Commons:Candidatas a imágenes destacadas

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

Shortcut: COM:CID Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | فارسی | 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)‎ | +/−

Aquí están las candidatas a imágenes destacadas

Ten en cuenta que todo el proceso se realiza en inglés por lo que necesitarás conocimientos mínimos de éste para poder presentar una nueva nominación.

Formalidades[edit]

Nominación[edit]

Si crees que hay alguna foto en Commons lo suficientemente atractiva como para estar entre las imágenes destacadas, entonces por favor inclúyela en la lista de candidaturas editando este enlace. Si hay consenso general después de 10 días, la imagen se transferirá a imágenes destacadas.

Crear una nueva nominación[edit]

Paso 1: copia el nombre de la imagen y pégalo en este cuadro (incluyendo el prefijo Image: ), cuando ya hayas pegado el nombre de la imagen, por ejemplo: Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:EL-NOMBRE-DE-TU-IMAGEN.JPG. Haz clic en el botón crear nueva nominación.


Paso 2: Sigue las instrucciones que verás en la página para rellenar los campos de información de tu imagen.

Paso 3: Manualmente inserta un enlace a la página que has creado sobre tu imagen arriba del todo en Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Haz clic aquí, y añade la siguiente línea ARRIBA en la página de nominaciones:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:EL-NOMBRE-DE-TU-IMAGEN.JPG}}

Para votar[edit]

Para votar puedes usar las siguientes plantillas:

  • {{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).

Puedes indicar que una imagen no puede ser destacada con {{FPX|razón}}, donde en razón explicas los motivos claramente por los que no puede ser destacada.

Por favor explica brevemente porque estas a favor o en contra de la nominación de esa imagen, especialmente cuando votes en contra.

Puedes hacer comentarios en el idioma que quieras, aunque más vale tener en cuenta el hecho de que la mayor parte de los usuarios hablan inglés.

Reglas[edit]

  • Hay 9 días de deliberaciones. Se decide el resultado al día 10 después de la nominación.
  • Los usuarios anónimos pueden proponer candidatas.
  • Los usuarios anónimos pueden participar en la discusión.
  • Los votos de usuarios anónimos no cuentan.
  • Una nominación no cuenta automáticamente como un voto. Debes expresar tu apoyo de forma explícita.

La candidata se convertirá en una imagen destacada a condición de:

  • estar bajo una licencia libre (por supuesto)
  • que haya un mínimo de cinco votos a favor
  • que la proporción de votos a favor / en contra sea al menos 2/1 (o sea, una mayoría de dos tercios o 67%)

Contents

Propuestas[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:München - Olympisches Schwimmstadion1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 14:29:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Olympic Swim Hall, Munich

File:Bertha Lutz 1925.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 13:10:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bertha Lutz

File:Royal Albert Hall Rear, London, England - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 09:23:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Royal Albert Hall, London, England
  • Tsk, tsk, tsk... by now you should really know the answer to that and every other question as well. w.carter-Talk 17:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Estação da Luz 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 03:41:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Estação da Luz 2015
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Brazil
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- The Photographer (talk) 03:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Probably not perfect, and I won't be surprised if someone finds some kind of fault with it, but my reaction is that this is wonderful and exciting! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I know that such a scenery is not easy to handle but the outside part is heavily overexposed. Then both corners are quite noisy and I feel that the whole picture has a slight magenta cast. Additionally it's not really symmetrical, you've been standing too much at the right side. I could live with these shortcomings if the picture had a big wow but I don't find it that pleasing after all. Sorry. --Code (talk) 05:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your review, however, It's not a hdr, you can't show the station interior without a external overexposition and in this case the interior is main subject. Btw, let me know if the noise is gone. --The Photographer (talk) 12:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. The image is a bit too bright in the middle but it is so impressive that I think it is right to support. -- Spurzem (talk) 08:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose you can take the picture in a better hour, not a excuse. The lines are not correct, you are not in the middle..., the colour is incorrect, and we already have a image with the same issue, far more interesting File:Estação Luz.jpg. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose I like so much about this image, but I think RTA has a point, and I can't say I'm not unaware of the issue myself. Daniel Case (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:MonumentoEcuestreaSanMartin-MDP-ago2016.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 22:07:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Equestrian monument to Jose de San Martin, Chica Beach, Mar del Plata, Argentina
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  • all by me Ezarateesteban 22:07, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:07, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good mood. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Monument and tree. Well composed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Mild oppose Soft and unsharp in a lot of places, and I don't think they work so well backlit against a clouded sky, and frankly they don't work together well for me, as the tree and the monument seem to be competing with each other for my attention. Daniel Case (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Eskibel - Paisaje.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 18:45:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape near Eskibel, looking towards Vitoria. Basque Country, Spain

File:Aeolian Islands at sunset.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 18:16:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aeolian Islands at sunset
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes esteban, I know....is the beautiful,blue sky,red sky and island. Thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:27, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting and beautiful -- Spurzem (talk) 20:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many posterized and unsharp areas. Daniel Case (talk) 21:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Daniel is not pasteurized is the rarefied air ..... anyway where would unsharp? thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose mostly per Daniel. It is rather noisy, there are practically no details at all on the sea, the sunset in itself is not extraordinary enough for an FP, the color especially around the islands is so posterized and saturated that at full size it almost looks like those psychedelic posters I had in my room during the 1960s, ok fond memories but not FP, sorry. --w.carter-Talk 21:48, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel & WC. INeverCry 22:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry, it's a nice sunset, but except for the colorful striations in the middle, the picture pretty much just sits there, and at full size, it gets worse to my eyes, as explained by others above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Lovely but the picture suffers from barrel distortion. I also wonder why it's that noisy at only ISO 100. --Code (talk) 05:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Túnel natural, Hartelholz, Múnich, Alemania, 2016-04-03, DD 05.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 17:24:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Natural tunnel with a viewer at the back :) in Hartelholz Forest, Munich, Germany.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Natural tunnel with a viewer at the back :) in Hartelholz Forest, Munich, Germany. All by me, Poco2 17:24, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 17:24, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:49, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:06, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice doggy (and tunnel)! :) But there is red CA on most of the branches at the top. w.carter-Talk 19:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks! And Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 08:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Has an almost hand-painted appearance. Daniel Case (talk) 20:45, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Interesting motif, but I'm not really feeling the composition adding up at full-page size, maybe partly because of the crops, and the blurring makes a lot of branches look like they have snow on them at full size. That's too much (or maybe the wrong kind of) distortion, in my view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I also wowed that there's something in Munich I've never even heard of - Hartelholz... Face-wink.svg --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 17:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Loojangu värvid 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 15:11:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Muraste Nature Reserve
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Kristoffer Vaikla - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support Could be sharper, but I like the texture and mood. Daniel Case (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice catch of sun-rain. --w.carter-Talk 16:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wowed composition. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 18:20, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 18:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- --Isasza (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:58, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Reguyla (talk) 20:46, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I find this interesting enough to support. The composition strikes me as retro, reminiscent of some early photos (though of course those were black & white or possibly sepia). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 16:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Kreta - Kournas-See.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 08:39:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Kournas, Crete, Greece
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Greece
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw, Lake Kournas is the biggest natural fresh-water lake in Crete. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 08:39, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 08:39, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful and very sharp -- Spurzem (talk) 09:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:35, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I again dislike an unsharp area in the foreground, this time in the near right corner, but it's a very small area. I also wish there were a little more room to the right as well as the left of the lake. But all that said, this is a beautiful photo, and I do think it deserves a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support clear composition Thennicke (talk) 09:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Trifolium pratense - Keila.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 06:16:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red clover
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Red clover (Trifolium pratense), all by Ivar (talk) 06:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 06:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose WB if off, and the image looks oversharpened (see dark lines at the countours) --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Uoaei1: WB was not off, look at shooting time (or maybe you haven't seen orange light during golden hour?). Leaf edges of the red clover are sometimes dark red, look this Dew on red clover.JPG --Ivar (talk) 09:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have also added the Category:Plants and trees at golden hour (set up some new cats since the first one was getting crowded) to the pic, same as I did to your previous flower. Perhaps you should remember to add that in the future to keep misunderstandings to a minimum. w.carter-Talk 10:45, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 15:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The droplets really make this golden-hour flower special. Daniel Case (talk) 15:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:48, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Modelo didatico bovino correto.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 00:53:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anatomy model of a bovine (cow), showing several organs and organic systems in left lateral view with the rumen highlighted in the foreground.
Alt version

Anatomy model of a bovine (cow), showing several organs and organic systems in left lateral view with the rumen highlighted in the foreground.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It's not a correction, it's a restoration from original file, because, IMHO Arion nomination has destructive alterations like oversharpening, overexposition and color saturation, btw, I preffer a black background, remembering that it's only my opinion --The Photographer (talk) 03:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a nice work, thanks! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 04:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This has evident relevance for Wikipedias! Joalpe (talk) 13:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As a Wikipedian, I thank you. :) w.carter-Talk 16:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~nmaia [[mia diskuto]] 19:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, although to make this even much more valuable, parts should be labeled. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg strong opposition what's that in the mouth of the animal? Did you invented a new part? And this is a anatomic model, colours are painted by the human, it's not oversaturated, it's the colour of the model, and could be any colour actually, it's a educational model... And it was not "destructive" was we do not have any lost of information. Next time, ponder your words, or at least bring truths... Btw, your cuts are not clear, and the reason is simple, you changed the background colour, but do not took into consideration the invasion that black creates, now we have harsh white knurled lines, and you also do not removed the invasion of magenta provoked by the model itself. Remembering that it's only my opinion. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
PS:I strongly suggest you bright down your monitor, the grey it's not even close to be black, and we do not have areas overexposed in the orginal image. Seeing those evidences, your monitor is probably away more bright that should be to work with images. If you do not believe me, check the histogram... grey vs black. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Pole with tension weight for overhead lines.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 21:39:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pole with tension weight for overhead lines.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- w.carter-Talk 21:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- w.carter-Talk 21:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice semi-abstraction. Daniel Case (talk) 06:42, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me. Also lack of details in the background. --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. INeverCry 19:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I've really been liking some views of pylons in Quebec while traveling there, but this composition is not interesting to me. Sorry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:59, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:2016.07.04.-26-Eilenburg-Ost--Distelfalter.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 17:04:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Colourful butterfly - Vanessa cardui.

File:Black Cliffs' Lake, Lagodekhi Protected Area, Georgia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 14:11:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glacier lake in the Caucasus mountains at the border of Georgia and Dagestan (Russia) 3000 m asl, it needs 3 days (by foot) to reach this beautiful lake from the closest settlement. For 6 months it is frozen.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Giorgi Balakhadze - uploaded by Giorgi Balakhadze - nominated by Giorgi Balakhadze -- g. balaxaZe 14:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- g. balaxaZe 14:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Welcome to FPC, Giorgi Balakhadze! It's really a good start, but being a cell phone camera, the level of detail is somewhat limited. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Very weak support per Arion. Daniel Case (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I would suggest cloning out that black thing at top left in the sky. Good to see a nomination not shot with a multi-1000$ camera/lense. INeverCry 18:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is a beautiful scene, but I think the level of detail should have been a bit better here for an FP. This is not your fault, it's just us being very picky here. I also think you should nominate these for Quality Image and one of them for Valued image. We would also appreciate if you could provide the coordinates for the camera location on the files so that they can be displayed on OpenStreetMap and Google Earth. Please look at this files page to see how that is done. w.carter-Talk 19:46, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice scenery, and the quality is quite good for a cell phone - but not enough for FP level. Details are too unsharp, and parts in shadow are too dark and noisy. --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:08, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 13:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - That's quite an impressive cell phone pic! But what is that black streak in the sky? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It can be an eagle or something like that. I don't remember I was concentrated on the lake.--g. balaxaZe 06:06, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
      • It doesn't come across as an eagle. If you'd be willing to remove it (clone it out), I would support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
        • To make alt version or just to edit?--g. balaxaZe 09:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Black Cliffs' Lake, Lagodekhi Protected Area, Georgia 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 13:50:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

This is a glacier lake in the Caucasus mountains at the border of Georgia and Dagestan (Russia) 3000 m asl, it needs 3 days (by foot) to reach this beautiful lake from the closest settlement.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment well, given the miniscule size of the camera's sensor (4mm diagonal), the f-stop as such is more than adequate. The lack of sharpness (at least when compared to more advanced photographic systems) is due to the sensor itself. This being said, the picture's still good enough imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking, especially that cloud shadow. Also the effort of getting these photos (reading the description) rivals this nom. w.carter-Talk 19:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lack of details. I also miss something special in this scenery. --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:09, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me this image is very good. Perhaps we could look for lacks but we should not overdo. -- Spurzem (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this image is beautiful, poetic and deserves a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Four-spotted chaser (Libellula quadrimaculata) female dorsal.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 12:57:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Four-spotted chaser
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 12:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Charles (talk) 12:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An absolutely stunning creature, but I am a little bothered by the sharpness of that grass it is sitting on. It seems almost "attached" to the dragonfly's head. There is another sharp grass up right that could be blended in with the rest of the bokeh. Thoughts? w.carter-Talk 13:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done I've removed the bit of grass as you suggested. Charles (talk) 14:04, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe a very very little bit oversharpened, and background a very very little bit noisy, but what a marvel ! I would like to know how to take such pictures ! Congratulations.--Jebulon (talk) 14:47, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 14:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:56, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Frecce tricolori Air show Valtenesi del Garda Manerba .jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 06:54:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Frecce tricolori at the Air show Valtenesi del Garda

File:Junonia atlites-Kadavoor-2016-06-23-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 05:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Junonia atlites (Grey Pansy) mating pair

File:Zaadpluizen van Cirsium vulgare in mild avondlicht. Locatie, De Famberhorst 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 05:14:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:7N Djurgårdslinjen SSB A2 24.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 16:10:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Alexandar Vujadinovic -- Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - as nom. - Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a beautiful picture that brings back fond memories for me and certainly a QI or VI, but that modern tram behind the tram spoils the image for me and an FP should be perfect. (not suggesting it could be cloned out this time) This museum tram runs so often that it would be no problem to wait for one with no modern vehicles around it. The architecture around this stop is from the 19th century so the perfect setting for the tram otherwise. Also you got the geo tag wrong, it has this as on the bridge, but the stop and this pic is on Strandvägen at 59.331748, 18.092906 just before the bridge even if the stop is named after the bridge. Sorry, but thank you for showing it. :) w.carter-Talk 17:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the location data, I've updated the page now. As for the newer tram in the background, I waited for it on purpose because I thought it'd be fun to have the newest and one of the oldest in the same image - Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 18:53, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for explaining how you thought, perhaps others will see this the same way you do. Had it been a side-by-side or more shown of the new version, I would have agreed with you, but not as it is unfortunately. w.carter-Talk 19:41, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per WC. INeverCry 21:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, plus I don’t like the current collector to be cut off as it is part of the coach. Sorry if it sounds harsh but this strikes me rather as a tourist shot than a carefully composed image. I am sure this can be done better, in a less busy environment. --Kreuzschnabel 22:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschanbel. Daniel Case (talk) 06:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:57, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Gloucester Cathedral High Altar, Gloucestershire, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 14:02:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The High Altar and stained glass of Gloucester Cathedral in Gloucestershire, England.
  • Diese "distorted"-Behauptung wird nicht wahrer vom ständigen Wiederholen. Ich warte immer noch auf Deinen Vorschlag, wie man solche Kircheninnenräume denn besser abbilden sollte. --Code (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • durch natürliche Projektion. --Ralf Roleček 16:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Aha. Und was ist das, "natürliche Projektion"? Ergänzung: Dein Bild hier wurde mit einem 10mm-Objektiv gemacht und hat eine geradlinige Projektion. Das Bild von Diliff wurde aus mehreren Bildern zusammengesetzt und entspricht einem 8mm-Objektiv, ebenfalls mit geradliniger Projektion. Deins ist ok, seins nicht oder wie soll ich das verstehen? Erklär mir den Unterschied. --Code (talk) 16:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm, ich muß zugeben, darauf habe ich keine Antwort. --Ralf Roleček 17:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral See several discussions below. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It really is beautiful and perfect, but IMO too beautiful and perfect, it doesn't look real, more like some computer animation from a film or a game with a huge budget and very good animators. Truly sorry. w.carter-Talk 17:13, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: Sorry, but I really don't understand why you opposed. Please, explain me. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @ArionEstar: I explained it below to Ikan, is that enough or should I do this once again here? w.carter-Talk 13:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @ArionEstar: Now this is turning into a philosophical discussion, by "too perfect" here I meant that it was so flawless that it looked unreal. Kreuz said it better in his explanation when he called it overprocessed and oversaturated. That was the "photography-speak" I was looking for. I am not wowed by this picture, it has perspective but it does not convey a sense of depth, the light is flat, the arches nearest the camera are far too distorted, the stained glass window at the end looks too bright. I don't find this image as stunning as the rest of his church pictures. But I will probably be explaining this "not-wowed" for the rest of my life if I keep up opposing this, so I move to neutral instead. I've learned my lesson. w.carter-Talk 14:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @ArionEstar: Please don't change the words in your question after I have answered it. It means something different now and my answer does not match it. w.carter-Talk 10:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Don't worry about expressing your opinion... You might be right or you might be wrong, but you're entitled to a subjective opinion. You may have a point about the flat lighting anyway. It's not actually flat (there is plenty of contrast), but there was a huge range of luminosity in the scene and the only way to 'squeeze' it into a normal low dynamic range image is to compress it and sometimes that makes it appear flat even when it's not. As I said below, I think reshooting it when the lighting was more balanced would help, but for now, this image is what it is. :-) Diliff (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support perfect as always. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It certainly looks real to me. W.carter, I have to shake my head in disbelief at the idea of opposing a photo because it's "too perfect". Because really great computer animators can produce a fine simulacrum of reality now, we're going to penalize the very greatest photographers for their level of perfection? I think that's not only absurd but really objectionable, and a totally untenable basis for opposing a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:40, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: We deal very much in subjectivity when casting our votes on these candidates, and describing why you don't think something that ought to be ok, is not, that's very difficult. That was the nearest I could come to explaining why the image did not appeal to me. Perhaps I should have used a language like 'flat light', 'too bright stained glass windows', 'arches nearest the camera looking distorted', 'even though it has perspective, it does not convey a sense of depth'. A perfect rendition of something is not necessarily a good photo. Would such a description be more satisfying? We all have our own way of describing why we like or don't like a photo. You often talk about "moving your eyes around the photo", an expression I have never understood, but I respect that as your way of describing how you take in a picture. Mine is often by using simile or metaphore. w.carter-Talk 20:02, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Those specifics make sense to me. In terms of moving one's eyes around the picture frame, see if you can find information about the linear arabesque. My father, a painter, cited a specific treatise, but I don't remember its name at present. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok, I'll see if I can look that up somewhere. And I'll use a more direct language in the future. We don't want things to get 'Lost in translation'. w.carter-Talk 07:36, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:01, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Diliff is the best church interiors photographer. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:13, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • That, I can totally agree with! :) But even the greatest masters sometimes create works that does not appeal to everyone. I don't like all Rembrandts just because they have his signature either. w.carter-Talk 21:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • An odd discussion indeed. I'm very surprised at being pummeled like this for having a different opinion than the rest of the community, I thought that was allowed. I'm starting to feel like a heretic in front of the inquisition for daring to not be wowed by a work of Saint Diliff The Magnificent! But if it saves me from being burned at the stake, I can change me vote to 'Neutral' so as not to hinder the speedy ascension of His work to FP. ;) --w.carter-Talk 07:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • w.carter: Ups, my last comment was way more harsh than I intended it to be. I should have added a smiley or two. I've realized that after re-reading it. I absolutely and honestly didn't want to attack you or your right to an dissenting opinion which I do - of course - respect. Therefore I'd like to apologize for my tone. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:35, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: Come on, this is ridiculous and you know it. Your opinion is always very welcome. But that doesn't mean that other's aren't allowed to reply on your comments as well. This is what we call a discussion. It's quite simple: If you don't want others to reply on your comments you shouldn't post them in the first place. However, I agree with you that language is often a problem here at FPC. I'm not a native English speaker as well and I often don't really know how to express my opinion properly. Thoughtfulness is the key, I think. --Code (talk) 09:30, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes, yes, I know. I enjoy a good discussion as much as anyone else and I can give as good as I get. Face-wink.svg No need to apologize for anything neither you or Martin, I have a very thick skin. Now I also know that speaking metaphorically may be nice when discussing art or the taste of a good wine, but not so much when discussing photos here. I should have tagged my comment above with a ";)" to clarify that I made that one smiling. (now fixed) And to explain a bit, part of my job is to go through hundreds of almost identical photos of something each day and decide which one is the best for a cover, an ad, a brochure, etc. So I'm more used to the "in or out" system, "neutral" is new to me. w.carter-Talk 10:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Though I usually am a great Diliff fan this is overprocessed in my eyes. Colours oversaturated (see all red areas, and even the blue books). Impressing level of detail of course but the look at 100 percent is too unreal for me. --Kreuzschnabel 22:50, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, this is even better than I thought ... come for the quality church interior, stay for the German lesson Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 00:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great // Martin K. (talk) 12:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. From memory this was a tough interior to process. I don't think the colours are unrealistic, especially on the books. If anything, the stained glass was the hardest part to process and some parts are blown a little bit (even with 5 bracketed images with 2-3 stops between them!). I would like to visit again when the light isn't as harsh, I think the stained glass would look better that way. But it's still quite accurate I think. Diliff (talk) 11:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Insula Maioricae Vicentius Mut 1683.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 13:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

1683 map of Mallorca
Yep, looks terrible in FF but fine in Chrome. INeverCry 04:24, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Wait. What is this about Firefox? And how will it look on smartphones, which a lot of people will use to view it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:15, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out the problem. This evening I will try to get rid of those ICC-Data tags that seem to be causing problems with Firefox. --Hispalois (talk) 12:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC) ✓ Done by El Grafo (see below).
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alchemist. If it's hard to view, it's not a good photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sorry, but it's fine with me. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Arion. INeverCry 21:09, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm not having a problem reading it. Daniel Case (talk) 00:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support any chance to fix the profile problem? IE and Safari work, FF doesn't. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
    • It was using a strange, non-standard colour profile called Metis DRS 2A0 CC24. Tried converting to standard sRGB using Gimp – new version looks normal to me in Firefox now (but @Hispalois: please feel free to revert my version if you've got a better solution). --El Grafo (talk) 13:48, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Your version fixed the issue. Thank you very much! --Hispalois (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is not an original, just a 1946 reimpression. Far much less value--Jebulon (talk) 15:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree that an original would fetch much more money in an auction but regarding the encyclopaedic usefulness of the image I'd say there is not much difference. It should be noted that this was a true reimpression, from the original copperplates, not a facsimile. --Hispalois (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

File:13-04-13-st-poelten-landhausviertel-628.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 13:03:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Pölten, Austria, Landhausviertel-Boulevard
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info St. Pölten, Austria, Landhausviertel-Boulevard - all by --Ralf Roleček 13:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ralf Roleček 13:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:19, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 14:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great light, great lines, great perspective, great desolation, but still lacks something... w.carter-Talk 15:52, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special in the architecture, average quality. Too much ground and too few roof. --A.Savin 17:28, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - I quite like this photo, but I'd love it if you could sharpen it a bit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:44, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Savin. INeverCry 21:11, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Living myself next to St. Pölten, I have to say: boring architecture. Also too much floor on this picture. --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:44, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 07:38:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sympetrum fonscolombii, female
  • Can't we have multiple FPs of the same thing? I've never heard anything about that. Anyway, the file:Darter August 2007-22 edit.jpg is an FP on the English and Croatian Wikipedia, not the Commons. --w.carter-Talk 22:23, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • It is only a 1.7 MP which may be good per that day's standard; but not of now. Jee 03:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Hersilia-2016-06-19-002.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 06:17:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tree trunk spider capturing a cicada
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A Tree trunk spider (Hersilia sp.) capturing a cicada. "Rather than making a web that captures prey directly, they lay a light coating of threads over an area of tree bark and wait hidden in plain sight for an insect to stray onto that patch. Once that occurs, they direct their spinnerets toward their prey and circle it; all the while casting silk on it. When the hapless insect has been thoroughly immobilized, they can bite it through its new shroud. They have lightning speed, giving the victim no chance to escape." C/u/n by Jkadavoor -- Jee 06:17, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jee 06:17, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 10:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:55, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 11:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:45, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yuck, but great picture. I know we have the {{Nsfw}} template for nudity and such, is there some similar arachnid warning? Face-tongue.svg w.carter-Talk 15:48, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • You can design one. Clin Jee 16:13, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I suppose this deserves a feature out of pure interest, but if it would work to sharpen the spider just a bit, please do so. It's a good-looking spider, though of course I feel for the cicada. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:50, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support The image is striking enough that although I would have cropped in more tightly on the, uh, action, it can still be featurable. Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm a little embarrassed by the proportions, I would have maybe prefer a vertical shooting and then a 45° rotation to have the trunk horizontal...though good picture! Christian Ferrer (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Tree trunk spiders usually seen on main trunk; not on branches. So making the trunk horizontal may reduce the EV. A portrait crop removing empty sky from both sides may possible. (This is a high speed action; just happened close to my range. I didn't made a single step; just raise the camera and shoot. Only later I found I'm able to capture all important moments, including the bite through shroud.) Jee 03:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP for sure and the slight lack of sharpness is not important for this type of shot. Charles (talk) 09:48, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:35, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 10:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 11:32, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Women model top.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 04:00:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Women model top
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Sitting_people
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Patrick Subotkiewiez - uploaded and nominated by -- The Photographer (talk) 04:00, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 04:24, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent portrait. --Code (talk) 11:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good -- Spurzem (talk) 11:19, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --Pugilist (talk) 12:24, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ralf Roleček 13:02, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:18, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent quality photo! Looking forward to the male version. w.carter-Talk 15:55, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per others. Well composed, well lit, and I appreciate the depth of field. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:52, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A genuinely artistic seminude. Daniel Case (talk) 20:38, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't wanna spoil the nudist party but I don't find this picture particularly enticing. I'm pretty sure it does work well in black&white though --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:46, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Excellent, but what about the copyright ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC) Sorry, it is good.--Jebulon (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 10:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 11:33, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cute--Lmbuga (talk) 20:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Apis mellifera - Melilotus albus - Keila2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2016 at 19:33:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Honey bee and white sweet clover

File:Entzia - Paisaje 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2016 at 09:45:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape of the Sierra de Entzia mountain range. Beeches. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Basotxerri -- Basotxerri (talk) 09:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 09:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral This probably looked much cooler IRL 3D than it came out in the 2D photo, with that cliff sticking out over a precipice contrasting the hills in the distance. Might have worked better if you'd gone further to the left and got a more diagonal line bisecting the image. Others may see this differently. w.carter-Talk 11:50, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per W. carter. Feels like the middle section of something that would be better as a panorama. Also seems underexposed. Daniel Case (talk) 19:01, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per W. carter & Daniel. INeverCry 20:35, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - per others. A good picture but not a FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:39, 21 August 2016 (UTC)


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you all for reviewing and for your opinions! --Basotxerri (talk) 15:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)


Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Basotxerri (talk) 15:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Jaguar E-Type series 1 coupé 1964.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2016 at 09:12:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jaguar E-Type series 1 coupé 1964
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by DeFacto - uploaded by DeFacto - nominated by DeFacto -- DeFacto (talk). 09:12, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- DeFacto (talk). 09:12, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, no. Great car and detail, unfortunate background, especially with that distracting message/ad in the window. Again we ask the impossible of photographers at FPC, such as walk on water, hover in the air or get the owner of the car to park it at a better location. Ok, I'm only assuming it is not your car, if it were I think you would have chosen a better location to shoot it. w.carter-Talk 10:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, sorry --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but per above. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:50, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the background is a good contrast to the wonderful car. -- Spurzem (talk) 12:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, you could "cheat" and clone the right window onto the left one to get rid of the ad and busy window. I mean we have accepted cars being cloned out in front of buildings, so why not part of a building cloned behind a car? And a toned down + desaturated version of the yellow is a good complementary color to the blue of the car. --w.carter-Talk 13:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. --Code (talk) 12:38, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Without prejudice to whether the retouching in the alt version is acceptable or not, the composition doesn't add up to me, though I actually prefer this version, which gives the eye more to move around. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 05:37, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

alt version[edit]

Jaguar E-Type series 1 coupé

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info, Martin Falbisoner, Alchemist-hp, Code: here's another version with an alternative background per w.carter's sugestion above. DeFacto (talk). 14:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support DeFacto (talk). 14:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now this version is something I'd call striking. Please add a {{retouched|What you did}} tag to the new version though. (And remove that line per below.) w.carter-Talk 14:17, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done, added tag. DeFacto (talk). 17:27, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sorry. Fake. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Just curious, what is the difference between this and cloning out an offending car, street lamp, trash, bottles or any other of the things we have asked photographers to get rid of here? w.carter-Talk 14:51, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Normally, I don't bother with objects that are cloned out, but in this case, part of the background (which is a crucial element for a photography composition) is fake. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:00, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you for explaining. I was only wondering since you had no problem supporting this faked image, but here we all know that the pic is manipulated from the start so that might make it harder to accept. I guess it's up to each of us where we decide to draw the line as long as the cloning/manipulation is thoroughly declared on the file's page, something that is clearly done in this case. w.carter-Talk 16:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Cool pic! :) Thanks for showing it, now I understand exactly what you mean. Great explaining. w.carter-Talk 17:22, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request I see a thin line at the car at the coned place and everywhere cyan color points?! What's that? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done, @Alchemist-hp: I'm no retouch artist, but reprocessed the changes and it looks clean now. DeFacto (talk). 17:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 17:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I thought the car was so striking in the original that I didn't even notice the background. But this is just fine as an FP, despite the fact that a careful eye will see signs of the cloning. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aceptable retuch --The Photographer (talk) 20:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I'm just not comfortable with editing of this magnitude. --King of ♠ 23:39, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for reasons given above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:53, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Whatever the outcome of this nom may be, it is very interesting and enlightening to hear the community's view on corrections and what levels are acceptable. --w.carter-Talk 16:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent, and very good new background. Smart idea well completed. If this image was nominated at first without explanations, it should have receive more supports. Why "punish" honesty ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Main subject and reality are not altered --The Photographer (talk) 01:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 11:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, per orhers and clearly unfortunate and uggly background--Lmbuga (talk) 20:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Six Men in a Boat at Cobbler's Cliff Backa Brastad.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2016 at 06:07:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Six men in a boat of the same model as the Hjortspring boat, a detail of Cobbler's Cliff (Skomakarhällen) in Backa Petroglyph Area (or Backa Rock Carvings) Brastad, Lysekil Municipality, Sweden
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media#Religion
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by User:W.carter - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:07, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Another in W.carter's series of photos of the Bronze Age petroglyphs at Skomakarhällen. Obvious artistic and educational value, in my opinion. (By the way, why is my category a red link? Please fix or suggest a fix if you understand this.) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:07, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support @Ikan Kekek: I put this in the same category as her last one. Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media#Others would probably be the only other option. INeverCry 06:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But I would like a bit more contrast. -- Spurzem (talk) 07:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks Ikan, that was unexpected. Face-smile.svg I'm glad you chose one of the smaller ones, they are often overlooked in favor of the large ships but they are more distinct and easier to isolate in the jumble of pictures on the cliffs. Six happy guys in their boat, off on a little Sunday raid... Contrast is upped a bit per request, not too much though since the colors are originally rather soft. I used one of the pine needles as a guide. w.carter-Talk 09:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Happy to nominate it. I'm glad others also consider it worthy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:30, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de África, Ceuta, España, 2015-12-10, DD 70-72 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2016 at 21:16:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the main nave of teh  church of Santa María de África, a Roman Catholic church located in the city of Ceuta, a Spanish exclave on the north coast of Africa.

File:Lotus Temple-Panoroma-Visit During WCI 2016- IMG 6471.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2016 at 17:29:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Lotus Temple, located in New Delhi, India, is a Bahá'í House of Worship completed in 1986.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bijay chaurasia - uploaded by Bijay chaurasia - nominated by Bijay chaurasia -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 17:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 17:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice motif. Could surely be featurable if only the light was better. Looks very dull this way. Additionally the picture needs a perspective correction. --Code (talk) 18:06, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Code. INeverCry 20:16, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, which is a pity because idea and location are striking. Can this be taken from a higher point of view to have less sky within the frame? --Kreuzschnabel 04:57, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I have to agree with the others. Please try photographing this temple again on a somewhat brighter day. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Very weak support I agree with Code and Ikan but frankly this picture captures the symmetry effectively enough. Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Weak support. No sunshine but good impression. -- Spurzem (talk) 07:32, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'll support it without any reservations. The building itself is awesome, taking the pic on a sunny day would most likely have blown much of the detail on the white roof and reflections from the pool could have wrecked havoc on the composition. Plus I welcome FPs of buildings from different religions, not just churches. --w.carter-Talk 09:56, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice shot--Biplab Anand (Talk) 13:54, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, with regrets...--Jebulon (talk) 15:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Commanderij Sint Pietersvoeren 2016 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2016 at 15:49:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Hans Erren - uploaded by Hans Erren - nominated by Hans Erren -- Hans Erren (talk) 15:49, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hans Erren (talk) 15:49, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would like it a little bit darker und with more contrast. Further the town-gate is leaning left. -- Spurzem (talk) 16:09, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done vertical lines rotated to true vertical, autocontrast changed using irfanview; it was a very bright morning so the intense colours are real. Hans Erren (talk) 21:04, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 21:09, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A QI perhaps, but first it's kind of unsharp at depth, with visible CA; second, the composition does not stand out enough for me. Daniel Case (talk) 02:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Still seems overexposed (as pointed out by Spurzem already) with washed-out colours, this probably can’t be fixed. Composition does not strike me this way, I’d crop most of the foreground out (try a 16:9 ratio at full width) to focus on the building. But the main issue is the image quality (sharpness) which is way too poor to be featured I’m afraid – the photographer is in dire need of better gear to execute his good ideas suitably. --Kreuzschnabel 05:03, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Surely doesn't suck, but not an outstanding photo worthy of a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 06:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Trabant P 601 S, Bj. 1986 (Foto Sp 2016-06-05).JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2016 at 11:28:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trabant P 601 S, Baujahr 1986
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Probably no “Wow” for some others but beautiful for me: One of the famous DDR “Trabbis” built in 1986 at a vintage car rally near Koblenz in 2016; created, uploaded and nominated by Spurzem (talk) 11:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- Spurzem (talk) 11:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No, not a "Wow" but a "Yay!". The picture has a happy easy air about it that I like. The light is good and the car is acutally going somewhere, not just sitting there. The background is right for a timeless, carefree Sunday afternoon drive and is not drawing attention away from the car. Even the color of the flowers by the road matches the car. I would welcome a little crop at the bottom though since asphalt is seldom that exciting to look at. Nice shot. w.carter-Talk 12:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, imagine that ... last week I compared an Opel with a Trabant, and look what happens? We get a picture of a Trabi that's just as featurable! Daniel Case (talk) 18:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: I remembered. Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 19:02, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We have Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Opel Rekord P1, Bj. 1958 (Foto Sp 2016-06-05).JPG already. How many models of cars are we going to feature with this same exact composition? Just these 2, or will there be a whole series? INeverCry 20:22, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Please show me the direction that it is not allowed to present nearly the same motive once more or that it would be not allowed to feature! -- Spurzem (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
I've seen FPCs opposed here a number of times because they were too close in composition to images of the same location or subject. This image is featurable on its own, but how many cars in this identical composition would be featurable? If we feature 2, why not 5 or 10, as long as it's a different car each time? Please remember though that this is my opinion and my single vote. My supports and opposes are no big deal. Just one guy's opinion. INeverCry 20:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps this composition for cars ("shells for humans") is the equivalent of gastropods with black background ("shells for snails") as a pleasing way to show the different models/species in FPs? w.carter-Talk 03:08, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
You definitely get points for cleverness on that one. Face-wink.svg But car after car, in the same basic lighting, on the same road, shot from the same vantage point?... They'll all have the honor of my one little oppose if they're brought here to FPC... Face-tongue.svg INeverCry 03:55, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes, I'd like to see the next hundred different cars ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 04:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
    If that'll get him 100 FPs, I'd roll out 100 motorcycles after that... Face-wink.svg INeverCry 04:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
    And I would absolutely support you on that project.Face-smile.svg Since I originally come from the writing side of this project, I don't see it as giving someone 100 FPs, I see it as getting FPs for 100 different articles (or rather hundreds of articles since they could be used for multiple languages). Also, hey, we all have our signature photo subjects... --w.carter-Talk 09:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
    +1 Face-smile.svg --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:48, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, may be QI but not outstanding enough for a feature IMHO. At just 6 megapixels it shows poor detail or sharpness, and there’s visible motion blur on all the details. I’d crop half of the bottom space out as well, there’s too much below and too little above the car. --Kreuzschnabel 05:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like this picture and consider it a good feature. In addition to being a quality photo, the Trabant, as the proletariat's car in East Germany, is historically important. And on the question of featuring numerous cars in similar compositions: Why not? We feature numerous church interiors with similar compositions, too. A worthy photo is a worthy photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:46, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • All the flower + bokeh are pretty standard too. w.carter-Talk 10:57, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:39, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 12:20, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support W. carter and Ikan make good points. I think I was being too rigid about this. INeverCry 21:22, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ralf Roleček 21:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per all of Kreuzschnabel's points. --King of ♠ 23:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could be positioned better, good anyway. --Mile (talk) 16:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As I remember very well 1989, this photo is much "Wow" for me (Yes I'm old, I was born before the building of the Wall) . This is not a car, this is a Trabbi, ladies and gentlemen. An iconic vehicle, full of symbols, with a great historical value. Technically very good, if not excellent.--Jebulon (talk) 16:06, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 19:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Colonial house Rua Tristão Mariano 175, São Paulo, Brazil.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2016 at 08:47:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Colonial house, Rua Tristão Mariano 175, Bosque da Saúde, São Paulo, Brazil
@PetarM: Sorry, but is it really a reason for oppose? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:25, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your recommendation @PetarM: and I will take into account the next time, however, in this case, the house was protected by a fence that prevented me put my camera on the floor (you could check it on GSM). BTW, In Brazil is not allowed to invade the privacy and this house has been uninhabited for years. A hug --The Photographer (talk) 19:16, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • More suggestion Arion. Fence makes difference. --Mile (talk) 06:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joalpe (talk) 02:09, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 16:08, 24 August 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Kreta - Panorama auf Kotsifou-Schlucht.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2016 at 20:04:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crete: View at Libyan Sea and Kotsifou Gorge
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Greece
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 20:04, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 20:04, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:45, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:00, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - This is a really sweet picture and I'd really like to support it, except the unsharp area of the foreground near the left corner bothers me, so I will abstain. If you happen to decide to crop it out, the result certainly looks like one I'd vote for. Just so you understand: the haze-caused unsharpness in the background is normal and doesn't bother me at all; it's only unsharpness in the foreground that is unnatural to my eyes and bothers me, because while there are technical reasons for it, there are in my opinion no good artistic reasons for it in this kind of photo. I've posted about this before: How we as artists should not allow our equipment to play us, rather than playing it (to use the analogy of musical instruments). If I think about this too much, I might oppose, but I will not because the panorama looks good except at full size. That's less than ideal, but it might not be enough of a reason to impede or slow down a feature, as the photo otherwise is very good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:20, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I just looked at the edited version. I will let my objection above stand, but I think that since the photo as a whole is so good at full-page size, I'll support a feature in spite of my demurral above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Captures the texture of the Cretan landscape well. Daniel Case (talk) 05:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel. Btw., there's a tiny, little, barely visible "cropping error" (ie black background) in the utmost lower right corner --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:59, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ralf Roleček 21:46, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:46, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 07:07, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Beautifull motif, but is it my screen, or the sky looks way to dark and colors dull? --C messier (talk) 08:33, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
I'll try a little adjustment this evening. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
C messier: You was correct, the image is brightened up now. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:35, 24 August 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:2016.06.24.-04-Viernheimer Heide-Viernheim--Krabbenspinne-Thomisus onustus-Weibchen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2016 at 16:52:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A crab spider - Thomisus onustus, female.

File:Lynx rufus - Zoo Sauvage de Saint-Félicien - 2016-07-19.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2016 at 16:49:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A bobcat (lynx rufus) at the Zoo Sauvage de Saint-Félicien
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Letartean - uploaded by Letartean - nominated by Letartean -- Letartean (talk) 16:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Letartean (talk) 16:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice idea and well done, yet I think the DoF is very shallow, at least the head should be in focus more or less. Don’t want to oppose for that though since the composition is striking. --Kreuzschnabel 17:00, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good composition but I would like more sharpness at throat and body of the cat. -- Spurzem (talk) 17:23, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a cat. That's all I need. Face-wink.svg INeverCry 19:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A bobcat, to be exact :-) --Kreuzschnabel 19:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes it's a feline, prrr... And you'd think that would be enough, but as a cat lover and having been owned by a cat, I know that these fine beings have high standards regarding their looks, fur must be perfect and immaculate, and an FP should also portray them in the absolutely best manner. No fuzzy hairs! ... Seriously, it's a great image and a great pose, but for an FP there should be more DoF, here it is so shallow that the face looks almost detached from the rest of the body. Very unfortunate. >^o^< w.carter-Talk 20:37, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
    To be clear, it's not a cat, it's a bobcat. Really not as common. Letartean (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
    I once had someone here at FPC call a prize Bengal kitten shot at a Moscow cat show "an ordinary cat"... Face-tongue.svg INeverCry 03:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
    Of course I know what kind of Felidae it is, but I call all members of that family "cats", even Bengal tigers. Face-wink.svg And IMO bobcats are the coolest and greatest of all felines, hence I was very reluctant to 'oppose' this (and on top of that 'promote' that creapy spider above), but here it is all about the photo. w.carter-Talk 08:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not sharp enough, in my opinion. Rarity is not so much of a factor when you are photographing an animal at a zoo. Try to get a clearer photo of the feline. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:27, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Unfortunately the shallow DoF spoils it for me - only the head is in focus. —Bruce1eetalk 06:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:2016 Gebaeude Grosser Feldberg ks01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2016 at 14:59:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Buildings and towers on the Großer Feldberg, Taunus
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Kreuzschnabel 14:59, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Buildings and towers on the Großer Feldberg, Taunus, Germany. At last managed to be there for sunrise this morning. Got them all in first sunlight, the leftmost mast casting its shadow onto the rightmost tower nearly horizontally. I also like the shadow of the near low barrier covering the entire path. Stitched panorama of 6 exposures, therefore high level of detail.
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral as author -- Kreuzschnabel 14:59, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Admirable sharpness -- Spurzem (talk) 16:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive light. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support w.carter-Talk 18:52, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting shapes and light. INeverCry 19:06, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the stark shapes against the sky. Daniel Case (talk) 04:17, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Clear lines, restful composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice atmosphere. However, white dust speck in mid-air.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 19:05, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Åkerbräckans kyrkogård och södra hamnen i Lysekil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 21:59:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southeast Lysekil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Sweden
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Not quite sure if composite images like this with the sort of unnatural sharpness in odd places that comes from stitching are allowed as FPCs. If not, please let me know. It was fun to make though, so I'll give it a try. A small treat is all the annotations on the file page. Take a look. :) - All by me -- w.carter-Talk 21:59, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- w.carter-Talk 21:59, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very nice. I have a similar photo by you in my queue of possible FP nominations. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Sounds intriguing. Btw, have you found the oil tanker on top of the roofs yet? :) --w.carter-Talk 07:48, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • In the distance! I'm not sure I noticed it before. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:57, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The cloud line puts what is otherwise a QI of a Swedish harbor over the edge. Daniel Case (talk) 02:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I actually agree with you, and many FPs are all about capturing a special moment, either by sheer luck or infinite patience. The boats in the right places and no cars on the road were also very lucky (ok, I did wait for the sailboats with spinnakers to come out from behind the cliff and the freight boat to approach the dock) and hard-to-repeat-things. w.carter-Talk 08:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:08, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not very engaging composition, specially at bottom, + white in background a bit blown Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:50, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With Christian -- Thennicke (talk) 02:48, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ralf Roleček 21:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neither scenery nor composition are exciting enough --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow. Kruusamägi (talk) 20:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Trski ohridsko ezero 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 21:54:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reed near the Ohrid Lake in Struga, Macedonia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Darkocv - uploaded by Darkocv - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - It looks beautiful but both the sky and water seem a little strange to me. Is it overexposed? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overprocessed --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overprocessed ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:47, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition, good colors – beautiful for me -- Spurzem (talk) 11:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overprocessed, grainy sky and there is something weird going on in the upper right part of the sky at full size. Colors are interesting though. w.carter-Talk 11:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Spurzem. --Dэя-Бøяg 19:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 20:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Even if it weren't overprocessed, I don't think the composition worked quite as well as the photographer had hoped. Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Ara bleu (Planète Sauvage, Pornic).JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 21:37:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Ivor Novello.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 16:48:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ivor Novello

File:Odocoileus virginianus fawn, Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 11:09:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-tailed deer fawn (Odocoileus virginianus), Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Benson - uploaded by Bruce1ee - nominated by Bruce1ee -- —Bruce1eetalk 11:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Bruce1eetalk 11:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose These are skittish and hard to shoot creatures so hiding behind bushes to get them is a must, but having its front legs substituted by an unsharp plant is a no-go for me. The fawn is adorable and very sharp, still the composition is very unfortunate. --w.carter-Talk 12:38, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is a pity. But the front legs should be to see. The blurred plant instead of that is very disturbing. -- Spurzem (talk) 13:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Too bad, otherwise it’s a fine shot. --Kreuzschnabel 14:03, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others; the placement of that plant in the front is unfortunate. Daniel Case (talk) 16:47, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 20:24, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I have to agree with the others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg moderate Too many bad vibes... this is a very good shot - only the unfortunate placement of the plant prevents it from being truly awesome. On the other side: As the fawn is utterly skittish by nature, being partially hidden by plants helps convey the idiosyncratic trait of this animal to the viewer - without hiding too much in the end. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive I find. You could crop the blurred plants on the right side a bit. The blurred plant in the foreground I first doesn’t noticed it so it's hardly a problem for me even if it's a bit unlucky. My focus when I look at the picture is on the deer and the atmosphere of the picture. --Hockei (talk) 07:27, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Paisajes cerca de Calama, Chile, 2016-02-01, DD 84.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2016 at 05:01:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape near Calama, Chile
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by User:Poco a poco - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:01, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I really like the contrast between the parched earth and clear blue sky. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:01, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 05:26, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support You know what? If I had shot a picture in the Atacama desert every 5 km 99% of them would look like this one :) the exception would have been this one with a solitary tree in the middle of nothing. Thank you for the nomination, Ikan! Poco2 05:57, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • You're welcome! Thanks for the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Btw, have you seen Wally there? :) Poco2 06:16, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • The burro? Sure. I enjoyed looking at him. His eyes are closed, though. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 07:46, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 11:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for Wally ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:32, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 12:36, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Flat half-desert country, nothing extra. Maybe, if the donkey could be much more close to the photograph, it could look better. --Karelj (talk) 21:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI for sure, but per Karelj--Christof46 (talk) 21:15, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the depth of field and the perspective ... shows you how vast the desert is. Love that you can't pick out the donkey at first, and when you do it just makes you feel that much more the vastness of the desert. Daniel Case (talk) 21:16, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Diego. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:27, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice, but not enough for an FP-image for me. The cut off plant in the middle is additional a no go. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:33, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
    Alchemist-hp: I've got rid of the "additional no go" (by improving the left crop) Poco2 19:02, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ¡Qué burrada! --Basotxerri (talk) 20:13, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
     :) Poco2 20:15, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Santa Maria in Cosmedin (Rome) - Ciborium.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2016 at 20:02:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santa Maria in Cosmedin (Rome) - Ciborium
  • 1) The perspective isn't very fortunate. It's neither central nor is it really a double point perspective. It just looks as there was no space in the middle so the photographer simply stepped at the right. It doesn't look as if the photographer really had a creative concept.
  • 2) The top crop is bad IMO because a part of the arc is cut (ok, maybe this alone wouldn't be a reason for an oppose vote).
  • 3) The bottom crop isn't good as well because of the cut chairs in the foreground (ok, maybe this alone wouldn't be a reason for an oppose vote, too).
  • 4) The whole picture seems to be distorted a little bit, maybe there's some barrel distortion.
  • 5) The picture has a severe lack of detail (look at the icons at both sides) which may be caused by increasing the contrast too much and adding too much clarity. It's oversharpened as well which makes the picture look like a painting, at least partially.
  • 6) There are some blown out parts at the left and in the background.
  • 7) The white balance is too cold (at the top the walls look nearly blue) (ok, maybe that's a matter of taste).
Sorry but do you really consider this to be one of our finest church interiors we're hosting here on Wikimedia Commons? Apart from that, it's a wonderful church which deserves a much better picture. Livio lives in Rome, he could easily go there again and take a much better picture (HDR, central perspective, better postprocessing). A better version would definitely get my support. --Code (talk) 07:43, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Sorry, I agree with Code. It might be the best image of this church to be found with a google image search, but that isn't the standard we should be aiming for. I also don't find it to be a particularly interesting or beautiful church. That's not the main reason for the oppose though, but it does mean that it should be an even more technically excellent image to have the necessary wow for FP IMO. Diliff (talk) 08:17, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agrre mostly with Code. Especially the non centered composition bothers me. --Berthold Werner (talk) 10:57, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fully agree with Code. Plus the columns on the left lean out in a funny curved way. There is some severe distortion in this shot. Sorry, but this is way below FP standard for church interiors set by Diliff’s masterpieces. --Kreuzschnabel 13:08, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Can't really add to what Code said. Daniel Case (talk) 17:47, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Haanja 2010 01 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2016 at 17:05:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winter in Haanja Upland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Vaido Otsar - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 17:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 17:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:17, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great! --Ralf Roleček 17:21, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Classic. This is how I prefer days like that: In a picture, and not having to dig out the car from the snow and hope it starts... ;) w.carter-Talk 17:33, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 18:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 18:46, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 19:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:59, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I dissent. Arbitrary-looking crops in front on the left and right, and the composition really doesn't add up to me, overall. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Easy support in the same way I would easily support pictures of beautiful tropical beaches in mid-February. Daniel Case (talk) 06:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The light is beautiful, true, but that alone does not make a featurable pic. I can’t see any composition here, it’s an arbitrary crop of a winter scenery. Could benefit from a warmer WB, as clean snow is usually not blue. --Kreuzschnabel 13:10, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposers. Nice but not enough for an FP-image. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposers. --Karelj (talk) 21:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice handling of colors; good detail; great mood. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:50, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Frank. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:29, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dэя-Бøяg 19:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Lech da Pertan y Fermedes sun Mastlé.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2016 at 12:04:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mountain lake in the Dolomites
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 12:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 12:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice! --Basotxerri (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice place, and excellent composition, but it is too soft for me, and the white cloud in the middle is absolutely not good.--Jebulon (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support like a painting, nice. --Ralf Roleček 16:36, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support w.carter-Talk 17:30, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Indeed a bit soft but very beautiful -- Spurzem (talk) 17:46, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Moroder: Is it possible to upload raw file of this? I could try to fix overexposed cloud and softness issues. --Ivar (talk) 18:14, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Yes it is possible, but what for? The cloud is just white and NOT overexposed, please check the histogram. I have been blamed for gray snow and now for white clouds. Up here with the crisp air you more easily find white clouds than in Paris or on the Atlantic Ocean ;-). Besides, I looove smooth images as many reviewers. Thanks for your comment. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:58, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ...I like the soft painting-like style of the pic. w.carter-Talk 11:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral as it is. The cloud is overexposed - water reflection of the same cloud has details and it's not pure white. --Ivar (talk) 05:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Very perspicous observation of the mirror image. I will look for the RAW file which I don't have on my computer right away and upload it on your behalf. Thanks --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 13:01, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
+1 I agree with Ivar, furthermore all images of the earth, even the more overexposed ones, can have a histogram ok if you if you edit them enough (e.g. overexposed image remapped to grey or with highlight strongly decreased can have a histogram ok, that's change nothing on the fact the camera did not register any details)...and I also agree with Ivar the edition can be improved here. Nice place and composition despite the overexposed cloud. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:47, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support despite the cloud related issue --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:13, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Reguyla (talk) 20:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Any repair to the cloud would be welcome, but frankly I just see it as one of the tradeoffs that had to be made for a picture that has otherwise worked out rather well. Daniel Case (talk) 02:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This photo is beautiful and a harmonious composition to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:30, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me, the softness adds to the overall mood of the image. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:52, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:30, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dэя-Бøяg 19:09, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ----Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:19, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 23:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Santa Cecilia (Rome) - Ceiling.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2016 at 17:18:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santa Cecilia (Rome) - Ceiling
Alt version

Santa Cecilia (Rome) - Ceiling

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I thought to explain the light matter (White balance, for example), however, I thought that showing the problem with an image would be easier --The Photographer (talk) 18:42, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good also. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ralf Roleček 19:19, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perhaps still better -- Spurzem (talk) 19:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:41, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - With the caveat that I wasn't there, this version looks better to me. Neither version is near perfect, as the lower right and left corners are fuzzy, but I'm willing to tolerate that in view of the quality of the resolution of the fresco. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:37, 15 August 2016 (UTC) - I can't support this alt version with the photographer stating that the colors are wrong. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support both versions are fine with me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:21, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this one. w.carter-Talk 08:44, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zcebeci (talk) 14:15, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too yellow, too warm.--Jebulon (talk) 14:57, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like warm colors. --Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support On the whole this works better. Daniel Case (talk) 18:12, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Reguyla (talk) 20:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:34, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dэя-Бøяg 19:30, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ----Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:14, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose wrong colors --LivioAndronico (talk) 16:14, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
If color were an intrinsic property of an object, and it was only the perceived color that changed under different lighting conditions, you could match the object’s intrinsic color in printed output, say, under any lighting conditions, and the colors would then match under all conditions. However, because color is not an intrinsic property of the object but rather a sensation, the only thing you can match is the sensation that a particular color induces in your visual sensory system. That sensation will change under different lighting conditions, and it will usually change differently for different objects. So the best you can do is match colors under specific lighting conditions --The Photographer (talk) 02:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: X support, X oppose, X neutral → not featured. /Note: this candidate has several alternatives, thus if featured the alternative parameter needs to be specified. /FPCBot (talk) 21:05, 23 August 2016 (UTC))