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====PROPIEDAD DE MARCOS ANGEL CARMONA CAZARES NUEVO NOMINACION PARA EJERCITOS DE TODO EL MUNDO 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}}

====Crear una nueva nominación====PROPIEDAD DE MARCOS ANGEL CARMONA CAZARES NUEVO NOMINACION PARA EJERCITOS DE TODO EL MUNDO Paso 1: copia el nombre de la imagen y pégalo en este cuadro (incluyendo el prefijoEJERCITOS DE GUERRAcuando 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. LICENCIA DE PAGO A EJERCITOS DE AMERICA LA MEXICANA Y DEL MUNDO 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}}

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:Priyanka on the ramp for Mijwan fashion show.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2015 at 03:11:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Metsatee Mustoja maastikukaitsealal.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 21:30:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mustoja Nature Park

File:Baroque ceiling frescoes (Ljubljana Cathedral).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 16:52:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Baroque ceiling frescoes of Ljubljana Cathedral

File:London Eye at sunset 2013-07-19.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 16:00:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

London Eye at sunset

File:Skjálfandafljót at Route 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 13:34:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Ceiling of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (Rome).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 11:40:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (Rome)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by LivioAndronico (talk) 11:40, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico (talk) 11:40, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:07, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:16, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Late baroque is leveling those state-of-art frescoes. I still like to scroll up and down and always see something interesting. Put city (and state) in description. --Mile (talk) 16:02, 4 September 2015 (UTC) p.S. Oil on canvas, and category should be religious bld...
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 16:02, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What does it represent ? Who painted this ? Isn't the denoising too strong ? Who is the pope owner of the CoA ?--Jebulon (talk) 17:04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Everything is written in the description Jebulon, why you do not read the description? What do I put in? And for denoising I have not put (are 100 iso) I do not know.--LivioAndronico (talk) 17:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice place and good details however I would have lowered the saturation (at least -20 in photoshop) and increased a bit the contrast. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm suspicious about WB, and clarity is pushed a bit too far. Very nice otherwise. - Benh (talk) 21:36, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Island Escape. Sète 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 11:33:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Island Escape (ship, 1982)

File:Iglesia de Santo Domingo, Lima, Perú, 2015-07-28, DD 52-54 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 11:14:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of St Domingo, Lima, Peru
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Wow! Great ceiling! More good pictures from South America! -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Certainly a good photo. That the part in the very centre appears to be blown seems unavoidable. --Tremonist (talk) 12:29, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 16:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Its not Rome, but interesting to see. Just wondering, wouldn't this be in panoramic mode better ? --Mile (talk) 16:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    Good question actually Mile, not sure, should I just rotate it or create an alternative version Poco2 17:01, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not bad :) Good choice! Poco2 17:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:01, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question @Poco a poco: Considered making it landscape so the lighting and columns are symmetrical? - Benh (talk) 22:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    Benh: as Mile brought up the same proposal, I have rotated it Poco2 22:43, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very clear, nice HDRi. --Laitche (talk) 01:40, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Sigmaringen Schloss 2015-04-29 15-52-34.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 11:11:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sigmaringen castle
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Berthold Werner -- Berthold Werner (talk) 11:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 11:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Probably tilted: castle seems to be leaning to the left (downhill). --Tremonist (talk) 12:35, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Nice detail and definitely an FP-worthy subject, but here it suffers from inadequate light (was the sun behind a cloud?) and maybe tries to include too much (I'd crop out the bridge), which might also be remedied by having consistent light on the structures down there and the castle, There's also a bit too much space above. Daniel Case (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Zámek Rájec nad Svitavou (Schloss Raitz) - panorama 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 10:51:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castle Rajec (Raitz), Moravia

File:Dreikönigskirche, Frankfurt, Nave 20150820 4.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 05:21:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The nave of the Dreikönigskirche, Frankfurt
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by DXR - nominated by me -- Code (talk) 05:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Code (talk) 05:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 09:31, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks a lot, Code! This one was really difficult to execute, because the light color of the lamps is quite horrible and the balance I found is still not quite perfect to me, still I think that the church is quite a nice example of neo-gothic work in a fairly large church. --DXR (talk) 16:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You forgot to sign that, DXR. Daniel Case (talk) 15:40, 4 September 2015 (UTC) thanks! --DXR (talk) 16:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Surely. --Laitche (talk) 01:53, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Thomisidae feeding Junonia almana on Acmella ciliata-Kadavoor-2015-08-21-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2015 at 02:52:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A  Thomisus species Thomisidae feeding a Junonia almana on a Acmella ciliata flower.
  • Ivar: Brightened a bit more. Need more? I don't want to loss/burn the "hanging ropes", the spider used to climb down to rest in grass and to return when feel hungry. :) Jee 07:44, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Try more, bright "hanging ropes" will be ok. Whole composition will suffer, if you leave it underexposed. --Ivar (talk) 08:22, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • More :) Jee 08:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is still empty space on the right side of the histogram (that means you have more room for exposure). --Ivar (talk) 12:29, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • I tried to spread the histogram. Now the butterfly wings not washed out. Do you like the new edit? Jee 15:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes! --Ivar (talk) 16:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for this hint. I updated the other view too. Jee 16:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's really nice! --Tremonist (talk) 12:33, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A little bit more brightness. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:17, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ivar was right the colors are more vivid now. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:08, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good now. --Yann (talk) 22:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow moment. --Laitche (talk) 23:16, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Cincinnati Panorama of 1848.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2015 at 21:15:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama of 2 miles of the riverfront of Cincinnati, Ohio, consisting of 8 full plate daguerreotypes. It is the largest daguerreotype scene of its age, and the oldest surviving example of a North American cityscape.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Fontayne & Porter - uploaded & nominated by Scewing (talk) 21:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is the largest daguerreotype scene of its age, and the oldest surviving example of a North American cityscape. -- Scewing (talk) 21:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Of course it has issues (scratches, framing, verticals, alignment, vignetting(?)), but it's very detailed . Also for its historical importance, both regarding photography and Cincinnati. - Benh (talk) 06:58, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support They could still put some work at least to align it appropriate by cliff edge. --Mile (talk) 08:42, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very interesting, but I think it needs more work to becme FP. At least ajusting colors and contrast. Some images are yellow, some are green, etc. Yann (talk) 12:05, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really exciting! --Tremonist (talk) 12:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,per Yann--LivioAndronico (talk) 13:37, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with opposers, in spite of the great value and interest of this rare collection.--Jebulon (talk) 17:06, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Benh and Yann... --Laitche (talk) 02:00, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Badlands National Park, South Dakota, 04594u.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2015 at 20:30:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Badlands National Park, South Dakota
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Carol M. Highsmith, uploaded and nominated by -- Yann (talk) 20:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting place, good composition, nice light. -- Yann (talk) 20:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:58, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perhaps a touch overprocessed, but that makes a potentially difficult image work better (Full disclosure: I served on the WLM USA 2012 jury with Ms. Highsmith). Daniel Case (talk) 05:23, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:13, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Mosaic floor opus tessellatum detail Gorgone NAMA Athens Greece.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2015 at 19:07:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roman mosaic Medusa
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by an ancient roman artist - the rest by me -- Jebulon (talk) 19:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Close-up of an ancient Roman floor mosaic, in opus tessellatum way, featuring the gorgona Medusa, found near Piraeus. 2nd-century CE. On display in the garden of the National Archaeological Museum of Athens, Greece.-- Jebulon (talk) 19:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good,maybe more contrast but good .....(Ahi Ahi my friend,the category...Interiors?) --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:19, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    • No my dear, it is now stitched verticaly on a wall in a garden (outside). I cannot add artificial contrast, as it is pale in real because old--Jebulon (talk) 19:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:53, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:01, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support After all these ceilings, a floor. And this one's well-done ... it could be so easy to just make it look like some prehistoric pixels, but here we've got relief. Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would raise some EV and contrast. Its too dark now. --Mile (talk) 10:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    Sorry I don't understand your comment. Anyway, your reference is completely "out" regarding the white balance...--Jebulon (talk) 11:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful. --Tremonist (talk) 12:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 16:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice image of a nice mosaic --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Vista desde Julio Andrade, Provincia de Carchi, Ecuador, 2015-07-21, DD 38-40 PAN.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2015 at 16:31:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the fields seen from the location of Julio Andrade, Carchi Province, Ecuador.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of the fields seen from the location of Julio Andrade, Carchi Province, Ecuador. What mostly amazed me is that this region is very poor but the landscape just amazing. Poco2 16:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 16:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment a few blurred on the left,if crop you'll have my sure support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Cropped :) Poco2 20:55, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very lovely compositon,beautiful colors and clear--LivioAndronico (talk) 21:56, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Love the detail in the landscape and it's great, but I'm too distracted by all those blown or near-blown clouds. Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 4 September 2015 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support Better now. Daniel Case (talk) 20:25, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    Daniel: I agree that the sky was a bit distracting. I have cropped it a bit and also reduced the highlights. Poco2 20:07, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice landscape. --Tremonist (talk) 12:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Colorful. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Love this kind of scenery, but I do find the frontmost slopes to be a distraction on the composition. A more side lighting would emphasize the relief. But I won't be sad if it's promoted. - Benh (talk) 22:07, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Münster, Prinzipalmarkt -- 2014 -- 4502.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2015 at 16:30:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by XRay - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 16:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 16:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,but I don't think that is good for FP. --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:28, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very good scene, but the foreground destroys it. -- -donald- (talk) 05:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, too many dark and blurred parts. --Tremonist (talk) 12:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks to Tomer T for nomination. Sorry, but IMO I've made better pictures of this location, Prinzipalmarkt in Münster. I'm not the nominator, but please withdraw this nomination. --XRay talk 12:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In case (ahem) you needed more reasons to withdraw: The contrast between the light in the upper half and the underexposed lower half is so abrupt as to be jarring, and it isn't helped any by being off-center. Daniel Case (talk) 15:37, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 22:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Long Room Interior, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 21:41:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Long Room Interior, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland - Diliff.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Benh (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not sure what David was waiting before nominating here. A beautiful place beautifully grabbed. -- Benh (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Ha, I only uploaded it a week ago and am in France at the moment (not a photographic trip, just here for a wedding and won't have a chance to catch up with you, unfortunately), so I didn't have a chance. Thanks for the nomination though, it's one of my favourites and I had been waiting patiently for Wiki Loves Monuments to come around before uploading it. Diliff (talk) 12:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
      • Yes I remember I noticed it on your Flickr stream. Possibly the best of your interiors I'm aware of, from a composition point of view (as as good as the other from a technical so...). - Benh (talk) 19:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Great interior of library! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Obviously, a great picture of a great place. Yann (talk) 22:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can´t say nothing more than the others. --Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 00:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Book pr0n. --Code (talk) 05:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:34, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 06:42, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding. --Laitche (talk) 08:53, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 09:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- KTC (talk) 10:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A couple of books for your next vacations! --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:59, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:34, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Diliff (talk) 12:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow, indeed. --Cayambe (talk) 13:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A pity I can not read !--Jebulon (talk) 19:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Awesome \o/ --PierreSelim (talk) 06:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 06:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 01:38, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

LEI0190 188 Leica Standard Chrom Sn. 24429 1937 -38-M39 Front view-5809 hf.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 21:39:22 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 -- Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 21:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Every picture is made with focus bracketing and -stacking (between 15 and 23 single shots).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 21:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose Here I find the reflections really distracting and annoying because they are very visible but cut. Maybe because of the whiter background. - Benh (talk) 21:46, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Benh thanks for the hint, indeed, it was a wrong layer with too hard edges. Please have another look now. --Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 00:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the fixes. It's better IMO. I still think these great shots would be better without any reflection, or with uncut ones. Keep my oppose for that matter. - Benh (talk) 18:59, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 22:51, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 06:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:35, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Inward shadow-reflection isnt good, should go outward. Can be fixed without reshoting. Now strong choped shadow-reflection is also distracting. Side view and front view can be shown in one, also other two if isometric projection would be used and better angle. No need for 4 photos. 2 would do. --Mile (talk) 13:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are no shadows, Mile. What you see is the mirroring on a white glass plate. --Hubertl 14:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanx Hubertl for correction, should be stated reflection instead of shadow. --Mile (talk) 17:56, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, the cut of the reflections are a pity, and anyway, I'm not sure the mirroring adds, but a great wow for the rest. Waiting for the next attempt !--Jebulon (talk) 19:20, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A real pity, Mile have right,sorry --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for reviewing. --Hubertl 19:58, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Wooden building, 7 Cité du Midi, Paris 1 September 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 21:03:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Flowers in front of the Palm House, Kew Gardens.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 20:02:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A front view of the Palm House at Kew Gardens showing the flowers planted in front
It was kind of a big display, big enough that only a panorama (which I wasn't set up to make) would have done it full justice. I couldn't get any lower without losing the perspective at the bottom, hence the apparent cropped corner. Daniel Case (talk) 02:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
As for the geotag, ✓ Done. Daniel Case (talk) 02:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment both side are leaning out, purple CAs at left and right --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
New version uploaded; I have tried to address both issues. Daniel Case (talk) 05:52, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral thank you for the corrections but per Ivar, the red flowers looks oversatured and the composition is just a bit too tight around the building. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Unfortunately tightening the composition was a tradeoff of fixing the image. I suppose given the general cool colors elsewhere in the image the reds will look oversaturated no matter what. Daniel Case (talk) 04:31, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose oversaturated red flowers, composition and light are not outstanding. --Ivar (talk) 06:49, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ivar. --Laitche (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The angle perhaps is a bit unusual. Otherwise it's a nice photo of a great institution. --Tremonist (talk) 12:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Karthaus, Kriegerdenkmal -- 2015 -- 5349.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 18:53:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

War memorial in the hamlet Weddern, Kirchspiel, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
@Yann: This is called subject bokeh, so that's reverse blurred part is a subject (not background). It's one of bokeh's technique. Here you are. But I think this bokeh is too much and the subject is too small in this frame :) --Laitche (talk) 01:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
However, the hamlet is also the subject in this case... --Laitche (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice blurred background. --Ralf Roleček 10:52, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks interesting, XRay. --Tremonist (talk) 12:38, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose That just doesn't work for me. Kruusamägi (talk) 19:01, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the general idea as well as the content-wise contrast created through the battle helmet in front and what appears to be an angel in the back. But for some reason, it doesn't really work for me as an image yet, and I'm not even sure why. Here are some thoughts: 1) Maybe a better separation between the helmet and the statue would help. DOF does a good job here, but they are still two objects of the same grey touching each other. Maybe move the camera a bit to the left to get some greenery between them? 2) As I think that the statue is an important element of this composition, it might be nice if it were a little bit sharper. 3) That patch of sky in the corner is a bit distracting, especially the two blobs of bokeh right in the face of the statue. The bokeh is pretty busy in general, maybe try again on an overcast day so you get less highlight blobs? 4) This might actually be one of those cases where B&W works better than color.
Again: these are just some ideas, which may or may not work if you've got a chance to re-shoot the scene. I think it would be worth a try, as I like the idea. --El Grafo (talk) 07:36, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Karthaus, Kriegerdenkmal -- 2015 -- 5349-2.jpg
I've made a decision before nominating this image and it wasn't easy. I'm not sure, may be the black and white image is better. Here is the other image which El Grafo said (and linked). Thanks for your good ideas, El Grafo. --XRay talk 10:48, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Rometsch lawrence2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 10:36:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rometsch lawrence
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Palauenc05 - nominated by Σπάρτακος -- Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good photo of a beautiful car. It's parked somewhere in the meadows? --Tremonist (talk) 12:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 13:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice subject but distracting reflections and the background, sorry. --Laitche (talk) 14:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    • @Laitche: "distracting reflections of the background", maybe ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
      • @Jebulon: Yes, of and and, also building in the hood (bonnet), other cars in the hubcaps are distracting too, Regards. --Laitche (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
        • Ah ok. Thanks for answer. I personaly don't find it so disturbing.--Jebulon (talk) 16:06, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
          • @Jebulon: BTW, what about the red and white truck of this photo (in the reflection), nothing disturbing? :) --Laitche (talk) 16:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
            • Why this question ? No, not so disturbing. I suppose reflections on sheet metal of vehicles are almost unavoidable... But I'm not very interested by cars, and completely ignorant in this matter.--Jebulon (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
              • @Jebulon: Thanks, just wanted to know others opinion :) --Laitche (talk) 17:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMHO the background ruins it.--Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 15:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. Exploringlife (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine with me --Ivar (talk) 17:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very good photo of a very rare care -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 18:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a very exciting lighting, and unfortunate setting. Not a fan of photos of cars taken at short to moderate focal lengths. - Benh (talk) 19:41, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. Nothing wrong with how the car itself is photographed; it's definitely a QI. However, the background does it in ... it almost fades into the dark area underneath, and the chaotic patterns of the nature around it are undeniably distracting from the vehicle's classic lines and contours. Daniel Case (talk) 20:06, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the background is ok to me. But wide-angle and too high position of photographer. QI ok but in my eyes not FP. --Ralf Roleček 10:55, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Russian Imperial Family 1911.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 08:19:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nicholas II of Russia with the family (left to right): Olga, Maria, Nicholas II, Alexandra Fyodorovna, Anastasia, Alexei, and Tatiana. Livadiya, 1913. Portrait by the Levitsky Studio, Livadiya. Today the original photograph is held at the Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Boasson and Eggler St. Petersburg Nevsky 24 - uploaded by Michael Romanov - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great document. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 08:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 08:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A bit noisy, but it may still be OK. There are a few spots and scratches to remove before being promoted (see notes). Regards, Yann (talk) 08:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    I am aware of the spots and scratches but the problem is that removing them may harm the originality of the photograph.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    I don't think there is any need to keep such defects. I remove such spots and scratches from old pictures all the time. I can help, if you like. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:43, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    If you think it would be better to remove them, your help is welcome. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    The texture in background have been gone with bad restoring, I think that's the serious problem more than spots and scratches. If there is the original, start from the original would be better :) --Laitche (talk) 15:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    Of, but where is the source? Regards, Yann (talk) 20:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    I would say that the original one was taken from here.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    Certainly not from this small thumbnail. Yann (talk) 22:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    I meant if the high resolution original exist, that would be better to start restoration from the original... --Laitche (talk) 01:44, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 10:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. A very unique photo document. --Michael Romanov (talk) 13:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good and....unfortunate family --LivioAndronico (talk) 13:46, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Sdobnikov A. (talk) 14:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP-worthy. --Laitche (talk) 14:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Per Yann. I can help too. Too many spots and scratches everywhere. Don't worry about the restoration and the loss of quality: the photo was already restored before publication ! (the the left upper corner) ! Anyway, something very better is possible. This nomination is a very good idea, btw I love Tatiana Nicolaievna, she is really pretty and beautiful...--Jebulon (talk) 15:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Needs restoration, but it's beautifuly taken (framing, pose, lighting), and the artifacts don't really stand in the way when looking at it. Curious if anyone familiar with early 1900s photographic process could tell how long the people had to stay still. Quite a feat IMO. - Benh (talk) 19:52, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Iconic historic image; restoration certainly welcome but this is in fairly good condition already. Daniel Case (talk) 02:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 05:11, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I removed some scratches and spots. As Jebulon said above, this photo was already restored, and IMHO, a better job could be done, preferably from the original. Anyway high EV. BTW is this from 1911 or 1913? There are conflicting info between the title and the description. Yann (talk) 17:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 18:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'll surely try a restoration, and after that an attempt of "delist and replace", but ok now. In memoriam Tatiana.--Jebulon (talk) 19:35, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 13:58, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:St. Stephan, Würzburg, Nave from Matroneum 20150814 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 06:25:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Stephan, Würzburg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u/n by me, DXR (talk) 06:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yay, it's WLM time... Here is one of my favorites of the work I did in August. To me, the church is rather interesting because it is old, but actually has a very modern feel to it. Shot from the location of the organ, the rectangular nave becomes a bit tunnel-like, just to end in a more typical choir. The bottom crop was a bit tricky (there is no natural place to put it due to a missing second break in rows). I'm looking forward to your comments. -- DXR (talk) 06:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support more than useful. Very fine work! --Hubertl 07:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting view. --Code (talk) 07:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ArildV (talk) 08:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Imposing view. Exploringlife (talk) 16:43, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice seeing one fit into a square (and with a mostly bright interior) for a change. I suppose it could be a little sharper, but frankly it's consistent throughout and I could see how you'd prefer to leave it this way instead of running the risk of oversharpening. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Vana-Vigala mõisa viinavabrik 03.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2015 at 15:47:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vana-Vigala manor distillery
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Kruusamägi (talk) 15:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 15:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • WeakSymbol support vote.svg Support Playing with light and shadow is quite interesting. The effect is nice, even though minor quality problems (respective to sharpness e. g.) are visible. --Tremonist (talk) 12:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me. Too much going on for any play with light and shadow to be noticeable. Daniel Case (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 20:44, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Dome of cappella sacripante in Sant'Ignazio (Rome) HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2015 at 15:19:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome of cappella sacripante in Sant'Ignazio (Rome) HDR
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination All by LivioAndronico (talk) 15:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico (talk) 15:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 18:50, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The wow makes it, the quality is improveable. --Hubertl 19:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Livio, I'm going to be rough, but you need to learn how to process pictures. I'm trying my best to give you advices, and I know that language is a barrier between us (english is not a natural language for any of us). This picture has wow, but has obvious CA. I personally can spend several days on a picture alone, just to remove artifacts, so while I don't mean that I set standard, IMO you should make some efforts. CA is easy fix in LR which has the calibration for your camera + body. You're just a checkbox away from a much cleaner work. Again, you don't really need to constantly have two active noms, and should take a little more time in processing your pictures. On the other nom, which I'm about to look at the RAWs, it should be a matter of playing with WB slider only. Back to this picture, it's also too dark. And while the ray is definitely a central part of the composition, the paintings are as important and should be exposed properly (and not cut in the corners) . - Benh (talk) 21:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Remove CA,anyway If a photo you do not like (to you or others) put your vote and that's fine. Do not make me the lecture, I have two pictures in FP? If the rules allow it,I do it. Do You must give me your advice? No. Maybe your advice not believe them interesting or useful. So put your vote and not make a Dramma. Thank you. --LivioAndronico (talk) 22:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • It really upsets me that you take it that way. All I want is you're autonomous. Given your throughput, you can't seriously expect someone to process pictures for you most time. And what upsets me even more is that all issues I find on your picture are easy fixes which makes me feel you're only after FP stars and not actually improving your pictures. I'm not the only one to have warned you. Now if you don't want the discuss, I can play it that way too. - Benh (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Maybe it's a job for you while for me is just for fun. That's all --LivioAndronico (talk) 23:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMO, this kind of picture should be perfectly centered, this is not the case. A FP candidate should be seriously categorized, this is not the case. It should be geocoded too... I don't hesitate to support when I'm convinced, but without any drama, it is not possible here. Maybe next time ?--Jebulon (talk) 23:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have genuine image-based reasons, but I'm not going to waste my time typing them in only to get insults back. -- Colin (talk) 07:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If LivioAndronico wants continue participating here, here can start by apologizing to Benh. Further such rudeness and I shall be asking for him to be permanently banned from FPC. This is a forum where real human beings participate, not some online game collecting tokens. Many editors have given image taking/processing advice and many editors have spent time helping LivioAndronico process his images and earn him FP stars. Yet those editors are insulted and get upset. I don't believe that image contributions should excuse bad behaviour to the point where the community turns a blind eye. This has become a persistent pattern, and no user should have to put up with this kind of abuse by another user who is just here "for fun" and not to engage respectfully with others, make friends and learn. -- Colin (talk) 07:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Sure, and you have a lot of friends here. I have not insulted anyone and therefore I make no apologies. It's not that you have to accept the advice if you do not find interesting or useful! Anyway go ahead ...--LivioAndronico (talk) 07:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. And I also have to agree with Colin in every word he says above. --Code (talk) 07:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is impressive, even if there were some tiny flaws. The light beams come in nicely. --Tremonist (talk) 12:16, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the light beams are minus factor in this angle. --Laitche (talk) 14:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Since it seems to be agreed that the crepuscular rays (something we do not get in many church ceiling shots) are the real subject of the image, I'm OK with the lack of centeredness and the uneven exposure (which could be a lot worse). Daniel Case (talk) 18:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks Daniel, at least someone understood my picture, now I'm happy--LivioAndronico (talk) 18:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. -- -donald- (talk) 06:04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Bombus cryptarum - Solidago virgaurea - Keila.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2015 at 07:14:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cryptic bumblebee
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cryptic bumblebee on the european goldenrod, all by Ivar (talk) 07:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unusual position. Unsharp areas (the animal's legs for instance). --Tremonist (talk) 13:49, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. --Tremonist (talk) 12:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info new version uploaded. --Ivar (talk) 16:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 18:52, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bzzzzzzz… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:31, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I really love your very technical comments, Arionestar...Smile--Jebulon (talk) 17:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but I just don't find it an interesting composition ... too cluttered. It also seems like the WB is off, and some of the petals at left seem overexposed. Daniel Case (talk) 16:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I feel that the WB is too warm --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment perhaps it is a little too warm, but golden hour was already approaching. --Ivar (talk) 11:44, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support agree that the composition is less than ideal, but otherwise I like it. --Pine 20:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Jaguar head shot-edit2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2015 at 00:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jaguar headshot
  • I think that the jaguar is doing an impression of Jalexander-WMF as he's about to eat a sockpuppet for dinner. --Pine 07:01, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry to spoil the party. The crop at left is too short, and this is quite small for a zoo shot. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:06, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • The crop works well for infoboxes. --Pine 20:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Libélula (Tramea sp), Cerro Brujo, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 147.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 18:17:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saddlebags glider (Tramea sp), Cerro Brujo, San Cristobal Island, Galapagos island, Ecuador. The common name in English is due to the 2 spots on the wings near to the body.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Saddlebags glider (Tramea sp), Cerro Brujo, San Cristobal Island, Galapagos island, Ecuador. The common name in English is due to the 2 spots on the wings near to the body. All by me, Poco2 18:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 18:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Damsels annual season in FPC Clin--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great details and excellent background but body and lower part of the head are in shadow plus this pose is not attractive for this subject, imho. --Laitche (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can be Tramea calverti or it's siblings; waiting for confirmation. :) Jee 03:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • It is a Tramea sp. female; that's all, Asian experts can say. You need to consult an expert who knows South American species. Jee 05:10, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jee:I think your comment is not reply to my opinion, so I've arranged your comment. It's ok? --Laitche (talk) 07:49, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
It was not a reply; but there is "some inspiration" which trigger my anxiety to research. A Pantala will not perch/pose this way. :) Jee 07:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jee:I suspected the pose thing but seems the comment was insufficient words :) --Laitche (talk) 08:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Scene is attractive enough to my mind. Shadows are neglectable. --Tremonist (talk) 13:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support on aesthetics alone. Great interplay of shapes and lines, on top of nice bokeh. Daniel Case (talk) 01:58, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Procedural Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until ID is confirmed. Jee 02:13, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    Jee: I'm not sure how to proced here. I suggested that it is Pantala hymenaea and you suggested that it is Tramea calverti. As far as I can see you can find both in the Galapagos.[1] [2] I cannot say which one is it. If you suggest it is Tramea, then I can change the naming, you are an expert in comparison to me. Or should be wait for someone, or rather ping someone, who can confirm it? Poco2 21:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    It is a pity ID please is not initiated so far. I made a request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Insects. Jee 01:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    I have also asked here. Poco2 16:42, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    Jee, I have got an answer about my request, which is neither yours nor mine, Tramea cophysa. What do you think, Poco2 17:06, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    This is a Tramea sp.; female as confirmed by Noppadon Makbun earlier. As both Tramea cophysa darwini and Tramea calverti recorded from Galapagos and it is difficult to identify a female alone from photographs, my suggestion is to stick with Tramea sp. female. A species level ID is not a must. Jee 17:20, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    Jee: thanks for helping out. I've updated all relevant pages Poco2 18:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support now as a classical perch of a sun loving Tramea sp. Please move the other versions listed here too. Jee 01:20, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lacks wow: the awkward angle of the insect detracts from any beauty of its shape and colour.--Fotoriety (talk) 06:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For Fotoriety --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Hausdülmen, Kettbach -- 2015 -- 8499-503.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 15:51:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kettbach at the street "Strandbadweg" near Hausdülmen, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 15:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 15:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 16:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nur ein Tipp: bei solchen Bildern ertrinkt der Blick sofort, er geht unter: es fehlt ein Vordergrundelement, ein Ast, eine Ente, ein paar Blätter, irgend etwas ... Grüße, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • You've basically right. There was just nothing as an element in the foreground except a bridge railing. That looks not good.--XRay talk 17:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support I might under other circumstances be bothered by the blown area around the sun, but it seems that steps had been taken to reduce it, and it doesn't distract from the perspective in any event. (BTW, why the FoP notice? What's in the image that could require it?) Daniel Case (talk) 23:05, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For this kind of photo, I want this level of composition, colors and the sharpness :) --Laitche (talk) 11:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe I'm mad...but I love the composition --LivioAndronico (talk) 15:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 18:56, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For Laitche --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition looks unbalanced to me, maybe a tighter crop on the bottom would improve it. The image also looks a bit too dark. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:05, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Tikjda Main du juive.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 10:53:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

One of Djurdjura summits.

File:Two columns, Temple of Zeus Olympian, Athens, Greece.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 10:22:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two columns of the Temple of Zeus Olympian
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 10:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Two columns of the Temple of Zeus Olympian, evening light, Athens, Greece. ...and the Pica pica-- Jebulon (talk) 10:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this photo.--Vikoula5 (talk) 10:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mountain looks awful noisy, like it was taken with a DP/S. Plus the cropped tree on the left is awkward and distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 04:15, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • We must not look at the same picture, I don't see any... unless you are talking about the bushes/trees on the hill?? - Benh (talk) 06:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
See that black scrape on the lower left side. Daniel Case (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Still don't get what you mean. Now it's on the tower? Anyways, my point was that there's no noise, and if some discern any because they have lynx like sight or whatever, it's certainly not awful noisy. - Benh (talk) 19:46, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
It's on the lower-left border of the image. I suppose it's a matter of taste. Daniel Case (talk) 20:27, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jebulon, I like it. --Tremonist (talk) 13:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Thank you. So do I too. Smile--Jebulon (talk) 17:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Composition could be better (maybe more colums), but good for me. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral it´s impressive in one way, but the technical realisation does not fully convince me. --Hubertl 19:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Zwellende bloemknoppen van Chaenomeles x superba 'nicolina' (chinese kwee). Locatie. Tuinreservaat Jonkervallei 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 07:19:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Carte du cours du Rhône de Genève à Lyon - 1787.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 06:05:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Map of the Rhône river from Geneva up to Lyon, France, with ports and fords, 1787

File:Hirundo rustica (Linnaeus, 1758).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 23:53:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The image shows a barn swallow when feeding her young in the nest.

File:Cologne Germany DITIB-Central-Mosque-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 19:22:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
All by -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am sympathetic to the problem of shooting large buildings and not being able to get far back. The result is often an extreme wide-angle view with enhanced perspective and distortions. Here the two hoops are a give-away and the top one is almost at 45-degree angle, whereas it should be horizontal. File:DITIB-Zentralmoschee Köln - April 2015-7493.jpg from across the road has much less distortion and shows the second minaret (?) but then there is more street furniture and there are more trees in the way. The front face of the building is also in shade, and the stone (concrete?) is a bit utilitarian. -- Colin (talk) 09:15, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 17:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin --El Grafo (talk) 08:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. And resolution could be higher, the sign can't be read. The containers on the left are distracting. --Tremonist (talk) 14:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bit tight of a framing. But beautiful building! - Benh (talk) 14:43, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. --Laitche (talk) 14:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin etc.--Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 15:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:2015 Nowa Bystrzyca, kościół fil. pw. Wniebowzięcia NMP 02.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 17:07:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of the Assumption in Nowa Bystrzyca


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Rhinocypha bisignata male-Kadavoor-2015-08-20-001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 16:48:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rhinocypha bisignata
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 21:28, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)--Cayambe (talk) 06:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think, this image is worth, that we have had this discussion on QI. --Hubertl 17:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good --Mile (talk) 08:15, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support God save Christian,now is very perfect --LivioAndronico (talk) 15:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Тајга (talk) 23:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:43, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice minimalist composition. Would have been even better with a smoother background. - Benh (talk) 19:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:16, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata

File:HUN-2015-Budapest-Hungarian Parliament (Budapest) 2015-02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 11:24:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Hungarian Parliament building in Budapest. Created and uploaded by Andrew Shiva - nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition and lighting. I'm a bit surprised with the lack of details in the dark areas, it's more "smeary" than anything else. And the highlights are also a bit clipped. Not enough to spoil it! - Benh (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture and an impressive camera gear. --Code (talk) 04:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Code --Hubertl 06:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Great! --Brateevsky {talk} 09:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - thanks for the nom...--Godot13 (talk) 15:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great lights, not a typical photo of the Hungarian Parliament. Einstein2 (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The clipped lights are not a deal-breaker given their overall size in the picture. Daniel Case (talk) 22:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There are much better light options for parliament. Even in daylight. When I saw EXIF, I see this could be in much better quality. Medium format used at f/6.3 in panorama mode is a bit small even for APS-C sensor, regarding both, lens and sensor (diffraction disc). Looking for sweet spot of lens I saw they are amazing 4000 eur ...but I got it - f/8. So two stops too far. Then I checked how many pixles has this model, first I met the price again 4-5000 eur. Its 40 MPx. From my mind, I guess you are at least some 5 stops to far, perhaps 10 would be more close. That's why also the qualiy is not there as it should be. Automatic programe on 10.000 eur camera ? --Mile (talk) 10:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your comments Mile. If I wanted to take a typical night shot, then I wouldn't have waited until dawn to take it.--Godot13 (talk) 22:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 17:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:17, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Samuel D. Ehrhart - An International High Noon Divorce (1906).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 06:22:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Guaratiba morning.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 19:24:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Early morning on whaling coast, Bahia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Jonathan Wilkins (edited by Poco a poco) - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I could imagine a bit less processing, but given what Paco had to work with I think he did the best he could. Daniel Case (talk) 01:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Case. --King of ♠ 07:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Wonderful composition. Sorry, but IMO it needs more sharpness. --XRay talk 09:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per XRay. I find some palmtrees too dark (no details)...--Jebulon (talk) 11:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good for me. Yann (talk) 21:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice composition and the light but not enough sharp and too much green CAs. --Laitche (talk) 09:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC) --Laitche (talk) 23:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel and Yann. --Tremonist (talk) 14:08, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Тајга (talk) 23:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ταπυροι (گپ) 12:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition. I see the noise issues when I look at the photo at pixel level, but downsampled this is beautiful. Overall, I think the pros outweigh the cons. --Pine 20:17, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
@Pine: I agree with you about the composition but that green sky and the reflections in the green water are caused by green CA, So that green colors are fake color, See note. imo :) --Laitche (talk) 22:52, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
When downsampled, that fake colors would never disappear. --Laitche (talk) 23:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Laitche: I see what you've tagged as fake green, but it's not clear to me that those greens are faked. Can you clarify? --Pine 05:33, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
@Pine: No I can't clarify it though I've ever seen the green sea but I've never seen the blue and green two-tone-colored sky even on the videos :) --Laitche (talk) 06:04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Laitche: I think I'm still missing what you're perceiving to be anomalies in the image. To my eye, even if there is some artificial coloring in the photo, it's a beautiful photo overall. --Pine 06:24, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • @Pine: I don't know, maybe you are right although I can see the big green halos as well... --Laitche (talk) 06:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Laitche: I agree that there are some problems when looking at pixel level. To me these are forgivable due to the other good qualities of this image. --Pine 06:44, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • OK, but I can see the CAs even in the thumbnail... --Laitche (talk) 07:05, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Hahaha OK, I withdraw my oppose but I'm still suspecting the colors, the differences are too much from the original. The main reason to oppose was not flaws, that was digital retouched edited colors. Poco's edit is good but too far I think, maybe too good :) --Laitche (talk) 23:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • @Laitche: The colors changed due to WB correction. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • WB correction is also the retouching editing... --Laitche (talk) 00:03, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Mealt Waterfall with Kilt Rock, Isle of Skye.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 17:47:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mealt Waterfall with Kilt Rock, Isle of Skye.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The waterfall from Loch Mealt on the Isle of Skye falls 55 metres to the sea. Behind is Kilt Rock, 90 metres tall, so-called because the combination of basalt columns upon a sandstone base resembles a kilt. All by Colin -- Colin (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High resolution photo of two notable natural features of Skye. The viewpoint is the very edge of the cliff nearby, and there is no better vantage point on land. -- Colin (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support WOooooooOW! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 18:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose So good while in thumb but when opened some huge portion on left side is out of focus. Makes some 20 % of photo area, too much. --Mile (talk) 19:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Mile, more like 12.5% is the near-by grass, and many photos contain far more featureless sky. In the distance, you can see the Isle of Lewis some 25 miles away, and the rocks below the waterfall are quite lovely. -- Colin (talk) 21:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment So its 12,5 %. What is the purpose of being Feautered then ? Simple push on touchscreen on that area and all would be solved, since is stitched anyway. Shouldn't Feautered wannabe photo deliver at least some minimal technical advantage ? Building megapixles shouldn't move that margin. --Mile (talk) 07:26, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
    • You must not know other cameras than your Olympus then ;) (They don't all focus with a tap on screen). And not "all would be solved", it's likely distant objects would be out of focus. But I think settings are not optimal and maybe a better focus point could have been chosen to achieve en:Hyperfocal_distance. - Benh (talk) 07:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Benh, I agree using f/8 could have improved the in-focus area a bit, and the point of focus seems to be a little further than I intended. The grass does come really close so I suspect I wouldn't get it sharp enough to satisfy. The bokeh is rather busy, so perhaps a different lens would render it more pleasingly. At the end of the day, the grass is not the subject, which is in focus. I'm leaning as far as I safely can out from a metal barrier at the cliff edge, and it is 600 miles away by car, so that's all I've got. -- Colin (talk) 11:01, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
        • It's not the subject but it's close enough to be a little distraction IMO. But yes, I didn't mean "go back and reshot it" :) Just my review and advices for a next time (but I'm pretty sure you didn't really need them) - Benh (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposePer mile,maybe a crop (I change my mind,also a 54MP must be clear and not blurred)--LivioAndronico (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I think the reason the out-of-focus area appears large and obvious to you is the very 54MP high resolution so that at 100% the web browser shows only a tiny portion of the image. But please remember that when viewed at 100% on a 100dpi monitor, this image is 2.3 metres tall and 1.5 metres wide, which would run nearly the whole height of a UK standard sized domestic room. I hope that when looking at an image that big, you stand back a little and don't study the bottom left corner with your reading glasses on. Reduced 50% to 13.5MP the close-by grass isn't nearly such a large area on-screen when you view the bottom of the image. Reduced further to 6MP, say, and the area considered unsharp is very small indeed, and not at all unusual. A crop would unbalance the composition, for the sake of pixel peeping. -- Colin (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes 54MP actually are true, they are not convinced, then, I leave to others the judge Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral--LivioAndronico (talk) 20:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 20%? I opened it and mesure the out of focus area, I would have more say not more than 12% of a 54mpx image, so that stay a lot of good pixel. No doubt in the finest of Commons. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:03, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The out-of-focus areas are not too distracting IMO. --King of ♠ 07:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Remember: we are not judging Mile's opinion, but a picture...--Jebulon (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
    • True, Jebulon, but opinions have a habit of sticking to an FP once stated: "per XXX" often follows and is hard to shift, and less commonly the opposite happens if people reject the complaint. I'm happy for people to look critically, pre-informed of any potential issues, rather than a pile-on support that might not be warranted. I think it healthy to discuss a picture as well as any opinions made, provided things stay friendly. I don't think any of us believe we are experts at taking pictures or judging a picture, and the question of "what is a featured picture" is always up for discussion. I always think the audience for these pages is bigger than just the person who votes and the nominator -- so there are things others, lurking perhaps, can learn here such as avoiding having too much busy out-of-focus area or considering the use of hyperfocal distance to maximise the in-focus-areas. -- Colin (talk) 12:10, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
      • I agree, Colin. I just want to notice that very often, a "support" (or an "oppose") vote is due to the disagreement with the opinion (of the expression of the opinion) of another reviewer, not exactly aboit the picture by itself... It is a trap IMO. That's why I did not vote at first view, but only now. Let's wait, we get the time !--Jebulon (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose the issue for me is not just the size of the out-of-focus area, but because it's placement on the foreground and this is too distracting for me. Otherwise it's very nice. --Ivar (talk) 13:29, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aside from irrelevant technical issues, everything is wow so it's FP, no question. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Ivar. Daniel Case (talk) 03:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I personally like to have control about how things render on pictures I take, unless I post them to Instagram or Facebook. Not a useless conversation IMO. - Benh (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Moroder and Chr. Ferrer.--Hubertl 06:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I've been thinking about it. It's definitely impressive but I would rather have the single shot version promoted because of its bigger DOF. 18mpix is far more than enough for most uses, and there's still that one in case someone wants to cover a whole building with a poster. - Benh (talk) 06:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Benh, one issue with the single shot photo is that the slightly slower shutter has made the waterfall more of a continuous white flow, and I think it much better in the nomination. -- Colin (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Fine with me. I'm one of those who like long exposure waterfall shots. But up to you. Let go this nom first and see then. - Benh (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technical issues are never irrelevant, IMO, but aside from that, per Moroder Clin--Jebulon (talk) 16:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Ralf Roleček 09:39, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Would you please explain why ?--Jebulon (talk) 17:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
      • The water is the main subject of this photo but i do not like ist. The Photo is in the most parts technically very good but the water is in parts sinmpe white, other parts are "not sharp, not typical water-unsharp". may be the exposure time ist to short. DOF is too short in left corner. --Ralf Roleček 18:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
        • Thanks for answer and explanations.--Jebulon (talk) 19:21, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:09, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For Mile --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Moroder --· Favalli ⟡ 02:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

A comparison, not for voting[edit]

Single frame at 18mm

I thought it would be interesting to compare the above image with a near-identical one taken from a single frame at 18mm and f/9 rather than lots of 50mm frames at f/5.6. The wider angle and smaller aperture should give much more depth of field. There's a small difference in shutter speed (1/125 vs 1/160) and the second photo is lit by hard direct sunlight rather than softly from sun behind clouds. I've tried to process it so it looks as similar as possible. The brighter sun in the second photo enabled a much smaller aperture with only a slightly longer shutter. Since the original is 54MP rather than 16MP, I've uploaded a version of the above nomination saved by Lightroom to the same dimensions and you may wish to compare this to the full size version of comparison photo. Finally, here's the full size 54MP version.

Benh mentioned hyperfocal distance. The DoF markings on old manual lenses, and most online calculators, assume we are casually viewing an 8x10 print at arms length. The calculator at CambridgeInColour has a fancy "advanced" mode that lets you choose a more nit-picking measure for people who have put on their reading glasses but I can't get the "advanced" button to work today. I've yet to see any calculators designed for the digital age where people are viewing a small 100% section of your image on a 100dpi monitor at 30cm. I accept the nomination could have had a greater DoF if a smaller aperture was used, though I'd have had to increase the ISO which can then start to rob detail, or wait till the sun came out from the clouds as it did here. And you might not like the composition, which was limited by circumstances. I do wonder, though, if I'd nominated the image downsized to 16MP whether anyone would even have noticed the near-grass was out-of-focus. When I compare the two 16MP images, I'm not convinced having it sharp helps the photo, which is of a waterfall and cliff face. But I thought comparing a single-shot wide-angle might be informative. -- Colin (talk) 16:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Interesting comparison. So 18mm f/9.0 renders quite good, which isn't suprising. The lens aperture diameter is 2mm. On your mosaic, the lens' aperture diameter is 50 / 5.6 = 8.9mm. More than 4 times the aperture of the single shot. No wonder it's more blurry. But I don't know if DOF is actually related to absolute size of aperture or not. I always say I have to find it out (read : find someone who did the calculation) but never do it. - Benh (talk) 17:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • And btw, several DOF calculators exist out there, which take into account the sensor size and resolution. My guess to get the correct one for this picture is to input 18mm lens at f/2 and a 54mpix sensor (Canon 5DS comes close to it). - Benh (talk) 17:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Benh, to get the same field-of-view on a Full frame camera would require a ~24mm lens, not 18mm. I think Poco a poco has the required camera. Fancy a holiday to Skye? -- Colin (talk) 17:37, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Actually, playing with the DoF calculator, at 18mm on my crop camera, f/9 wasn't necessary and f/4 or f/5.6 would have been a little sharper. -- Colin (talk) 17:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Didn't know your camera was APS-C :) So based in f/5.6 at 18mm, you would have needed f/16. f/4.0 at 18mm gives you f/11 @50mm. Sounds right. - Benh (talk) 19:08, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Eurasian Roller (Coracias garrulus semenowi) (16518343511).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 16:14:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eurasian Roller (Coracias garrulus semenowi)

File:Asian Brown Flycatcher (Muscicapa dauurica) (15489798050).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 11:44:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Asian Brown Flycatcher (Muscicapa dauurica)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bernard Dupont - uploaded by Josve05a - nominated by Josve05a -- Josve05a (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Josve05a (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was to oppose, but seeing EXIF its compact camera, wont mind some more noise. --Mile (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but background a little dark. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's really nice, but too much noise for me, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 07:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice framing and surprisingly good quality for a super-zoom bridge camera, but: 1) Sharpness is not that great. 2) Background could use some de-noising. 3) Flash usage produced some strange kind of blue-ish red-eye effect. That in combination with the centred catch light makes the bird look totally perplexed to me (reminds me of that flash-thingy they use in MIB). --El Grafo (talk) 08:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Red-eye effect, asian brown flycatchers have brown eyes and too noisy. --Laitche (talk) 13:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Frescos of Ignatius of Loyola HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 10:13:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Frescos of Ignatius of Loyola HDR.jpg

*Symbol support vote.svg Support I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? --Jebulon (talk) 11:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC) in favor of alternative.--Jebulon (talk) 20:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you put alternative, the middle shot. I think HDR spoiled it. --Mile (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Why HDR for this? The dynamic range is not higher than it could be captured by a single shot, I guess - no windows, lamps or other bright areas. There are also some ghostly contours, see note. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:15, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

The Triumph of St. Ignatius.jpg For Mile and Uoaei1

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Would you mind if we to turn to panorama ? Pictures that are very tall looks so strange. --Mile (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Colors are more natural than in HDR. I like this more. --Mile (talk) 20:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Whatever. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:10, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Again, I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? --Jebulon (talk) 20:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better. The ghostly contours are gone, and the colors also look better for me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support You can see the improvement in the thumbnails. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, better. --Yann (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:12, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WP needs it very badly  ;-). But, please give a better file description. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Also ok. --Tremonist (talk) 14:15, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:2015 Wieża widokowa na Górze Wszystkich Świętych.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 07:51:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Observation tower on Góra Wszystkich Świętych
Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the the lines and the colors. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: ✓ Done --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Little wow to me. I'm not quite sure how you framed it: did you try to center it? Looked for rule of third line? Really looks like a quick snapshot to me. Also tilted. - Benh (talk) 08:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I did not found the words, now Benh helped me...--Jebulon (talk) 11:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 17:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:44, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per Benh. Yann (talk) 10:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A good photo for me. --Tremonist (talk) 14:17, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 21:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Benh, lighting situation doesn't really convince me. --El Grafo (talk) 08:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very good quality but not FP level wow for me, sorry. --Laitche (talk) 01:29, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Червоні карпатські гори.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 04:16:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Carpathian Biosphere Reserve, Zakarpattia Oblast, Ukraine
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Carpathian Biosphere Reserve, Zakarpattia Oblast, Ukraine, created by Vian - uploaded by Vian - nominated by Christian Ferrer --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 07:55, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. --Yann (talk) 08:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Laitche (talk) 09:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Color banding in the sky, especially at left, and looks unnatural to me. This is discussible. But what is not is the following: please dear reviewers, be more careful in reviews, how can you support as FP such a picture, with at least 6 very visible dustspots in the sky ???? I'm afraid we need to be more serious in assessing, I recommend, for those who don't know, some stages at the QIC pages...--Jebulon (talk) 11:46, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Perhaps that banding is caused by jpeg compression, I can remove the banding with Photoshop but when save it as jpeg, the banding appear again. (Tiff is no problem.) --Laitche (talk) 13:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is so big wow for me that I didn't noticed the little qualities issues, great and fp even with those qualities issues. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This kind of hemisphere-stratosphere border can be seen above 15-20 km, here original curve was moved so far to show up the banding, beside at least 3 smudges in the sky. Main oppose is : its not real. --Mile (talk) 17:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unnatural colors (sky), too pale. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others; unnatural color. Daniel Case (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A pity… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I removed many light dustspots and tried to minimize banding problem. Please check and revert, if it's not better. --Ivar (talk) 13:18, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 13:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
A real improvement, thank you very much Ivar --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I support (although very weak) my suggested crop. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I don't want to crop the work of an other photographer and I don't want an alternative too, thanks. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for a FP, the colors are not realistic enough. --Hubertl 06:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support die farben wirken unnatürlich und genau davon lebt das Bild. Gerade das gefällt mir. Es muß nicht immer alles realistisch sein, wir akzeptieren ja auch Panoramen und HDR. --Ralf Roleček 09:46, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Exactly the art of photography is a visual art. (genau die Kunst der fotografie ist eine visuelle kunst). Successful here. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love it! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 12:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • I Symbol support vote.svg Support (although very very weak) due to majestic composition. Almost a painting! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Frederic Edwin Church - Rainy Season in the Tropics - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 20:46:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

One of many beautiful artworks by notable American landscape painter Frederic Edwin Church.

File:WolayerSee.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 18:32:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nature reserve Wolayer See and surrounding area in Carinthia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by GeKo15 - uploaded by GeKo15 - nominated by لا روسا.--لا روسا (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- لا روسا (talk) 18:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great scene, but overuse of polarizer is evident, resulting in an unevenly exposed sky, too dark in places. Daniel Case (talk) 18:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is also oversharpened Poco2 19:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't believe a polarizer was used. The variations don't have that pattern. And at f/13 and 1/250 sec, it would be darker (unless this was brightened afterwards of course, but I don't think either). Also high altitude = darker blues in the sky from my experience. But to get back to the point : the sky is posterized, generally screwed and has strange artifacts/blues halos at some edges with the mountains. The whole picture could be better processed. Nice scenery though...- Benh (talk) 20:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me the posterization is not too bad. Agree with Benh, if the settings are accurate there's no way a polarizer was used. --King of ♠ 00:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Whatever. My point was that the sky looks unnatural for some reason. And what a shame given that it looks like a Yes album cover. Daniel Case (talk) 06:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. I would like to see this image better processed. The posterisation may be due to the JPG being saved with ProPhotoRGB colour profile -- the 8-bit JPG format can't handle that profile without serious information loss. -- Colin (talk) 11:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. --Tremonist (talk) 14:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Pierre-Auguste Lamy (?) - Les contes d'Hoffmann by Jacques Offenbach, prologue.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 05:17:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Prologue (or possibly epilogue) to Jacques Offenbach's Les contes d'Hoffmann in the 1881 première.

File:Siriema.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2015 at 00:29:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Swaledale Sheep, Lake District, England - June 2009.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2015 at 16:17:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Swaledale Ewe
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. I thought I'd go for something a bit different. An older photo of mine that was actually previously nominated and almost passed but for lack of votes. I think it's a characterful animal portrait. You have good detail of the animal (a relatively rare domestic breed of sheep native to the hills of northern England) and an idea of the typical landscape it inhabits with pleasant blurred background. -- Diliff (talk) 16:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 16:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Its good, but some more space around should make it. --Mile (talk) 17:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I no longer have access to the original file (from memory this is not cropped anyway), so I'm not able to give more space unfortunately. Diliff (talk) 17:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Very weak oppose Tada, it's an oppose! A fine QI, but missing that little something for me. The tight crop "tips the scale" toward oppose (hope I use the expression right). - Benh (talk) 20:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 07:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a really impressive portrait! --Tremonist (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Tremonist. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wasn't convinced at thumbnail size (too static, tight crop, centered,...) but the expression and detail is very good Poco2 19:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Einstein2 (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:15, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Mammals