Mirror.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 07:25:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"NASA engineer Ernie Wright looks on as the first six flight ready James Webb Space Telescope's primary mirror segments are (prepared) to begin final cryogenic testing at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center."
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA/MSFC/David Higginbotham - uploaded by Originalwana - nominated by Pine -- Pine 07:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pine 07:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fine composition but way too noisy. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Specially the scientist is noisy (it must be a very dark room and it's backlighted) but it has lots of wow and a great composition and EV. --Kadellar (talk) 09:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great image of a interesting subject. The noise doesn't bother me. For a second I thought the guy was standing in front of a giant VCR! --Baykedevries (talk) 17:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 01:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Composition mitigates minor technical flaws. --Slaunger (talk) 07:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 13:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:39, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Tilted, just a little bit but still needs to be fixed. Gidip (talk) 09:59, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Ruhrschleuse Mülheim 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 07:24:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Watergate at the river Ruhr in Mülheim
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:33, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI, but fail to see any special wow, lighting is not particularly interesting, the gate on approx. 1/2 of the frame is rather distracting than any special, the close lantern masts do not do the composition good either. --A.Savin 11:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose An above average picture, but not quite FP level. I agree completely with the comments by A Savin. --Slaunger (talk) 07:29, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Really pity that the photo does not gain support up to now. @ A.Savin and Slaunger: IMHO the composition with its symmetry and repeated elements is good enough for FP (that was the reason for the nomination) but surely I respect your comment. Another reason for nomination was that the motive is somehow different than other nominations. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:15, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing against the subject, but the composition don't work with me -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice perspective, good light. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:03, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Nettipattam of elephant.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:46:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Head Mask of Elephant used in Kerala.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ranjithsiji - uploaded by Ranjithsiji - nominated by Ranjithsiji -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Object tilted, top side unsharp, tight crop, white parts blown. Sorry, wouldn’t even be a QI for me. Besides, the pic lacks wow because I can’t make anything of it. What kind of thing is this, and how is it used? Do elephants wear it? Would be nice to see it in use then. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. --Slaunger (talk) 07:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Object tilted and top a bit blurred -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:17, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Presqu'île du Rouens, Clermont-l'Hérault 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:14:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Presqu'île du Rouens, Clermont-l'Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Presqu'île du Rouens, Lac du Salagou, Hérault, France. All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Benh, thanks to you for this image. After your comment in this page you motivated me to return on the hill. What I made on saturday and I took this photo while waiting for the last hour of the sun to take a picture of the village (it is taken from the same point of view). Unfortunately, as you can see in this image there is some clouds and just after this shoot the sun was hidden, I am quits to go back up again....:) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but unfavorable light, washed out colors, distracting foreground. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:04, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done (for colors) New version with a bit more saturation and contrast. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info I was totaly wrong with the saturation, new version much less satured. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Malheureusement, il manque encore qq chose à mes yeux. La composition est assez simpliste, et le premier plan est en fait malvenu et n'apporte rien (contrairement à la nomination du canal ci-dessus, qui guide le regard). Ça pourrait être compensé par une jolie lumière, comme sur ta nomination précédente, mais ici, ça semble pris à 18h. À cette heure là, en été, la lumière n'est pas assez rasante et ne crée pas assez d'ombre pour donner une ambiance magique. Juste mon avis ! Quelques examples de photo pour illustrer mon propos : [3] ou [4]. Dommage qu'on ne voit pas plus de photos comme ça par ici... - Benh (talk) 21:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Anemone tomentosa 'Albadura' 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:10:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Beautiful swelling buds of Anemone tomentosa 'Albadura' created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request How about a tighter crop on left side to get the main object out of center? Would look more interesting. Altogether it’s a bit dull for me, maybe not the best light. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Tighter crop.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Since you're doing requests, would it be possible to photoshop the spiderweb thread out? They bother me a bit. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Cobweb removed.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:06, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very good composition, but light is too dull for me to support. --Slaunger (talk) 07:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Fleuren.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I really don't like the crop. If you see here an imitation of a face with two eyes - emphasize it by more lead room on the right (if possible) and a tighter crop on the left (and maybe on bottom too). If, on the other hand, it is just a plant with no reminiscence of other things - go for an upright crop that emphasizes the shape of the plant. Gidip (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If I go right off the picture is more or less square (as https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anemone_tomentosa_%27Albadura%27_02.JPG) because the space below is missing.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I really prefer that crop! Gidip (talk) 04:44, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:HMS Belfast with rainbow.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 22:05:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

HMS Belfast with rainbow.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dmitry A. Mottl - uploaded by Dmottl - nominated by Dmottl -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- on this day we've all been treated to gorgeous images of Thames side in London by helicopter Tour de France, very happy to support. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The colors seems not natural, it lacks a lot of blue, not only on the sky and the water. As you can see in this picture the blue parts of the bridge disappeared on your image. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 10:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice for me. Even thought I would have prefer a 16:9 crop --PierreSelim (talk) 11:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic. --Tupungato (talk) 16:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support What a lucky moment. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Natural History Museum, London (long exposure).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 20:02:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Main Hall of the Natural History Museum in London, United Kingdom
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dmitry A. Mottl - uploaded by Dmottl - nominated by Dmottl -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 20:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 20:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Striking, overall good quality, and UW angle provides a good feeling of how big it is. But the ghosts are really an issue here. There's just too many of them. - Benh (talk) 21:33, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral As with Benh. Personally I'm not scared of ghosts. If someone can persuade me that the rest of the world really shouldn't be afraid of them either, I'd be happy to support. Such an excellent image. High, high praise. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is a composition of 12 individual photos :) --Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because of perspective issues --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ghosts, perspective, blur at the sides --A.Savin 11:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Way to many issues with ghosts. --Slaunger (talk) 07:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Did you (or camera) combine multiple exposures?
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the top crop. Daniel Case (talk) 05:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Monday James Hammarby April 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 13:29:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monday James
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nigerian professional football defender and 2008 Beijing Olympic Silver medalist Monday James during game in Sweden. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I think the background is too distracting. I would have recommended a larger aperture to get better separation between subject and background, but you are already at f/2.8, so not much to do there. Otherwise nice. --Slaunger (talk) 07:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Pic de Vissou, Cabrières, Hérault 06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 12:38:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pic de Vissou, Cabrières, Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Pic de Vissou (480m), (Cabrières, Hérault, France), and two paragliders. This hill is known in the all region (and more) for the practice of paragliding and of ridge lift. All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 12:38, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 12:38, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The paragliders helps in making it a bit interesting, but besides that, the light is dull and the composition uninteresting. A minor technical aside: There appears to be a little color fringing on the paragliders and the vegetation in the transition to the blue sky. A little CA perhaps? --Slaunger (talk) 07:48, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    Maybe not perfect but I don't see any CAs and/or the purple fringing -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de los Remedios, Kotor, Bahía de Kotor, Montenegro, 2014-04-19, DD 29.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 11:05:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Roman Catholic Church of Our Lady of Remedy with the city of Kotor and the homonymous bay in the background, Montenegro. The church, located in the slope of the St. John Mountain and only reacheable on foot, dates from 1518. All by me, Poco2 11:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 11:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have a problem with the big white water part it looks blown out. For me it unbalances an otherwise very nice picture. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    That is the reflection of the clouds and according to LR5 there is no real overexposure here. Poco2 19:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Einstein2 (talk) 16:20, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Cypriot statue - Neues Museum.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 08:32:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cypriot statue - Neues Museum
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by MrPanyGoff -- MrPanyGoff 08:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MrPanyGoff 08:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 07:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good work balancing the sometimes jarring contrast between the natural and artificial light one encounters with these (Is that the actual background? Or is it something you swapped in? It just looks so clean). Daniel Case (talk) 04:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the words. As for the background, no, it is not the actual one.--MrPanyGoff 07:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2014 at 21:53:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Benh (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Little attempt while I'm still wandering around... I'm aware it's heavily processed, but I really wanted to enhance the dramatic mood. I also know my venerable 10-22 lens is soft on the corners, and that the three exposures don't overlap very nicely on moving objects (leafs, people). -- Benh (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perspective can be corrected without losing too much of the dramatic effect:
    Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS k201.jpg
    --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:39, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it but I do prefer the original. Shot from a low angle with a u.w. lens I like to see some perspective distortion. Over correcting, like the second picture, looks unnatural to me. --Uberprutser (talk) 10:58, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As always, it is a pleasure to see your photography, which has the wow, but the technical flaws you point out yourself plus a quite noisy sky is too much of an issue for me. I would also appreciate a more faithful representation wrt processing (but I respect that you prefer it heavily processed). For me more a photo targeted at a 500px audience. --Slaunger (talk) 15:58, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please don't correct the verticals, it really spoils it... my composition is on purpose : worm's view is dramatic, and the perspective lines lead your eye to the dramatic sky which enhances the effect even more. I was just trying to check how audience would react, as I'm on a "processing pictures" momentum. I'd like to point out that although it's heavily processed, the original picture already looked like that. HDR only help to brighten up the church (and again, I try to keep a natural look). I'll upload a pic for comparison if I think about it tonight (and I still have to fix the pont du gard picture as I promised). This is a recurring issue, but the noise (which is very small, but can be fixed) and overlapping issues won't be visible until scrutinized at 100%. Even large print would look nice. Similar FP candidates which were promoted before were all downsampled to 2mpix. - Benh (talk) 10:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • "Please don’t"? If you do not want your work to be edited and re-published by others, why do you publish it under a free license which explicitly allows to do so? I did not overwrite any of your work, I just issued an alternative. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 14:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
      • You're right. My comment was more in an FPC context and "please don't alter the nomination" would be a better statement. This is not en:FPC where you can apply this kind of fix, because it's for the sake of encyclopeadic value. If this photo is to be promoted, I would like it to be because people like it the way I meant it. I think commons FPC is more a ground for that. Sorry for any misunderstanding (I do realise my english doesn't help). - Benh (talk) 15:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
        • \\// and no hard feelings :-) --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Kreuzschnabel, the free licence requires that you "must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation." :-) -- Colin (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
            • OK, if the Original Author’s honor or reputation is affected by my humble suggestion, I withdraw it of course. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
            • Relieved that my reputation is safe now ;-) At least I'd have learnt something about the license. - Benh (talk) 20:56, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Are you going for something that might grace the cover of a gothic novel? If so, it isn't nearly dramatic enough. Possibly a strong crop on just the church would help. The trees, wall, path and colour all have a taming effect. The sky isn't particularly foreboding. I agree completely with Benh on the vertical "correction". This isn't an architectural shot and one simply can't correct verticals on a picture taken this close without introducing a ridiculous stretching effect. In terms of sharpness/megapixels, I have recently discovered the wiki software lets you create links to images at any size. So one could suggest that the image be "reviewed for sharpness" at a given size, while still uploading/nominating a larger image if desired. For example, it looks sharp at 50% reduction (2.5MP). At 66% reduction (4.4MP) it looks ok. While those sizes would be underwhelming for an architectural nomination, they might be sufficient for an image with enough wow. -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Agree with everything. Review size should be something automated, but this was discussed a lot already. You may be right for the framing affecting the effect. I've played a little with recroping and the results are interesting. Will think about it (but the picture doesn't seem to attract much interest anyways, so will be for myself :) ). - Benh (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment To show how much the HDR processing differs from the single exposure shot : File:Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS single exposure.jpg. It's already quite underexposed on purpose. - Benh (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment After to have see the single exposure shot, I think the HDR kill the dramatic effect in part because it's maybe a bit overdone -- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment One support other than from the nominator. But not seeing any chance to get featured. Close? Jee 09:03, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Borgo a Mozzano Ponte della Maddalena.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2014 at 10:44:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ponte della Maddalena, also called Ponte del Diavolo, Borgo a Mozzano, Tuscany, Italy.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Myrabella -- Myrabella (talk) 10:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
    As this image of a medieval bridge in Tuscany (the Ponte della Maddalena in Borgo a Mozzano) had some success at the May Photo challenge, I give it a try here.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Myrabella (talk) 10:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My humble opinion: very good composition, very nice light, excellent subject with a lot of value(s). (Maybe) I've removed the electric wires in the sky by cloning out, and (maybe) a little over exposition on the white parts of the second arch (loss of details). Anyway, a FP for me.--Jebulon (talk) 15:32, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp, and Not enough wow because the entire bridge from end to end should have been included in the photo. Sorry. --Graphium 03:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Following Jebulon's advice, I have removed the electrical wires in the sky and treated the brightest areas; I have also sharpened the image a bit. --Myrabella (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tight crop IMO.--Claus (talk) 07:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Claus. That was my first impression on seeing this picture. Can we see a different crop? --Baykedevries (talk) 17:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info From this bank of the river, the view on the right side is obstructed by a parapet and alas, I did not have an ultra wide angle lens yet (you can see the situation in that former FPC). So I did my best to get a composition that emphasizes the harmony of the water reflections in spite of this difficulty. However, from that bank, other compositions are possible, without an UW lens (example). I am so sorry that my photo doesn't manage to charm you, thanks for the reviews anyway :) --Myrabella (talk) 10:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:BEP-GIRSCH-Declaration of Independence (Trumbull).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 22:50:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Engraving based on Trumbull's Declaration of Independence
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bureau of Engraving and Printing - uploaded, restored, and nominated by -- Godot13 (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Bureau of Engraving and Printing engraved vignette of John Trumbull’s painting Declaration of Independence (c. 1818). Engraving by Frederick Girsch. This vignette has been featured on U.S. currency beyond the $2 bill. It was the reverse of the $100 National Bank Note from roughly the 1860s to 1880s. The vignette was also on Certificates of Indebtedness in the early to mid 1900s.--Godot13 (talk) 23:05, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Godot13 (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High value, and of course very good timing (Happy birthday USA !). I'ved cleaned out more spots, but a very good and clear restoration, IMO. --Jebulon (talk) 15:37, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:22, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. Very impressive. --Slaunger (talk) 20:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Loads of wow. Very impressive. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 11:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you give some details of the restoration technique and how was it photographed/scanned? And what did you use as the source? I think all this should be specified in the file. Gidip (talk) 18:55, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Added to the image file.-Godot13 (talk) 20:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Iziko Koekoe resistance beacon.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 12:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An example of some of the beacons that marked key sites in territory at the Cape claimed by the Dutch. Both are made of Robben Island slate and bear the coat-of-arms of the Netherlands (a lion with seven arrows representing the seven Dutch provinces). This beacon was found on the farm Ongegundefontein on the southern side of Olifants River mouth, near present-day Papendorp, and was donated to the South African Museum in 1893.
Pictogram voting question.svg Question Savin, what about this image would have made this image featurable and of quality?
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject... but uneven lighting and unsharp. --Cayambe (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The lighting is a one source light from above, thus the uneven nature of its look. Quality? Its 20mp image. Which part of the image lacks sharpness? In the museum with their limited light sources and the beacon secured in a glass cage, this happens to be the closest to best I could achieve with my camera.
      • The lighting would not really be a problem for me. Uneven lighting in this case enhances the readability. The image *is* unsharp, however. View the image at full resolution to see. Kleuske (talk) 08:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Hans Gadamer.png[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 16:30:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Copyleft portrait of german XX Century philosofer Hans-Georg Hadamer, developer of philosophical hermeneutics, who argued that a artwork's meaning is not reducible to the author's intentions, but is dependent on the context of interpretation.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Oto Vega Ponce - uploaded by Oto Vega Ponce - nominated by Dvdgmz -- Dvdgmz (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Remarkable and impressive portrait of the German philosopher. Similarity well achieved, quality of drawing, encyclopedic approach. - Dvdgmz (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is a good and valuable portrait. The stains on the paper are rather ugly though and I think an attempt should be made to make a digital restoration prior to considering nomination for FPC, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 19:35, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
    • It isn't a deteriorated paper. The author included digitally this background to give texture to the portrait.--Dvdgmz (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

File:01 United States Air Force, Dornier Do-328-110, Larnaca, Cyprus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 10:50:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dornier C-146A Wolfhound (version of Do-328), registration 10-3077. Operating for 524th Special Operations Squadron with 27th Special Operations Wing of United States Air Force.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tupungato - uploaded by Tupungato - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tupungato (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Technically well done but lacks wow to me. Wing aligning with elevator looks a bit puzzling. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:23, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --.AVIA Airplane silhouette.svg Flag of Bavaria (lozengy).svg Bavaria 12:41, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Times Square Time-Lapse Style.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 00:24:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Times Square time lapse
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dan DeChiaro - uploaded by Mono - nominated by Mono -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ordinarily I dislike these artsier-type effects pictures for their tendency to sacrifice encyclopedic value regardless of their quality. But this is an exception that sort of proves the rule: how else do you capture the very Blade Runner-esque qualities of contemporary Times Square, its bustle and color, without them? It conveys the reality of the place more effectively, I think, than even a video would. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 08:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Isn't this a DW of the Inception poster? Is this covered by FOP? Regards, Yann (talk) 12:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
    No, it is considered DM in the same way that it's fine to take a picture of a bunch of skycrapers in France. --King of ♠ 17:22, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not my taste, and not perfect technically. In this case, I don't know where is the border between "artistic choice" and "strong technical flaws". + we have some FoP issues here, IMO (but I'm not a specialist of US copyright laws).--Jebulon (talk) 15:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow and bad time lapse resulting in all the motion blur. --Graphium 15:29, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposes.- -Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dislike the processing and not convinced by the framing either. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:11, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is not that great IMO and the colours are a bit oversaturated. I don't mind the ghost. --PierreSelim (talk) 06:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Big Sur Shoreline.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 00:20:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Big Sur Shoreline
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Vadim Kurland - uploaded by Mono - nominated by Mono -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ranjithsiji (talk) 07:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. --Graphium 15:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose what is the main: the coast or the plants??? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose—per Alchemist—the bright blue patch of sea is distracting—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. And we need a proper identification (even if the plants are not the main subject...)--Jebulon (talk) 15:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Me, I like it (colors, composition, not bad quality) and I can support with an identification of the plants in focus. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, poor composition. Gidip (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Eucera cinnamomea male 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 17:07:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eucera cinnamomea, male


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 11 July 2014 (UTC)



Tabella dei periodi di voto per la regola del quinto giorno (5 giorni dopo la candidatura)[edit]

Sun 06 Jul → Fri 11 Jul
Mon 07 Jul → Sat 12 Jul
Tue 08 Jul → Sun 13 Jul
Wed 09 Jul → Mon 14 Jul
Thu 10 Jul → Tue 15 Jul
Fri 11 Jul → Wed 16 Jul

Tabella dei periodi di voto (9 giorni dopo la candidatura)[edit]

Wed 02 Jul → Fri 11 Jul
Thu 03 Jul → Sat 12 Jul
Fri 04 Jul → Sun 13 Jul
Sat 05 Jul → Mon 14 Jul
Sun 06 Jul → Tue 15 Jul
Mon 07 Jul → Wed 16 Jul
Tue 08 Jul → Thu 17 Jul
Wed 09 Jul → Fri 18 Jul
Thu 10 Jul → Sat 19 Jul
Fri 11 Jul → Sun 20 Jul