Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Featured picture candidates)
Jump to: navigation, search
This project page in other languages:

Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | молдовеняскэ | norsk bokmål | português | polski | română | русский | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing - Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. Note that a 1600 × 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. A 1920 × 1080 image, commonly known as Full HD, has 2.07 Mpx, just more than the 2 million level.
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful colour adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.


Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolours, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution. For instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are none the less wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file hosting page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Digital cameras (or images) have a narrower latitude than film. Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of Thirds" is a good guideline for composition and is an inheritance from the painting school. The idea is to divide the image with two imaginary horizontal and two vertical lines, thus dividing the image into thirds horizontally and vertically. Centering the subject is often less interesting than placing the subject in one of the "interest points", the 4 intersection between these horizontal and vertical lines intersect. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. The upper or lower horizontal line is often a good choice. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, colour, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Colour is important. Over saturated colours are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or colour AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of colour brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio

Set nominations

Sets are temporarily disallowed for technical reasons; will reopen soon.

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set.

  • All images should be processed and presented in a similar manner to ensure consistency amongst the set.
  • All images should be linked to all others in the "Other Versions" section of the image summary.
  • If the set of subjects has a limited number of elements, then there should be a complete set of images. This may result in images in this kind of set with no "wow" factor, and perhaps little value on their own. Their value is closely bound to the value of having a complete set of these subjects. The decision to feature should be based on this overall value.
  • If the set of subjects is unlimited, the images should be chosen judiciously. Each image should be sufficiently different to the others to add a great deal of value to the overall set. The majority of images should be able to qualify for FP on their own.
  • All images should be of high technical quality.

Adding a new nomination[edit]

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2


Set nominations ONLY

Sets are temporarily disallowed for technical reasons; will reopen soon.

Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify him/her using {{subst:FPC-notice}}.

Voting[edit]

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use following templates:

  • {{Support}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Oppose}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram voting question.svg Question),
  • {{Request}} (Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as an FP.
{{Delistandreplace}} Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{withdraw}} ~~~~
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least 7 supporting votes
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, he/she should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between the bot has counted the votes and before they are finally closed by the bot, this manual review can be done by any user that are familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite[edit]

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also[edit]

Table of contents[edit]

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Contents

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Palácio do Planalto de Brasília.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2014 at 00:32:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palácio do Planalto and its reflection, displayed from the Three Powers Plaza in Brasilia.

File:1. Island on The Sky North View.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 23:29:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Canyonlands National Park

File:Colored flowers b.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 19:48:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flower Poster
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Second try (the first is here). I like this composition and colours very much and believe that FPC goes beyond strict encyclopedic value -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- MrPoloczek (talk) 21:14, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Not entitled to vote, sorry: at least 50 edits are needed. Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Glysiak (talk) 22:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I rechecked the last review and still hold that stand. More per Gnangarra's argument (lacks a common theme). Jee 03:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Eicocon of eierzak van spinnen (Araneae).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 19:03:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Egg sac or egg sack of spiders (Araneae). created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 19:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 19:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Does better identification possible? I see the spider below. :) Jee 03:43, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Goat baby in Margarita Island.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 16:45:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Goat baby in Margarita Island
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:45, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose Poor cloning job, see annotations, far even from QI for me. Overexposed IMHO (not blown but washed-out colours), and generally no wow, it’s a nice pic of the animal but lacks something special. --Kreuzschnabel 19:01, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment About cloning : not so easy, eh ?--Jebulon (talk) 19:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes it is not easy, however, after of that (see history) anything is cinch :) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 19:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:52, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment (I may be biased as it is difficult from me to get a support for domestic animals or garden flowers.) Although the baby is more adorable, the harsh light is not favorable to that theme. Less details compared to your existing fp. Jee 03:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Franz von Assisi Kirche-DSC 0004w.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 15:32:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Francis of Assisi Church, Vienna

File:Öxarárfoss, Parque Nacional de Þingvellir, Suðurland, Islandia, 2014-08-16, DD 029.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 14:45:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Öxarárfoss, Þingvellir National Park, Suðurland, Iceland. The 20 meter high waterfall flows from the Öxará river and is one of the most visited attractions in Þingvellir National Park, one of the two World Heritage sites in Iceland.
  • Not entitled to vote, sorry: at least 50 edits are needed -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Caladium 'Fireworks' Leaf.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 14:30:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Caladium 'Fireworks' leaf
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Ram-Man 14:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ram-Man 14:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice,beautiful colours --LivioAndronico talk 15:40, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Please add a compatible license acceptable at fpc. Jee 17:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done -- Ram-Man 18:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
    Thanks; Symbol support vote.svg Support love the details. Jee 03:07, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Excellent document, however I find the crop very tight.--Jebulon (talk) 19:49, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 00:06, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Vällingbydepån September 2014 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 09:13:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vällingby depot
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Vällingbydepån (the Vällingby Subway depot), Stockholm metro. The picture was taken from a helicopter, part of Wikimedia Sveriges aerial photography project. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 09:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 09:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Bojars (talk) 14:43, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:10, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:La scolie hirsute (Scolia hirta) MHNT fronton.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 20:38:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Scolia hirta

File:Pinus halepensis, Castries, Hérault 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 20:36:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castries, Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- ChristianFerrer 20:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ChristianFerrer 20:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support More paintings !!! :)) anyway, excellent management of the light in a simple but beautiful landscape. I like this very much.--Jebulon (talk) 23:11, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! -- -donald- (talk) 08:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question is this an HDR? -- Ram-Man 12:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
No -- ChristianFerrer 13:01, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Bożków, pałac 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 17:40:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palace in Bożków

File:大连国家地质公园11-蟹将出洞-海蚀崖.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2014 at 11:13:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sea cave (age: 600-800 million years ago, formed by coastal erosion during the Sinian period in Neoproterozoic Era) in Jinshitan Coastal National Geopark, Dalian, Liaoning Province, China
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sea cave (age: 600-800 million years ago, formed by coastal erosion during the Sinian period in Neoproterozoic Era) in Jinshitan Coastal National Geopark, Dalian, Liaoning Province, China. Created by Techyan - uploaded by Techyan - nominated by JesseW900 -- JesseW900 (talk) 11:13, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JesseW900 (talk) 11:13, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a pretty picture, but there are a few issues, the most serious is the curved/tilted horizon. The focus/sharpness is on the foreground, which is slightly distracting and takes away from the wow as it draws the eye away from the interesting subject. The sky is underwhelming as well. -- Ram-Man 19:22, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per not only title noted above, but other issues—white balance seems off, and I question whether f/4.5 at 100 was the right aperture and ISO setting for this scene. Daniel Case (talk) 21:44, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, horizon is tilted, and the greenery is too distracting. Sorry, --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:45, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Debarsko jezero (Дебарско езеро).JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 13:59:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Debar Lake, Macedonia

File:Castel Sant'Angelo at Night.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 12:31:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castel Sant'Angelo at Night

File:Timema poppensis camouflaged on its host, Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), California.jpeg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 08:54:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Camouflaged stick insect
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moritz Muschick- uploaded by Animalparty - nominated by User:Animalparty -- Animalparty (talk) 08:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Animalparty (talk) 08:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The idea is excellent, sadly the resulting image is a bit unsharp. Kleuske (talk) 11:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is a wonderful shot, but the primary subject is just too unsharp. -- Ram-Man 18:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree that sharpness is not quite sufficient for FP. But I think this image has very high educational value, so I've nominated it at COM:VIC. --El Grafo (talk) 14:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Phalanta alcippe by Nayikayam Thattu.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 06:51:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Phalanta alcippe
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Phalanta alcippe, Small Leopard. All by me (except the butterfly which is a gift as His B'day is coming!). -- Jee 06:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Preferred FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jee 06:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 11:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:43, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd like a little more DoF, but the composition is excellent and it looks great at normal viewing distances. -- Ram-Man 18:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 19:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfect. Yann (talk) 20:52, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And 7 --LivioAndronico talk 22:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perhaps not centered in the best way, but an excellent photo. --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes; a centered composition is not so good. But the subject was very fast moving and disappeared soon. I got only fiver "keepers", and we can see it is in different location in all of them. My camera has some limitations; I've to move the spot focus point using a joystick, which takes time. The fixed LCD is also not very helpful as I've to kiss the mud to get a view. :) Thanks all for the quick appreciation. Jee 02:38, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I know how that is, that's why this amateur photographer sticks to moth photography, lights attract the moths overnight and then the next day, they're still there, and they don't fly during the day unless touched or bothered. Anyway, great pic! --AmaryllisGardener talk 03:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Ha ha; I like your moths. BTW, I see some point in your suggestion and made a crop. There is plenty of room in original even if I'm in the closest focusing distance because the subject is very small. We have another Leopard which is bigger and more common compared to this. :) Jee 04:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:45, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Note: A few pebbles cloned out as suggested by Wilfredo. Jee 16:44, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ChristianFerrer 20:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 00:04, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Praça 3 Poderes Brasília panorama (more size).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 00:18:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view (extension: about 190º) of the Praça dos Três Poderes in Brasília, Brazil. View towards West. Created by Sting - uploaded and nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:18, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support More pictures of Brazil! -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:18, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Not sharpness. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Vultures in the nest, Orchha, MP, India.jpg (delist)[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2014 at 18:13:52
Vultures in the nest, Orchha, MP, India

Vultures in the nest, Orchha, MP, India

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I propose to replace the first image by the retouched version (corrected white balance, white building cloned out) (Original nomination)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace -- Yann (talk) 18:13, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:55, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep The new version is a decrease of the quality (artefacts, overexposition...) -- ChristianFerrer 20:45, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
After to have see the request here : Commons:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop#Vultures in the nest, I uploaded a try, maybe too satured? -- ChristianFerrer 22:38, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Apollonia, Albania (by Pudelek) - Monument of Agonothetes.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2014 at 18:02:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Apollonia, Albania

File:Apyãwa (Tapirape) Mask MHNT.ETH.AC.1732.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2014 at 17:36:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amazonian mask in Museum de Toulouse.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Apyawa / Tapirape people in Brazil. Photographed and uploaded by Archaeodontosaurus - nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 17:36, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No comment. Excellent (as usual) explanations and description in the file page, to be read. I'd be happy if all our FP could benefit of such an encyclopedic work ! More pictures from Brazil ? Here we are ! I hope you will enjoy this very colorful artefact.-- Jebulon (talk) 17:36, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 17:39, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 17:52, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have always neglected ethnology. I have only recently discovered. It crosses beautiful objects as masks or objects trivial appearances. But all tell a story and it is that which is the essence of this science. In the case of this mask I was fascinated by the care taken to represent a dead enemy. If I had to represent enemy I will not get it adorned with much care. Thank you to Jebulon, and Pezi for their friendly conspiracy --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:07, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:12, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I am Brazilian. Yes, more pictures of Brazil! Incidentally, I nominated an aerial picture of the Amazon rainforest in Brazil here on the FPC few days. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:44, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pugilist (talk) 20:59, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 22:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So many feathers! Parrots and Macaws? Jee 03:39, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High educational value; technically well done. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:23, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 13:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ChristianFerrer 20:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 00:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Kłodzko, ratusz, wnętrze 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2014 at 16:16:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Town hall in Kłodzko
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:16, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:16, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- tsca (talk) 00:43, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 07:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Zsuetam (talk) 07:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote. Jee 16:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a shame that the top of the windows wasn't captured. It could have been possible to lose a bit of the lower table to reach further at the top. Diliff (talk) 11:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
    You're right, but now it's too late.--Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:32, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:37, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and 7 Clin --LivioAndronico talk 17:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice to have an architectural interior shot this good of something other than a church sanctuary. Daniel Case (talk) 03:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Hey, I do take photos of other interiors! The trouble is that interesting and accessible interiors tend to be churches, but yes, variety is the spice of life. ;-) Diliff (talk) 09:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Apart from the compositional missed opportunity that I mentioned above, I have little else that I could be critical about. Nicely taken. Diliff (talk) 09:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 13:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:46, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ChristianFerrer 20:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 00:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Pugilina morio 02.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2014 at 12:50:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Giant Hairy Melongena with periostracum
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 12:50, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 12:50, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good wow and light. Brilliant technical quality and DOF due to proficient use of focus stacking. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:47, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:43, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 17:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 17:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --fedaro (talk) 20:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 07:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 16:43, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Top of "Commons", IMO. And per Slaunger.--Jebulon (talk) 23:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and thanks for the info. Jee 10:26, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Intern of the church Saint Mary above Minerva.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2014 at 10:50:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the church Saint Mary above Minerva
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Santa Maria sopra Minerva (English: Saint Mary above Minerva, Latin: Sancta Maria supra Minervam) is one of the major churches of the Roman Catholic Order of Preachers, better known as the Dominicans. The church's name derives from the fact that the first Christian church structure on the site was built directly over (Latin: supra) the ruins or foundations of a temple dedicated to the Egyptian goddess Isis, which had been erroneously ascribed to the Greco-Roman goddess Minerva.

The church is located in the Piazza della Minerva one block behind the Pantheon in the Pigna rione of Rome, Italy, within the ancient district known as the Campus Martius. The present church and disposition of surrounding structures is visible a detail from the Nolli Map of 1748. All by -- LivioAndronico talk 10:50, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico talk 10:50, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, too soft, chromatic noise, cameras and rope are disturbing, ghosts and moving persons too... The "church-interior bar" is now very high, and this picture cannot be a FP in my opinion.--Jebulon (talk) 13:18, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment We cannot expect every church interior to be a Diliff. I would support this one if a) the crop would be symmetric (which can be helped) and b) the right half would be as sharp as the left one (which cannot, it’s definitely unsharp. Maybe you ought to have this lens serviced.). --Kreuzschnabel 21:42, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
✓ Donethanks Kreuzschnabel ,tell me if is better in this way. Regards --LivioAndronico talk 00:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Right side looks a bit overprocessed now, but considering the high resolution, it reaches FP level for me. Altogether a really nice shot. Would like to have some explanation of the TV cameras though on the description page. TV service starting soon? --Kreuzschnabel 08:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the support Kreuzschnabel, however, the Pope Francis came to the anniversary of the canonization of Saint Catherine of Siena (which is buried under the altar). --LivioAndronico talk 11:31, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Flaming June, by Fredrick Lord Leighton (1830-1896).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2014 at 09:29:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flaming June, by Fredrick Lord Leighton

File:Dülmen, Viktorkirmes auf dem Overbergplatz -- 2014 -- 3769.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2014 at 08:57:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Light traces of a ferris wheel, Viktorkirmes in Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 08:57, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 08:57, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good impression! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not impressed by the composition or the lighting. Kleuske (talk) 12:22, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pelz (talk) 21:25, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI but not FP. Better composition and size might help. Although the wheel is captured ok, it just looks too accidental framing. -- Colin (talk) 22:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I think it's a good pic, but it's a bit cut off. --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:58, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 11:38, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While the lighting is good, I'm not convinced by the cut off composition. I agree with Colin, the framing just seems completely arbitrary. -- Ram-Man 19:16, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Argiope pulchella at Nayikayam Thattu.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2014 at 07:03:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Argiope pulchella, courtship
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Argiope pulchella, courtship. For more information about this behavior, see this study and this video. Photographed and nominated by me; edited by Christian Ferrer -- Jee 07:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Preferred FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- It was a tough for me to choose a version to nominate here; so received some help at Photography critiques. I don't want to mess the nomination by so many alts. Feel free to support (preferred Clin), oppose, or comment. :) Jee 07:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Good but IMO it could be sharper. (Look at the spider top right.) --XRay talk 08:00, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • @XRay: He is in a different plain (on the web); and moving too. Note that, only leg tips of female touch the web, which is a few mm below from her body. The male is a bit more sharper here because of the chosen focal point (between male and female). Do you prefer that? Jee 08:29, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • No. Your image is OK (and you've a support vote from me). DoF could be better, but I know it's difficult to do this.--XRay talk 08:54, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks. :) Jee 09:11, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 17:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Two spiders! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:28, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Scar House Reservoir Dam.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2014 at 06:34:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dam of Scar House Reservoir
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by --Kreuzschnabel 06:34, 14 December 2014 (UTC). It was a cloudy day with dull light but I happened to catch a beam of sunlight enlightening the dam in the afternoon (Exif time is UTC), setting it very nicely off the background. Looks definitely finer in full view. I only had a few seconds to set up a composition before the lighting changed again.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kreuzschnabel 06:34, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support A little bit dark in the background. --XRay talk 07:57, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support Per XRay--LivioAndronico talk 10:52, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the light, but I find the fence in foreground left disturbing. An horizontal or vertical crop could maybe help...--Jebulon (talk) 13:23, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am with Slaunger here. Cropping would take too much off the image, and cloning would be too large a deception. --Kreuzschnabel 21:29, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good light and interesting structure, colors and texture of the stones. I see the point raised by Jebulon regarding the fence. It is not the prettiest, but I think that too much will be sacrificed by cropping it out. It would be tempting to clone out, but I think it would be a too big alteration of reality to be acceptable. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:32, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment D’accord. --Kreuzschnabel 21:29, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. But why didn't you just shoot the image from the fence, or just to the right side of it? I know you would have had a lower point of view, but I think it would have improved the composition. The lighting is nice and really makes the dam stand out from its surroundings. Diliff (talk) 15:58, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Having read your question I wonder why I didn’t even consider to do so. Of course you’re right about the fence being cropped out but the lower point would lead to two issues: a considerable amount of background hill would be covered, and the battlements on the opposite wall would not be visible either. I don’t think that would improve the image. --Kreuzschnabel 21:29, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Fair enough. It's always slightly unfair for viewers to tell you what you should have done, because they are usually unaware of the terrain and exactly how the change would affect the photo. It's easy to be an 'armchair critic' as they say. :-) Diliff (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
        • Yes, but "that's the game" as we say in french. Furthermore: "armchair critic one day, photographer the other" :-)--Jebulon (talk) 12:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ChristianFerrer 05:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Window details on Haus für Abgeordnete des Deutschen Bundestags at Wilhelmstraße 65 2014-07-12.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2014 at 23:15:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Windows on Haus für Abgeordnete des Deutschen Bundestags
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Noticing a recent nomination of a pattern of windows by Wilfredor, I got triggered to nominate this photo, which I like a lot, because I think it makes the observer curious how far this pattern of windows extends (at least that is my intention). And after the interesting debate about the artistic sides of photography recently on FPC talk, I am ready to try and nominate something (for me) 'untraditional' like this. Spoiler. Created, uploaded, and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's a really nice composition but IMO it's not sharp enough.--XRay talk 07:59, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Overall sharpness is fine. At 100% there is a slight fuzz to the edges, but this vanishes otherwise. This isn't the kind of photo you want to be looking at that closely anyway, but rather one to appreciate on the whole from a greater distance. -- Ram-Man 19:03, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Amazon CIAT (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2014 at 21:23:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Aerial view of a typical image of the Amazon rainforest: dense trees around on the rivers. Photographed near Manaus, Brazil. Created by Flickr - uploaded by Chronus - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Big wow factor. I nominate this picture mainly because I think we should have more FPs of the Amazon rainforest (Amazonia) and Brazil. -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful. --King of ♠ 02:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Beautiful but not sharp.--Claus (talk) 07:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
    That is something I also noticed, but consider: 1) This is an aerial photo; 2) trees are inherently unsharp. Just look at how bad the trees are in this photo compared to the (much farther) buildings in the skyline. So I lower my visual standards for foliage, since I know my eyes are deceiving me and real sharpness is higher than I perceive it to be. --King of ♠ 17:42, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support I think this is the kind of image that could be done better, but it's very nice. The sharpness is fine for me. -- Ram-Man 19:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:51, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Maersk headquarters Copenhagen 2014 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2014 at 09:01:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maersk headquarters in Østerbro, Copenhagen.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by me. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:01, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I nominate this because I like the simplicity of the shapes in this photograph combined with the contrast between the vegetation and the extremely cold architecture surrounding it. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:01, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Reminds me of an architect's proposal, with model trees and clean pavements (though the vantage point would be higher and a little more distant to get more of the building and less of the trees). -- Colin (talk) 11:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent shot. Great composition and simplicity. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love it—as Colin says, it looks like a rendering. And this is one of those cases where what is otherwise a flaw—the slight overexposure—actually works in the image's favor. Daniel Case (talk) 16:04, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel Case --Cayambe (talk) 17:31, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:03, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 17:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 21:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:56, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 18:03, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support,--Pugilist (talk) 20:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:52, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 01:19, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Pensive Bodhisattva 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2014 at 04:58:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gilt-bronze Maitreya in Meditation (National Treasure No. 83) is a work of Buddhist art and a national treasure of the Republic of Korea.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info sculptor unknown (circa 7th century), photo created by the National Museum of Korea - uploaded by Lawinc82, edited by Crisco 1492 - nominated by Pine -- Pine 04:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pine 04:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Bojars (talk) 08:21, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I really like the pose. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:47, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ChristianFerrer 05:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kleuske (talk) 11:22, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes. -- Ram-Man 19:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 20:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Navajo generating station Page 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2014 at 17:46:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Myrabella - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 17:46, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:46, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A pity that the station is shadowed by its own smoke! it's a lighting issue for me , sorry. -- ChristianFerrer 08:28, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T, thank you so much for this nomination! @Christian Ferrer: in fact, the smoke is the prominent element of this picture. I uploaded it to participate in the November Photo challenge about Smoke and to illustrate the section on the environmental impacts of the powerplant in the en:article in Wikipedia. --Myrabella (talk) 08:55, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe I've cloned out the plastic bottle (a small detail), but I find it excellent, and really unusual here. No details of the plant itself are lost by the shadow of the smoke, IMO. Very good idea, Myrabellian achievement, I would say.--Jebulon (talk) 11:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like it. The smoke is the feature here and what a great capture -- I can find no similar image with the clouds or composition. -- Colin (talk) 11:30, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A big fluffy cloud. Daniel Case (talk) 16:10, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:36, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:03, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 22:32, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pity the station is in shadow, would look even nicer otherwise. But enough wow for me this way too with the cloud. --Kreuzschnabel 07:02, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:56, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Excellent image and I actually think the fact that the power plant is in shadow is an asset to the image rather than a drawback. Diliff (talk) 16:10, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 17:39, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice find. The smoke appears to blend with the clouds. Excellent composition. Nikhil (talk) 03:41, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I hate to be one of the only opposers, but the composition's just not working for me. It lacks a "wow" factor. --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Matsimäe Pühajärv.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2014 at 11:13:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Matsimäe Pühajärv in Estonia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Rutake - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 11:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 11:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 11:27, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 12:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WWOOWW! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Flawless. Daniel Case (talk) 20:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The crop is not optimal: the tree tops at the right are cut. However, for sure FP! --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:41, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:05, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 17:37, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --fedaro (talk) 20:20, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:03, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 14:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Nebulosa de Eta Carinae o NGC 3372.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2014 at 10:01:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Carina Nebula taken from the Astronomy Observatory of Los Molinos (OALM) (es) located in Montevideo, Uruguay. Please, note that on the contrary to most of our FPs listed here, this is not the work of the NASA or ESO, but of an Uruguayan Commonist thank to a project of Wikimedia Uruguay with several institutes in that country, who took the picture and processed it by himself. The result has nothing to envy to the works of space agencies in my opinion, that's what amazed me and motivates this FPC. The picture is based on 9 frames of 2 minutes exposure each with a Nikon Df and a catadioptric Nikkor 500mm f/8 lense, apart from the dark, bias and flat frames for the post-processing. For the post-processing a dedicated software for this kind of photography (PixInsight) was used that merges the images, analyses the brightness scale, reduces the noise and enables the management of saturation and dynamic range.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of the Carina Nebula taken from the Astronomy Observatory of Los Molinos (OALM) (es) located in Montevideo, Uruguay. Please, note that on the contrary to most of our FPs listed here, this is not the work of the NASA or ESO, but of an Uruguayan Commonist thank to a project of Wikimedia Uruguay with several institutes in that country, who took the picture and processed it by himself. The result has nothing to envy to the works of space agencies in my opinion, that's what amazed me and motivates this FPC. The picture is based on 9 frames of 2 minutes exposure each with a Nikon Df and a catadioptric Nikkor 500mm f/8 lense, apart from the dark, bias and flat frames for the post-processing. For the post-processing a dedicated software for this kind of photography (PixInsight) was used that merges the images, analyses the brightness scale, reduces the noise and enables the management of saturation and dynamic range. Created by Fernando da Rosa and Asterismo (Santiago Roland, coordinator of OALM) - uploaded by Fernando da Rosa - nominated by Poco a poco -- Poco2 10:01, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 10:01, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 15:56, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great work, awesome results. --Kadellar (talk) 17:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ChristianFerrer 08:36, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:42, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --fedaro (talk) 11:55, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:06, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 17:35, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rangelo (talk) 10:23, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:52, 17 December 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 14:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Pedro, Teruel, España, 2014-01-10, DD 11-12 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2014 at 23:39:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Peter's church, Teruel, Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by MarcoAurelio -- M\A 23:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This picture is the winner of WLM in Spain 2014. Poco2 10:08, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- M\A 23:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 08:57, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks again MarcoAurelio! Poco2 10:08, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 16:34, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This picture is no necessarily strongly distorted, and does not fit, IMO, the FP standards, as it is frequently the case, I'm afraid, of a lot of winners of WLM. And it is a pity.--Jebulon (talk) 19:02, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
    • The way I see it, Poco has traded tilted vertical lines in order to reduce perspective distortion. If Poco had used an architectural perspective, the distortion would have been greater. I still prefer to perserve straight vertical lines, but in wide views such as this, it is unavoidable to get some kind of distortion and the distortion is perhaps no worse than mine. I guess the difference between this image and my stitched images is that I can retain more sharpness and resolution so the distortion does not affect the quality as much. With a single frame, it is not so easy. Diliff (talk) 11:28, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The "standard" rectilinear view is an FP Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Iglesia de San Pedro, Teruel, España, 2014-01-10, DD 10.JPG. This one is closer and sharper with more detail and better handling of the lighting. The ultra-wide rectilinear has its own distortions. And File:Iglesia de San Pedro, Teruel, España, 2014-01-10, DD 16-17 HDR.JPG is seriously bendy! The converging verticals draw the eye to the apex and make one feel small, looking up. This is a valid perspective choice, rather than a technical error. -- Colin (talk) 15:43, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Both this and the second image you cited are standard rectilinear though. As far as I can see, the only difference is the position and tilt of the camera. The angle of view seems the same although unlike the other image, the shutter speed, aperture and focal length have been removed from the EXIF data of the file so I can't be sure. Diliff (talk) 11:28, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
      • I have added more information, also the camera settings (ISO 100, 17 mm f/11 2,5s and 8s). One thing, though, I haven't removed anything. As I've explained here and there I have a problem with the EXIF info update module of my enfusion SW that I used for (pseudo-) HDRs. I don't aim to hide any information, the other way around. Poco2 12:02, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Regarding the observations of Diliff and Colin I pretty much agree with them. In this picture I got "in the middle of the thing" and the result of a 17mm lens is what you see. I could make a version where verticals are vertical but, apart from the fact that I'd lose half of the picture, the result wouldn't be what I was looking for: "transporting" the viewer into the picture. One of the constraints of the picture when I took it was to be careful with the crop at the top (specially the middle top). David, I think that you'd have a worse time even in Spain to take pictures of churches with a tripod 15 minutes long than in France. I negotiated it (hard) after explaining what the picture was for and got inside 5 minutes before everybody else did in the afternoon allowance. Sometimes I do really miss a kind of acreditation for Wikimedia, that would ease my life. Poco2 12:02, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I didn't mean that you were deliberately hiding the EXIF data, just that it is missing. It's frustrating that they are so restrictive about photography. There are many locations in England that I would love to be able to photograph but getting permission is hard. I've written to many organisations asking for permission but of course I'm not officially representing Wikimedia, so I'm not usually given any special allowances. Really, the only notable example so far who has given me permission is St Paul's Cathedral. That was a big success though, because photography is usually completely forbidden and there are not many high quality photos of the interior anywhere on the internet. I was given a whole hour but it wasn't really enough. I wish I had another chance because now with my 50mm lens and a bit more experience shooting church interiors, I would have been able to take better photos, but I'm happy with what I managed to take under some time pressure. I have managed to get permission to photograph the interiors of the Bodleian Library in Oxford (again, photography is usually strictly forbidden) and I will be visiting in early January in the morning before it opens to the University. Lighting and time will be very limited, so I'm not sure what results I'll get, but we will see. I agree though, it would be great to get accreditation or for Wikimedia to be able to negotiate on our behalf somehow. Diliff (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Diliff by "standard" I meant "looking straight ahead", as well as the choice of projection. I think here "pointing the camera up" is a good creative choice here. It displays aspects of the view one sees if one were there, looking up, but also (since it is a flat fixed 2D view) has attributes one wouldn't see. Not everything unnatural that is due to a lens is a "fault". For example, with shooting a photo with shallow depth of field -- something the eye never sees. So is background blur a distortion just because it isn't how we perceive the world in person? And bokeh highlights are merely a lens artifact. The viewer isn't mislead here. Architectural perspective is not the only one. My 2p. -- Colin (talk) 13:14, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Ah ok, I agree, the tilt is good for the composition in this case (although the altar isn't exactly centred so the symmetry is an issue). Just as we don't see a shallow depth of field with our own eyes, we also don't see vertical lines leaning inward as a camera does so I agree there also. We would if our retina extended across our whole field of view, but it doesn't, so we move our eyes to re-centre the view and the vertical line straightens when it is centred. However, I think that is a good argument for why we should (if we can) try to preserve the vertical lines - it better matches what our eyes see. I admit that it isn't possible to do so in this image without introducing fairly significant distortion elsewhere. So yes, in short, I agree that it isn't a rule for all cases, just a guideline that works in most non-extreme cases. Diliff (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, although as mentioned above, it isn't entirely symmetrical. Could benefit from a slight crop to the right hand side. Diliff (talk) 13:55, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
    Diliff: True, I didn't notice that asymmetry. I applied a slight crop on the right. Poco2 14:12, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, it managed to win WLM Spain, so I guess nobody else noticed either. ;-) Diliff (talk) 14:19, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --fedaro (talk) 15:39, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ram-Man 18:58, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ChristianFerrer 20:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:An der Obertrave-Luebeck-DSC 0482w.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2014 at 17:06:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Listed buildings An der Obertrave, Lübeck
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- P e z i (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An der Obertrave, listed buildings (cultural heritage monuments) nr. 6-8 and 11-15, Lübeck, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany --P e z i (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Supportsupport for alternative version --P e z i (talk) 17:23, 14 December 2014 (UTC) -- P e z i (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 08:55, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very hanseatic --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:46, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like it, I've suggested a crop. IMO you have to sacrifice the reflection, there is to much empty water in the composition.--Jebulon (talk) 11:07, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Jebulon to crop the bottom, but I would remove less than proposed by Jebulon, just about 50% --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 17:33, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this version. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:17, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this version too.--Hubertl (talk) 04:11, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Alternative version; bottom cropped[edit]

An der Obertrave-Luebeck-DSC 0482w2 crop.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info cropped version between the suggestions by Jebulon and Uoaei1; tried to keep the mirrored image of the towers in the middle of the picture. --P e z i (talk) 17:23, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support changed my vote to this version. --P e z i (talk) 17:23, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I follow you. Thanks for this compromise.--Jebulon (talk) 17:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good! --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 16:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support better. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Mastiff Vehicle .50 Calibre Heavy Machine Gun Night Firing MOD 45158051.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2014 at 12:32:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mastiff armoured vehicle machine gun fire.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Babbs Robinson - uploaded by -- (talk) 12:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- (talk) 12:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Wow is significant, the red lightning underlines the dramatic atmosphere. The composition is very convincing and emanates power. Rather terrible quality-wise in 100%. I mean worse than I would expect given the difficult lightning conditions, but for me wow mitigates these quality issues. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:58, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment this picture terrifies me. They will use it in ten years against protesters. And they will justify it as a terrorist defense.--Hubertl (talk) 21:52, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Slaunger --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger, but for me wow don't mitigates these quality issues. -- ChristianFerrer 08:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, following ChristianFerrer --Jebulon (talk) 11:14, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. It looks great downsampled 50%, which is still a good 3 MP. That, combined with the huge "wow," makes me want to support. --King of ♠ 20:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, per ChristianFerrer --P e z i (talk) 17:37, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per ChristianFerrer. --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Snow at Camp Bastion MOD 45158232.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2014 at 12:20:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night-time snowstorm at Camp Bastion, Afghanistan.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Sergeant Paul Shaw - uploaded by -- (talk) 12:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- (talk) 12:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition and mood mitigates rather poor tecnical quality. It is also a difficult shot though, and I think it is very good at showing the snowy conditions in Camp Bastion. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:02, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Slaunger --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:41, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. --XRay talk 12:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Far much too dark, almost a half of the picture is just black. Is the man a soldier ? Look, dear friends photographers, the man is carrying... a tripod ! Sorry, this picture does not say anything to me. And of course, the rather poor technical quality does not help...--Jebulon (talk) 22:34, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Jebulon:: According to the metadata linked to from the file page the person is an "army photographer", which for me indicates that he is not a civilian. If you are an army photographer, you are as far as I can understand still a soldier first and (at least in the U.S. Army) "you may be expected to join the fight, fire your rifle and still be expected to take photos of the action". -- Slaunger (talk) 22:43, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The equivalent role in the UK army does not state explicitly that you are considered a soldier, but they are as far as I can understand members of the Royal Logistics Corps. For me, that means they are 'soldiers' and they have the ranks of Corporal, Sergeant (depicted person) and Staff Sergeant. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Yes of course, but I find this a bit disappointing... And obviously his tripod is not as good as mine...--Jebulon (talk) 11:05, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
      • @Jebulon:: You mean it is dissapointing that the army photographer is carrying a tripod and not a rifle? Anyway, knowing the weight of your tripod, which share some of the characteristics of this one, I doubt an army photographer would survive long in a combat situation if you swapped the gear. Clin -- Slaunger (talk) 14:42, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Most of it's in the dark and the composition lacks "wow". --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ram-Man 18:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Yesterday's news horrified me. If this is the situation, we need military deployment in schools. Jee 10:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 12:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose to many dark areas. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Põdravärvik.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 23:45:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Protostropharia alcis in Estonia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Ireena - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 23:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 23:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice idea, light and composition. DoF sufficient for me. Background bokeh looks a bit strange though. --Kreuzschnabel 09:36, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nice, but the DOF is too small. Try f/16. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request I will support with more information for the location (geolocalisation would be even better). -- ChristianFerrer 12:19, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I updated the eng description based on Estonian description. Should I ask coordinates from the author or is it enough when the location is specified up to the village? Kruusamägi (talk) 01:31, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:2014-12-08 Bergkäse mit Antipasta 5713.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 23:34:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alpine, so called mountain cheese, three month old, (in fakt, industrial ware), together with antipasti, mixed turkish and italian on black glass
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Hubertl (talk) 23:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hubertl (talk) 23:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:48, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Background make me feel so uncomfortable about the food. --Mile (talk) 10:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 12:03, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hubertl, I'm sorry but I think the black shiny background is a bad choice for this still life. The black olives are lost in the composition because they're the same colour. We also lose some perception of volume due to the lack of shadows. I also feel this kind of setting is not so appropiate for this food: the cheese, the peppers and the olives remind me of nature, but the background feels too artificial and cold. A white background wouldn't be very good either imo, but maybe a dark wooden table could work. Nice work with light. --Kadellar (talk) 21:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but neither the background or the food looks attractive. --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I specially like the dark reflective background and I think it is much better at bringing out thous food items than any lighter background ever could. Kruusamägi (talk) 01:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Origami modułowe.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 22:33:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Modular origami
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very eye-catching and quite different from other kinds of origami, that I am familiar with. Good composition and useful. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:40, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not just a good picture, also an impressive work! --Hubertl (talk) 01:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hmm... Well, I like it! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:40, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very cute JacekFace-smile.svg LivioAndronico talk 11:56, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:14, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question - Who made the origami figure itself? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    My daughther Joanna. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:04, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    Alright, so copyright-wise this should be fine. Symbol support vote.svg Support. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 14:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Chrumps (talk) 18:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jebulon (talk) 22:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --fedaro (talk) 20:22, 14 December 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 06:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:44444 חדרו של דוד בן גוריון בצריף בשדה בוקר.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 20:49:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Hanan epstein - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is the room where David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, lived in its later years. In 1953 he quit the role of Prime Minister and moved to Sde Boker in the Negev, and encouraged the people of Israel to move and to settle the Negev and the periphery of the country in general. Before dying he asked that his house in Sde Boker will be reserved and serve as a museum, Ben-Gurion's Hut. The museum, and this picture in particular, demonstrates the famous simpilicty in which Ben-Gurion lived, which is a complete contrary to the luxury life many of the Israeli policians have now. -- Tomer T (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I asked the picture to be moved to an English name, but this request was declined. Tomer T (talk) 20:51, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I do not see the file name as a problem at all. File names can be in any language and character set. Its main purpose is to be meaningful (Google translates to 'The room of David Ben-Gurion in Sde Boker hut') and serve as a unique identifier. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:23, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Needs perspective correction at least. EV is very high certainly but I fail to see something special in the image, without knowing the room I think a more interesting composition (more depth) should have been possible. --Kreuzschnabel 21:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like the very simplistic interior and the green colors a lot. It is a refreshing topic. As a cultural ignorant I did not know about Ben-Gurion, and I agree it is remarkable life-style for a former Prime and Defense minister. So I learned a lot by seeing it, as it triggered me to read about it, thus fulfilling its educational value purpose. There are some not so good technical aspects abut the image. As a minimum I think it needs to be rotated such that the corner line behind the bed is vertical. Furter improvements on the perspective are also adviceable - it looks weird at the cropped windows. Also quite some noise, but I think reasonable given the interior shot with no flash. There is also quite visible CA at the edges. Not thaat important, but probably correctable, espececially if the creator has the raw file. I improved the categorization and added an English description to the file page. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:23, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This picture illustrates what I expect from a FP in photography. It's amazing, it fascinates me and makes me think. Technical considerations are nothing. we lost the idea of what may be an FP image.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as it is per Archaeodontosaurus. Any "corrections" to the perspective would probably do more harm than good, as they would require a significant amout of cropping afterwards. --El Grafo (talk) 12:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Archaeo is convincing ! and he is right.--Jebulon (talk) 20:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:33, 12 December 2014 (UTC)--Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:33, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Value trumphs my pedantism :-) -- Slaunger (talk) 21:07, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I prefer the alternative. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:19, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Claus (talk) 07:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 13:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Alternative version[edit]

rotated a bit, and verticals corrected

Pictogram voting info.svg Info I just wanted to get a try, and I think the result deserves your wise opinions, dear colleagues. Yes, there is a loss of informations, but actually not so important that we were afraid of. Not so bad and better quality-wise IMO, and there is no treason of the will of the photographer, I hope. It could be perceived as an improvement. Anyway, this is an "alternative" in your choice. The simplicity of Ben Gourion's end of life is still well shown here. Thanks for attention. As for me, I support both.--Jebulon (talk) 14:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per above.--Jebulon (talk) 14:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm in on this one. Thanks for the edit, Jebulon -- Slaunger (talk) 14:19, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The tighter crop makes it more impressive to me. --Kreuzschnabel 21:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Prefer this. Jee 06:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I clearly prefer this one. --Cayambe (talk) 09:09, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not as bad as I had suspected. Maybe it's just my imagination but the chair seems to have suffered a tiny little bit from the manipulation. I still prefer the wider crop. --El Grafo (talk) 12:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)t

File:Rome (IT), Ponte Sisto -- 2013 -- 4093.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 17:02:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ponte Sisto at night in Rome, Italy
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 17:02, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 17:02, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice picture. I have some questions/comments:
    1. When I just look at it, and especially when my eyes follow the top of the bridge the photo looks like it could need a clockwise rotation. When I further look at the mirror lines where the three pillars meet the water I note they are also quite far from being on a horizontal line, again indicating it could need a clock-wise tilt. But I am not sure though as it depends on the exact position of the vantage point. I assume the photo was taken from Ponte Guiseppe Mazzani? It appears you did not take the shot from the middle of that bridge, which would be the obvious choise (not knowing the place myself). Was there a good reason for picking the exact vantage point? Please consider if the proportions are as they should be. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
    2. I always find it hard to get the right white balance in a shot like this. In your photo, I find there is a quite noticeable yellow cast and even the (I suppose green?) foliage looks rather yellow. Are you sure the WB is approximately correct? -- Slaunger (talk) 20:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
    3. IMO the composition could be improved by cropping both at the top and bottom, giving a larger aspect ratio, emphasizing that the main subject is significantly longer, than it is high. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
    4. You have an 18 Mpixel sensor, but the nomination 'only' has half that resolution (in pixels). I suppose it is downsampled to about half the original pixels? The noise level is extremely low. I would recommend not downsampling to unravel more details - or do it less aggressively. I do not think the noise level would become unacceptable from doing that. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Fixed First of all: Thank you for your review and your comments. They are very helpful. I've made a perspective correction with the lights and the water reflections. So it should be OK now. You're right, the photo was taken from Ponte Mazzani. On the left there were disturbing elements. So the photo is taken from the left of Ponte Mazzani. You're right, the white balance got changed. There is too much blue in this image. In the original shot there is really too much yellow. The crop is changed at the top and the bottom. And finally the noise level is changed now and the file size is increased. Hopefully everything is fine now.--XRay talk 16:22, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A significant improvement Smile. All good for me. --Slaunger (talk) 19:49, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Just a quick response to your issue of white balance in images like this. The problem is that it's fundamentally impossible to fix. The yellow lighting used is sodium vapour, and it produces light of a very limited wavelength. This means that if there are no other light sources with a wider spectrum, no matter what white balance you try to use, the light will be monochromatic. All you will do is change the colour of the monochromatic light. ;-) See here. Sodium lighting scores lower than any other form of lighting. They are cheap and nasty, but because they are quite energy efficient, they are typically used in street lighting. Good for municipal power bills, bad for photography. Diliff (talk) 23:05, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. As per my comments on the lighting above, I find it difficult to support. Yes, it's a photo of the bridge at night, but if it were taken in the blue hour, we'd at least have a counteracting source of lighting that would avoid rendering it rather monochromatic. Diliff (talk) 23:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Rom (Italien), Ponte Sisto -- 2013 -- 4093 -- bw.jpg

  • An Alternative in black and white. --XRay talk 11:46, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. To be clear, I was opposing the previous image above because it was monochromatic, not because it was yellow. The same problem applies to this image in B&W IMO. And yes, this is a reflection of my views as discussed in length on the FPC talk page. As a general rule, I don't believe that landscapes and buildings in B&W are most useful to Wikipedia. There are exceptions, but this is unfortunately not one of them. Diliff (talk) 12:14, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Φάρος Ρεθύμνου και Ψηλορείτης 2782.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 16:26:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The lighthouse of Rethymno and Mt. Psiloritis at the background.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- C messier (talk) 16:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- C messier (talk) 16:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support weak, because of a lack of wow. --Hubertl (talk) 07:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Bixby Creek Bridge, California, USA - May 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 14:35:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bixby Creek Bridge
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 14:35, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 14:35, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, once I looked closer and realized that dark spot above the bridge is not an errant cloud's shadow but a coniferous tree. Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice place, nice image. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:03, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 22:16, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nikhil (talk) 03:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I went three times over this bridge, but always coming from the other side. Unfortunately I never got out of the car to enjoy this part of the CA1.--Hubertl (talk) 07:31, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    • It's worth stopping, there is a car park just 100 metres away from the bridge. But you could stop every few Kms and never actually get anywhere. The scenery is quite stunning. Some of the very best views unfortunately had nowhere to stop. :-) Diliff (talk) 09:19, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Have we started the "Diliff Original Nomination" club yet? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yeah --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:19, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Wladyslaw. --Kadellar (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, while I generally admire your photos, I feel like this shot is not up to your other quality work. Shooting southbound is what most photographers do at this place. However, I would have suggested also exploring the other side of the road (to the viewer's left). That view exposes more of the Pacific and makes the viewer understand the height of the canyon better. Now, what I don't like is your choice of the time of day. Also, the climatic conditions were somewhat unfavorable (see the hazy sky in the background). In general (and maybe I'm more biased than everybody else because I know the place well), this specific shot lacks the wow for me. Again, your other work is outstanding. Best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Frank, I understand your point but your suggested view has the big disadvantage that the power supply lines are disturbing the scenery in a significant way. And I think the coast line in Diliffs image is a good framing for this bridge. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:22, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Frank, I did actually explore both sides of the bridge but didn't find a view that I liked. I agree that the other side gives a better impression of the height of the bridge, but I think it's an inferior view of the coastline because it's mostly obscured behind the bridge and the hill on the left. I don't think either view is necessarily 'the best'. They are show different things more clearly. I don't consider the haze a particularly unfavourable condition. It's subtle and doesn't really affect anything but the clarity of the horizon. It was pretty characteristic of my entire 2 day drive along the coast, lots of nice deep blue skies but a persistent haze along the horizon. Diliff (talk) 11:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Chrumps (talk) 18:30, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hard contrast and could be nice more beach too, however, excellent --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:38, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Link to existing fp for ref. Jee 06:02, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Polyommatus bellargus male, Aveyron, France - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 14:34:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Polyommatus bellargus male butterfly
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 14:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive. --C messier (talk) 16:32, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This confirms to me: If you have this lens, never leave the house without it!--Hubertl (talk) 19:29, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support beautiful colour -- Colin (talk) 22:16, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nikhil (talk) 03:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBruce1eetalk 05:07, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Shallow DOF, f/8 on FF migth not be good idea. Crop could be biger. --Mile (talk) 10:52, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    • The DOF is 'good enough' by macro standards though, and all important details are sharp. Only the top edges of the wings are out of focus. It is very difficult to get a macro shot of a butterfly with its entirety in focus as you probably know. If you look at other FPs in this category, you will find that virtually all of them have similarly limited DOF, and many of them with significantly poorer sharpness and detail. Diliff (talk) 16:54, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Magnificent. --AmaryllisGardener talk 14:45, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This image was my main reason for purchasing my own macro lens. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:29, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good DoF imo. --Kadellar (talk) 21:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An unusual Diliff - no tone mapping, no stitching - but excellent in any way --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:02, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support One would wish for all the butterfly to be in focus, but I understand the limitations explained above. Daniel Case (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 06:14, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --fedaro (talk) 20:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 17:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 21:24, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Bruno Doucey par Claude Truong-Ngoc décembre 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 13:38:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bruno Doucey par Claude Truong-Ngoc
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Claude Truong-Ngoc, nominated by Yann (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Professional quality portrait of a French writer and poet. -- Yann (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent quality, nice expresion, high EV and the black and scale up white are colors too to realse the contrast and expresion --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 13:44, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 19:28, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Is he a saint ? I see a halo behind his head, and I'm not a fan of that. BtW, I "don't dislike" the B&W choice here...--Jebulon (talk) 21:21, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Je pense que c'est volontaire pour mettre en valeur le portrait par rapport au fond. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 21:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
    • @Jebulon: Votre commentaire est très drôle, je suis d'accord avec vous, le Vignettage devrait être retirée. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 10:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a nice B&W image but ... the halo arround the head is distracting and the false focus point: it's to the beard and not to the eyes = "a malpractice"? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:43, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I think this is done on purpose, to highlight the portrait from the background. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:03, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Purpose or not, it looks simply bad for my opinion, as a nimbus and Bruno Doucey isn't sacred. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Have to agree with Alchemist-hp/Jebulon that the halo is odd. Otherwise it's a fine portrait I'd be happy to support. -- Colin (talk) 22:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
        • Claude confirmed that this is done on purpose. See his talk page for the details (in French). Regards, Yann (talk) 09:45, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
          • I don't full understand the talk page conversation but I see now it is a strong vignette all round the face. If the vignette overlapped the top of the hair, then perhaps it wouldn't look so much like a halo. I appreciate the desire to bring focus on the face, but this doesn't seem to be subtly done. -- Colin (talk) 18:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
            • It is a very good technique in fine-arts. But if Commons only wants boring 100% faithful reproductions, it will be bad technique. :) Jee 02:24, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
              • Thanks Jee. That proves, if needed be, that opposing votes here are completely out of line with what professional photographers do. Very disappointing... Yann (talk) 10:06, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
                • I can only say: images from "professional photographers" ≠ always featured pictures! If you can't accept an opinion from another, so close your eyes please ... ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:52, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
                  • Family portrait photography (per the link) isn't really "fine arts". Nor (to put my Wikipedia hat on) is 500px a reliable source for serious photographic technique. Regardless, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with using a vignette just as there is nothing wrong with using a graduated filter for landscape photography. But both techniques can be overdone or misaligned. -- Colin (talk) 13:00, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Purpose or not, etc... Sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That halo is hardly visible in the original, full resolution version. I suspect that the halo effect in the thumbnails/smaller sizes is due to oversharpening from the recently introduced "bucketed" thumbnailing. See phab:T76983. --El Grafo (talk) 10:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes; no halo in full size. And glad to see his teeth are out of focus. I had vomited several times after seeing an fpc at EN last year. :) Jee 11:56, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
I see the halo on the full-size image if I step back, or if I reduce it in software. So this is not a mediawiki thumbnail issue. -- Colin (talk) 13:00, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
I see it also at my 4K monitor. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Bruno Doucey par Claude Truong-Ngoc décembre 2014.jpg
I see it as well, and yes it gets more pronounced if you step back or zoom out. I've downloaded the small thumbnail on the right as well as the original, loaded both in Gimp and zoomed out the original to match the thumbnail's size. There's quite a difference in sharpening which also affects the halo to some degree. Personally I think that the amount of halo visible in the original size is OK. I can understand other people disagreeing on that, but however you decide, please don't make your decision solely based on Mediawiki's current thumbnail settings. --El Grafo (talk) 13:56, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm only talking about the light halo around the head btw, not about the dark vignetting effect that makes the scarf blend into the shirt at the bottom etc. That's an appropriate thing to so in order to focus on the face, imho. --El Grafo (talk) 14:01, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
All quality photo websites, including MediaWiki apply a small degree of sharpening when they downsize an image, to offset the softening effect of the algorithms and to restore pixel-level contrast which can be averaged away. If you simply downsize without sharpening, an image can look soft. See this. -- Colin (talk) 14:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, but very recently the way this is being done on Commons has changed. Previously, each thumbnail size was created from the original with an appropriate, small amount of sharpening. Now they use a "bucket chain", where only the largest thumbnail is created from the original. From that, the next smaller size is created, and from that the next smaller size and so on. Sharpening is done in every step so that the smaller sizes receive several rounds of sharpening. See this example ("old" mediawiki default on the left, new "bucketed" approach on the right). See also phab:T76983 or Commons:Forum#Neue_Version_der_Vorschau? (in german), where people complain about that.
All I'm saying is: Don't trust our thumbnails at the moment, there have been some drastic changes lately. --El Grafo (talk) 15:38, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Faro de Holmbergs, Suðurnes, Islandia, 2014-08-15, DD 113.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 12:50:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Holmbergs lighthouse, Suðurnes, Iceland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Smial -- Smial (talk) 12:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition, the colours, but especially the waves which are somehow "living", don't know how to describe it better in english. -- Smial (talk) 12:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks Smial for this nomination! I can add that this picture was taken just after the sunset (the time 21:43 is correct). Sunsets in Iceland are though a bit different. I remains relatively bright until after midnight during sommer. Taking this shot was also challenging due to the weather conditions, it was so windy that the wind pulled my camera + tripod away, so I had to put myself against the wind direction and in front of the camera to take this shot. Getting to this location is also tricky, I had to climb to get to this spot. Poco2 13:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I appreciate the difficulty because of the weather conditions, but the picture is too blurry. Sorry. Nikhil (talk) 03:47, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    Nikhil: well, you cannot expect that the whole picture is sharp from the see to the stone below the camera, especially the stones in the foreground are unsharp, which should enhance the eyes movement through the sharper area in the background. Poco2 17:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    Some may call it "blurry", others call it "not oversharpened". I prefer images that are not oversharpened. -- Smial (talk) 21:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    User:Poco_a_poco: I like the composition as a whole, but looking at the camera settings, for an exposure of 0.6 seconds, and against a wobbling tripod, because of strong winds as you mention, no wonder the picture is blurry. Couldn't you have increased the ISO and decreased the exposure time to say 1/60 seconds so that blur would have been mitigated to a great extent? Just a suggestion Nikhil (talk) 05:30, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
    Nikhil: The lack of sharpenss that you claim, and for me is acceptable for this kind of shot, cannot be due to the a shaky tripod, since some areas are IMO sharp enough. In such a case there would be a lack of sharpness overall. I not only took this picture but a bunch of them of this subject and uploaded a third of them. Poco2 13:07, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
    I prefer the image linked below by Kruusamägi. Nikhil (talk) 05:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I prefer this image. Kruusamägi (talk) 21:50, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --fedaro (talk) 15:40, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Jatra Posters and a Tram.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 07:50:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jatra posters and a tram
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Jatra posters are visible through a moving tram at Kolkata, India. c/u/n by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good capture: makes you want to investigate the image. -- Colin (talk) 08:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice idea. Nikhil (talk) 03:42, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Uploaded a version which is in sRGB color-space. --Dey.sandip (talk) 13:23, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this execution of the blurred-tram idea so much more than this one. Daniel Case (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Added Geo-location data. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 16:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am afraid that FOP in India does not allow this. Nice image nevertheless. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, I am not sure what the FOP-India mentions. The posters are only a portion of the overall frame (which is essentially a street scene), and no close-ups of only the posters have been captured. The posters are appearing as anyone can see them from a road-side position in a public setting. I am not sure how that violates anything, but as I said, I am not really aware of any issue here. If someone can throw some light on this, or why the image should be disallowed on this ground, I'll be happy to know. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 21:40, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Image promoted as QI. Also, checked the conditions of FOP in India. Since in this image, the posters only occupy a part of the frame (which is a street scene) and the posters were visible and accessible in a public setting, there should be no issue with regards to FOP. The image is therefore fine in this regard. --Dey.sandip (talk) 09:25, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment FOP in India allows onlt 3D works. And since the poster is an essential part of this picture, I don't think it can be de minimis. The only valid defense would be that it is not readable, and that it is only a patch of colors... Regards, Yann (talk) 09:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with you that all the details in the poster are not readable. In fact, that was not the intention of the photograph either, for which a close up of only the poster could have been captured. The intention of the photograph was to capture an impression of the shop and the street (with posters adorning it) using a moving tram in the foreground. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Cathartes aura at Tomales Bay.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2014 at 05:33:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Turkey vulture (Cathartes aura septentrionalis) perched atop a piece of wood on the eastern side of Tomales Bay, Marin County, California.

File:Canadian window + indian summer.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2014 at 23:49:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A window and its outside taken during indian summer, Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by SteGrifo27 -- SteGrifo27 (tell me) 23:49, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- SteGrifo27 (tell me) 23:49, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the image quality isn't OK: noisy in the dark areas, chromatic aberration. The main, the indian summer: is only an unsharp part of this image. No FP for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, and not much likelihood of getting any through editing. Daniel Case (talk) 06:48, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • strong Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. --Yikrazuul (talk) 13:08, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the underexposed foreground, and a generally unimpressive picture EoRdE6 (talk) 19:59, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 09:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Torre America Building Facade in Caracas, Venezuela.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2014 at 23:38:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Torre America Building Facade in Caracas, Venezuela.
Yes but its not my idea, my inspiration was a image of @Alvesgaspar: --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 08:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 01:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it! I almost think I should be playing a board game on it! Daniel Case (talk) 06:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 07:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Next time try a stitch to get more resolution. Then your photo of a building facade could be worth £1.5 million. PS I saw Gursky's Montparnasse in a photo exhibition last week: it is very big, but only a two-photo stitch and done in 1993 so we can do better now with only a cheap DSLR and some free software :-) -- Colin (talk) 08:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Do stitch is not posible :( because, This photo was taken from an interstate, Unfortunately for these cases the camera is important. I am sorry --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 08:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Another version[edit]

Full version

*Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment please respect the nomination process. This is NOT an alternative, but another picture. This is NOT another version, but another crop. It should be another nomination.--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Jebulon, this is exactly what an alt is for -- different crops or processes of the same image. If it was another version uploaded over the top of the existing one, it wouldn't be an alt but just an update. -- Colin (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
So, if Jebulon is right, the two pictures can be FP. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
I really dont underestand, this jpg picture have the same time shoot (See EXIF). --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:05, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support in my opinion: this is an alt image and I prefer this one. It works better for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:05, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
        • It appears that I'm wrong, please excuse me.--Jebulon (talk) 20:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
          • Hi Jebulon, there is no need to apologize. Your opinion is also a valid and acceptable opinion! Why not ... :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:01, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
            • Sorry Al, I did not express a wrong opinion, but just made a mistake about a fact...--Jebulon (talk) 22:47, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
              • Vous ne avez pas besoin de se excuser, je apprécie vos opinions. Je apprécie votre travail. Merci --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this version. -- Colin (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--LivioAndronico talk 22:25, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Although focus is a little soft at the top, but we need more FPs from, e.g., Caracas. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:16, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:31, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wish it was bigger. --Kadellar (talk) 17:15, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
I uploaded another version with a row more of windows, I am not sure if it is ok --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support now. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:03, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Either one. --King of ♠ 20:11, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 16:37, 15 December 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, oppose, neutral → featured. /😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:43, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture
The chosen alternative is: File:Torre América, Caracas, Venezuela.jpg

File:Astrantia major Mitterbach 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2014 at 20:13:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Great Masterwort (Astrantia major), found in Mitterbach am Erlaufsee, Lower Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Great Masterwort (Astrantia major), found in Mitterbach am Erlaufsee, Lower Austria. All by me -- Uoaei1 (talk) 20:13, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 20:13, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Banding very obvious in many parts. A bit to shallow DOF. Bad crop. --Mile (talk) 21:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • @PetarM: I will work on the banding issue. What is wrong with the crop? --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:16, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would concentrate more on what is sharp, or at least some crop from sides, should main flower fell to third rule spot. --Mile (talk) 07:25, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow --LivioAndronico talk 22:12, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Conditional neutral I like the composition a lot. It is refreshing and eye-catching after having seen a lot of unimaginative plant composition being nominated at FPC. I do not mind the somewhat shallow dof. It attracts the eye to the main central flower. It is visual caviar, ahh. I do think though that something should be done wrt the banding in the background. Maybe re-introduce a little grain or subtle noise in the background to break up the banding? I'll be happy to change to support if that is addressed. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can support the new edit. Nice work! -- Slaunger (talk) 21:10, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 22:50, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 07:07, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - What is that white line on the flower? (I've tagged it). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:49, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Something from a small animal, a spider or an insect, I presume --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:49, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I preferred the close crop. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:49, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Preveli Palm Beach Panorama 02.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2014 at 20:10:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palm beach of Preveli with the mouth of Megalopotamos river, Crete
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Palm beach of Preveli with the mouth of Megalopotamos river, Crete. All by me -- Uoaei1 (talk) 20:10, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 20:10, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It reminds me a lot of Big Sur. Amazing how two places on opposite sides of the world, united only by climate, can be so similar. --King of ♠ 01:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's "belo, parabéns"! ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 14:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --C messier (talk) 16:35, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now, I understand all the other pictures from the river! --Hubertl (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Singapore Airlines Airbus A380 at Sydney Airport.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2014 at 19:57:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Singapore Airlines Airbus A380 at Sydney Airport
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Damien Aiello - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Russavia -- russavia (talk) 19:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Description from photographer: Singapore Airlines Airbus A380 (9V-SKD) operating as SQ222 taking off in a southerly direction on Runway 16R at Sydney's Kingsford Smith Airport. Photo taken from a chopper flying parallel at approx 500ft. Focal length 200mm on F8 aperture. russavia (talk) 20:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- russavia (talk) 19:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Milad A380 talk? 20:02, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Very good light and detail level and well caught moment, but I do not like the tight crop of the tail to the left and the shadow to the right, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nick (talk) 23:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Sorry,per Slaunger,the I don't like the crop --LivioAndronico talk 07:57, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, the crops are tight and 16:9 would probably give the subject more room to breathe, but it's excellent in every other way and I like the shadow very much. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Singapore Airlines Airbus A380 at Sydney Airport (cropped2).jpg
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment We could look at File:Singapore Airlines Airbus A380 woah!.jpg as see that although it is a fantastic photo, it is unlikely to be FP in its current state (ignoring the size issue) because it is "boxed in" in the frame. The analogous version of the photo being discussed here is to the right. Slaunger and LivioAndronico2013 have issues with the crop. The crop is fine IMHO for the purposes of FP -- the aircraft is not boxed in the frame, and has plenty of room to breathe. russavia (talk) 10:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because of the right and left crops. --Kadellar (talk) 17:18, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The shadows in the nominated image gives highlight to the image showing hight above the ground etc. Josve05a (talk) 19:46, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What about a little "cheat", and adding some space left and right by cloning ? --Jebulon (talk) 22:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I think it works. :) Jee 06:10, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Alternative version with more room[edit]

Singapore Airlines Airbus A380 at Sydney Airport room added.jpg

Pictogram voting info.svg Info I don' t try to be deceptive. But please don't focus your review only on the retouched parts of the picture. Of course, you will probably find flaws (repeated patterns etc...) because it is a cloning. Remember instead: are you sure you will find (and search) the flaws if you did not know it is a retouched version ? Thanks in advance.--Jebulon (talk) 12:56, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 12:56, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, better. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 13:10, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now is perfect --LivioAndronico talk 13:20, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:28, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice edit, Jebulon! -- Slaunger (talk) 14:23, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Even the original one was great and this one also is better, thank you! −ebraminiotalk 16:58, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 17:14, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Much better, compositionally. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:45, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done improvement of an already very nice image. --P e z i (talk) 13:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Old Woman of San Juan Bautísta.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2014 at 18:48:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Old Woman of San Juan Bautísta
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:48, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice idea and impressive face but the light is way too harsh IMHO. Would look marvellous in softer light. --Kreuzschnabel 12:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I suspect (an I'm really not an expert in this) that this might actually work better in B&W (plus a slightly tighter crop at the bottom and right). --El Grafo (talk) 10:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your recomendation --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 14:46, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Version soft[edit]

File:Old Woman of San Juan Bautísta

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Per @Kreuzschnabel: comment. All by --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 13:10, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better. Yann (talk) 22:32, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is an impressive face, the quality is good and we have relatively few humans in our FP galleries! I would crop the image a bit on the left though. Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:35, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Oi Alves, could you do that by yourself o simply add a note a I will do that. Nice recomendation --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
I don't think most portraits, including this one are better off center. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:49, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Antiguo faro de Akranes, Vesturland, Islandia, 2014-08-14, DD 008.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2014 at 18:37:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The old lighthouse of Akranes is located in the westmost location of the Akranes Peninsula, Southern Peninsula region, Iceland. The lighthouse is one of the oldest concrete lighthouses in Iceland and was built in 1918. It served the fishing town of Akranes until it was deactivated in 1947 in favor of the larger structure several meters away.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The old lighthouse of Akranes is located in the westmost location of the Akranes Peninsula, Southern Peninsula region, Iceland. The lighthouse is one of the oldest concrete lighthouses in Iceland and was built in 1918. It served the fishing town of Akranes until it was deactivated in 1947 in favor of the larger structure several meters away.. All by me Poco2 18:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 18:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request please add a GEO-tag, so you earn my support :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
    Alchemist-hp: ✓ Done! I promise, I'll not get a new camera without GPS Poco2 21:52, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
    Perfect SMirC-thumbsup.svg. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:08, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:08, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support However, it would benefit from a little less sky, since there's nothing interesting going on there (e.g. puffy clouds). --King of ♠ 01:48, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:05, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with King of Hearts, there is too much sky imo. What do you think about leaving the horizon at the upper third line approximately? I added a note (and I removed too much sky, pick a bit more). --Kadellar (talk) 21:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    Kadellar, King of Hearts: ✓ Done! I agree with your proposal. Poco2 09:35, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think it's better now, thanks for reworking! --Kadellar (talk) 16:38, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --fedaro (talk) 15:38, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Portrait of ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis), Windsor, Ontario, 2014-12-07.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2014 at 20:45:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Portrait of ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Crisco 1492 --  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 20:45, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 20:45, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 09:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 12:11, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Bojars (talk) 16:46, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but maybe you could reduce noise in the background --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I've already denoised a bit. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:27, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great work. Nice to have close portraits which bring out their eye in such beautiful detail. --99of9 (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • 99of9, I think for your !vote to be considered, you have to sign. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • oops thanks. --99of9 (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bom ângulo, mais uma espécie de ave para o banco de dados das FPs. ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:15, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks. It does work well, documenting the species. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 14:37, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose
    Clipped areas
    Hard not to excuse again … but while idea and composition of this picture are truly great, the blown whites (of which there are huge areas all over the head!) are an absolute no-go for me. See the pic on the right, all green areas are pure white in the original. Contrast does not make the clipping inavoidable here, so the image is simply overexposed or overprocessed. --Kreuzschnabel 08:02, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    • My Lightroom is not showing as extreme highlight issues; what software are you using? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:05, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
      • I am talking about the picture nominated. The areas I have pointed out show no detail at all to me, and I found that by looking at the picture, not by using any analysing software. Be it 255/255/255 or 254/254/254, the visual effect is the same. I was using colour selection in GIMP but don’t remember the tolerance setting (admittedly it certainly wasn’t zero). However, it still shows what I feel looking at the original image. --Kreuzschnabel 15:07, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
        • I checked the nominated file in Lightroom, not the original RAW. I'm guessing the two pieces of software have different thresholds (Lightroom's own settings, and the tolerance in GIMP's software). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
          • Again: I am talking about my visual impression, not about some software output. That was just to prove my impression. --Kreuzschnabel 20:41, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:40, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nicely done. Great close-up bird portrait. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 06:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 21:25, 15 December 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 22:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Sveti Stefan (06).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2014 at 19:36:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sveti Stefan, Montenegro.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Halavar -- Halavar (talk) 19:36, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Halavar (talk) 19:36, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Pretty good wow, light and composition, but I am not sure if it among our 'very best'. The texture of the sea and some of the stone facades looks a bit weird (luminance noise reduction?), although it is a minor issue. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Slaunger that is only a minor issue. --LivioAndronico talk 20:30, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very nice, useful. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice, but a bit soft and some kind of noisy texture visible e.g. in the sea in front --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:48, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I added contrast, so now the image is less soft. But for the other thing, I don't know where is the problem. --Halavar (talk) 19:11, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:42, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I feel like the crop on the left and right are too tight, and it's a bit washed out in terms of lighting (would be better to take it some time other than noon). --King of ♠ 01:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've some concerns regarding FOP, or rather non-FOP in Montenegro. That island is a hotel constructed in the last years. I wanted to propose myself this picture of the same subject but I'm not sure about the license situation here. Poco2 15:59, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm not showing the hotel, but the island. I've been there also in 2009, before opening the hotel, and this place looks exactly the same (from the outside of course). Opening the hotel didn't change anything with exterior of this island. The other thing is that FoP (or no-FoP) has nothnig with Featured pictures nominiations. If you think, that showing this island/hotel is breaking the copyright law, you should start deletion procedure to the all images in this category (including your images from this year). --Halavar (talk) 17:01, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
True that it isn't the place, but the argumentation you provided was fair enough and now I don't see that ta DR would be needed Poco2 10:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 18:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Sassoferrato - Jungfrun i bön.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2014 at 23:06:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Virgin in Prayer, by Giovanni Battista Salvi da Sassoferrato
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Giovanni Battista Salvi da Sassoferrato, uploaded by J-Ronn, nominated by Yann (talk) 23:06, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Virgin in Prayer, by Giovanni Battista Salvi da Sassoferrato (1609–1685)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 23:06, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support "More paintings"! ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:33, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- J-Ronn (talk) 03:16, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 07:10, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose just digitally enhanced and softened with loss of details. --Hubertl (talk) 15:26, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pugilist (talk) 22:09, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Strong painting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 20:47, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And 7....Sassoferrato here is strong --LivioAndronico talk 21:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 18:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 06:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Sat 13 Dec → Thu 18 Dec
Sun 14 Dec → Fri 19 Dec
Mon 15 Dec → Sat 20 Dec
Tue 16 Dec → Sun 21 Dec
Wed 17 Dec → Mon 22 Dec
Thu 18 Dec → Tue 23 Dec

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]

Tue 09 Dec → Thu 18 Dec
Wed 10 Dec → Fri 19 Dec
Thu 11 Dec → Sat 20 Dec
Fri 12 Dec → Sun 21 Dec
Sat 13 Dec → Mon 22 Dec
Sun 14 Dec → Tue 23 Dec
Mon 15 Dec → Wed 24 Dec
Tue 16 Dec → Thu 25 Dec
Wed 17 Dec → Fri 26 Dec
Thu 18 Dec → Sat 27 Dec

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Featured picture}} or {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessements template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
    • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==

{{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.

  1. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/December 2014), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/December 2014.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.