Commons:Candidatas a imágenes destacadas

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

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

Aquí están las candidatas a imágenes destacadas

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

Formalidades[edit]

Nominación[edit]

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

Crear una nueva nominación[edit]

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


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

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

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

Para votar[edit]

Para votar puedes usar las siguientes plantillas:

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

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

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

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

Reglas[edit]

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

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

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

Contents

Propuestas[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Црква „Св. Јован Канео“.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2016 at 14:48:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Schoenbrunn Palace as seen from Neptune Fountain, September 2016.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2016 at 08:06:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schönbrunn Palace in Vienna, Austria, as seen from (or rather through) Neptune Fountain

File:Sgt Major Christian Fleetwood - American Civil War Medal of Honor recipient - Restoration.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 23:39:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Medal of Honor recipient Christian Fleetwood
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Unknown photogreapher - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Any further darkening and information would start to be lost. One could change the midpoint, but this is probably the most accurate reflection of the original photo. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm satisfied, and it's a good photo to feature during Black History Month or on Memorial Day, etc. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:34, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 03:30, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:07, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 07:48, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:51, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Johann Strauss II by Fritz Luckhardt.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 23:36:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Johann Strauss II

File:Polish-Saxony CoA in Festung Königstein.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 22:01:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Polish-Saxony CoA in Fortress Königstein, Saxony

File:Holy Spirit chapel in Jabłeczna (Яблочина).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 17:51:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Holy Spirit chapel in Jabłeczna (Яблочина)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 17:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 17:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The chapel is hidden in the shade and trees, and the extensive foreground of grass is not interesting. Maybe you could try photographing the chapel when more light is hitting it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral For me the lighting and composition are good, but it is just too small for a landscape photo. --King of ♠ 00:12, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. -- Colin (talk) 11:22, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Vanessa indica-Silent Valley-2016-08-14-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 13:42:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vanessa indica

File:Abtei Seckau Basilika Innenraum 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 11:31:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of Seckau Basilica, Styria
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Interior of Seckau Basilica, Styria. All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice church and good picture, but considering the extremely high standard of church interiors by Diliff and others, I find this picture insufficiently sharp and probably without sufficient detail of the altar to merit a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:01, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 17:52, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. I don't think comparison to others' works is really fair except for photos of the same exact object; I think we should have consistent standards (modulo difficulty) regardless of subject matter, and just because one particular category has disproportionately many high-quality FPs does not mean our standards should be raised there. The blown-out windows would ideally have been controlled with HDR but it's not strictly necessary for me. --King of ♠ 00:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Maybe we should discuss this on the talk page, because I think many of us make allowances for the quality of photos of very unusual natural or historical events or very rare creatures photographed in the wild. I think the flip side of that is if we have loads of great photos, for example of stained glass windows, our FP standards should be correspondingly higher. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:38, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Looks great in thumbnail size but at full size it's rather soft and the DoF seems insufficient to me. Our other church interiors are much more detailed usually. The blown window doesn't really bother me - a bright window can look bright and I don't expect any information there. All in all it's a good picture but it has some flaws. Hard to decide. --Code (talk) 05:03, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Ikan and Code. The standard is to be among "the finest on Commons" and I do think that is topic-dependent and finest naturally is higher where we already have a high number of excellent images. It's really rather soft (too much NR?) and yet somewhat downsized from camera resolution which I would have expected to sharpen things. As such there isn't any detail in the stonework, the writing no the walls is illegible and the other wall art unclear. The corners are naturally extremely soft due to the projection/wide-angle. I think where the technical level is below FP standard, the subject/lighting would have to be spectacular to compensate, and this here is fairly ordinary. -- Colin (talk) 11:30, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:18, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Sadhu in Janaki Temple, Janakpur-September 22, 2016-IMG 7437.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 08:22:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • He looks more like a Sadhu. Although many of them make a living from the donations, they are not beggars. Mendicant may be more suitable. Jee 08:43, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your input. In any case, this needs to be clarified and fixed. cart-Talk 09:11, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for reviews.. @Jkadavoor: @W.carter:
    • ✓ Done File renamed..
    • ✓ Done Suitable description..
    • ✓ Done Suitable category.. --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 09:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It's quite arguable whether this photo should be featured - everyone should have a look at the Featured Pictures in Category:Sadhus and note that some of the photos are of better technical quality - but I think it should because it's a different kind of sadhu picture than any of the Featured or Quality pictures of sadhus on this site, it's of acceptable quality and it's moving. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 03:34, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 05:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, gritty docuumentary feel. Not perfect (the dust on his left shoulder seems to have posterized slightly) but that's a bit more effective here, actually. Daniel Case (talk) 06:44, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • It is not dust; a kind of paste. Just sharing some info. Jee 08:41, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 07:45, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 08:41, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive --Biplab Anand (Talk) 09:00, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Fort Jay New York September 2016 002.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 05:57:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fort Jay
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♠ 05:57, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 05:57, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 06:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This subtle composition felt borderline for FP to me, but what made me decide to support is the historical importance of the place. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol unsupport vote.svg I withdraw my support in favor of alternative version. --Ivar (talk) 07:16, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 07:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not “wow” at all. The quality is good enough, but not perfect. IMO, there was no reason to take this photo towards evening. On the one hand, special atmosphere of the evening isn't “drawn” here, on the other, the evening light isn’t good and we have the rather dark, dull photo. (P.S. As a photo of an important historical place it can be nominated at Valued Picture Project). Dmitry Ivanov (talk) 08:34, 29 September 2016 (UTC).
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Dmitry Ivanov (more or less). Good composition, but very bad light, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 09:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The quality is ok but the shades prevent to see the details.--Zcebeci (talk) 12:16, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support On the whole, while the contrast between sides may be greater than desired I like this one better. Daniel Case (talk) 04:32, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like others I think too much of this too dark (though I'm sure that's how it was, rather than just being underexposed). It's not a remarkable enough scene and the centred composition demands more symmetry than we have here. The grass is also not photogenic. -- Colin (talk) 11:39, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Alt[edit]

Fort Jay

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info @INeverCry, Ikan Kekek, Iifar, W.carter, Johann Jaritz: @Dmitry Ivanov, Jebulon, Zcebeci: I have made a brighter version. If you think about it, there is no better time to take this photo (which faces south) than sunset; mid or late afternoon would have created harsh shadows in the moat which could be resolved only by weakening light (i.e. waiting until few minutes before sunset), and noon and early afternoon would simply produce awful colors. The morning is just a mirror image of afternoon, and after sunset is not possible as Governors Island is only open during the summer, until 7 PM. King of ♠ 02:23, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 02:23, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like them both, but this one is perhaps a bit of an improvement. INeverCry 02:26, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I prefer this one. Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:45, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 05:48, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The light has became much better; the lines of the fort make the great “diagonal-symmetric” composition; but, IMO, the photo has some shortcoming, too. Dmitry Ivanov (talk) 11:32, 30 September 2016 (UTC).
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per my comments above. It is hard to be objective when we know it was actually taken in darker conditions, and raising the exposure a stop might often be acceptable, but sliding the shaddow slider to +100 has resulted in a washed out look, and highlighted the noise in the shadows, which (combined with DoF limits) rob much of the image of sharpness. It's a QI though. -- Colin (talk) 11:39, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Aularches miliaris-Silent Valley-2016-08-13-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 04:33:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aularches miliaris
  • Category: Arthropods
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Aularches miliaris. C/U/N: Jkadavoor -- Jee 04:33, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jee 04:33, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Great insect and the composition is quite acceptable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 06:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like something the props department for a SciFi movie would conjure up. :) --cart-Talk 07:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zcebeci (talk) 12:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 11:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 17:01, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bijay chaurasia (talk) 03:05, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:30, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 05:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:05, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Super capture --SuperJew (talk) 13:11, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Shrinika performing Abhinaya (Kede Chhanda Janilu Tuhi).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2016 at 02:17:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Gersfeld, Panorama, b.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 20:55:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gersfeld from (Rhön) from Rodenbach knoll
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rainer Lippert - uploaded by Rainer Lippert - nominated by Rainer Lippert
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 20:55, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm not feeling impelled to support this effort, although of course I respect it. The composition isn't very interesting to me, with nothing that striking and quite hazy light in the middleground and background, including the town of Gersfeld. I think that given the quality of the panoramas we've been seeing at FPC, this is not outstanding enough for a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:40, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. INeverCry 03:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan and INC. Looks like it sure was humid that day ... Daniel Case (talk) 20:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Eiche bei Graditz.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 20:42:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rainer Lippert - uploaded by Rainer Lippert - nominated by Rainer Lippert
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice oak tree, but not an interesting enough picture for me to support. Sorry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. INeverCry 03:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:03, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice tree. We need more nice images of trees! :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:44, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality, but centered composition with midday light isn't very appealing. --Ivar (talk) 07:09, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very good and clean shot of an oak, hard to get since the good specimens usually are in dense groves or places with disturbing things. I like that the shadow in a way gives the oak a sort of "visible root". But please add latin name in the description and categories. --cart-Talk 08:16, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Centered composition, I'm sorry no wow for me --The Photographer 11:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zcebeci (talk) 12:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pedestrian composition, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Mentha arvensis - põldmünt Keila.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 20:30:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Field mint in Keila
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Ivar Leidus - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 20:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like the colors. Kruusamägi (talk) 20:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:58, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support thanks for nomination. --Ivar (talk) 07:13, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Crisp and fresh! --cart-Talk 08:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 08:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bijay chaurasia (talk) 14:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Enough of it's in focus, and the green tones work well together. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The green plant on a green background is not good contrast imo. --SuperJew (talk) 13:12, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:PL-PK Mielec, mural nad Wisłoką w okolicy parku Oborskich 2016-08-24--10-07-36-002.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 19:03:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mielec, mural painted by Grzegorz Bula Cebula and Tomasz Simiński in 2013
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kroton - uploaded by Kroton - nominated by Kroton -- Kroton (talk) 19:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kroton (talk) 19:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Fun picture, but is there a reason why you had to crop it so close on top? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:12, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
    • The singer's hair is very close to the edge of painted surface. The picture with the background (green bushes and the piece of white wall) looks much worse. Please look at this photo --Kroton (talk) 17:55, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the explanation, and most importantly the link to the other photo. I had no idea this wasn't in a more urban environment. I find it interesting enough for a feature. Moderate Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice texture, framing captures quite well the way murals interact with their environment and their medium; but I, too, would like an explanation for the tight top crop. Daniel Case (talk) 17:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Aspen Highlands bowl from Loge Peak .jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 17:34:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aspen Highlands peak and bowl from Loge peak. Top elevation 11,678 feet (3,559 m)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:34, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:34, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice photo, of course, but not striking enough to me for FP. The lack of contrast between the clouds in the sky and the snow on the slopes doesn't help. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:58, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. INeverCry 03:12, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ikan nailed it. --cart-Talk 08:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Zcebeci (talk) 12:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I am going to give this my support even though it probably will not be promoted the way things are going because, when I first looked at it, I shivered slightly for a second or two. It's not the season for it and I am too many years removed from a ski slope, but the instant I saw it I felt myself again in a moment I have experienced many times: late in the afternoon, perhaps an hour before the lifts close, standing near the top of a run pondering whether I should try to make this next one fast so I can get in one more before calling it a day, just as a strong breeze comes up and makes me feel that chill even under all the warm insulating ski clothing I have been wearing all day, reminding me that my body is feeling its limits, as I regard a scene like this.

    Any image that can capture that, can make me feel that, is in my opinion deserving of being featured, even if it is a rather static picture of a mountain under a partly cloudy/partly sunny sky. Daniel Case (talk) 17:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

  • * Thanks Daniel. It's exactly what I felt looking at this photo taken some time ago but thinking forward to the next skiing season with the same feelings as yours. And, a cloudy sky makes your feelings towards dealing a rough nature more intense, maybe scaring. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 22:44, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The lack of contrast between the mountain and the sky --SuperJew (talk) 13:14, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Elisa Bonaparte with her daughter Napoleona Baciocchi - François Gérard - Google Cultural Institute.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 16:10:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Elisa Bonaparte with her daughter Napoleona Baciocchi, by François Gérard, scan by Google Cultural Institute
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by François Gérard/Google Cultural Institute, uploaded by Zhuyifei1999, nominated by Yann (talk) 16:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Gigapixels image of a colorfull painting. The whole image is too big to have in one piece (around 3.36 Gpx(!), above the limit of 65535 for JPEG images).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 16:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Do you have a good suggestion on how to view this image at full size? The large image viewer showed me only a small part of the picture. I was actually able to view the picture normally by clicking on it, but attempts to zoom to full size failed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
    Ikan Kekek plz use Mozila Firefox... Face-smile.svg -- Bijay chaurasia (talk) 18:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I always use Firefox. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek, Daniel Case, W.carter: I never try to see such huge images with a browser. I download it and open it with the local image viewer, or Gimp/PS/etc. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I can live with not being able to see it directly or doing so with a few friendly tips from users like you. What I meant was that I question if something this hard to get access to for the readers/viewers who use this site to see things and get some knowledge, should be featured. Our "best" is not only about the work and picture quality of it, it is also the documentation and accessibility of the files. A parallel: how good is a book if only a few select can read it? cart-Talk 12:32, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm willing to Symbol support vote.svg Support on that basis, but it really is a problem for people to have to download such a huge file onto their local drive to view it in full. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:09, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 18:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 23:00, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Ikan since I'm having the same issue at the moment (and I'm using Chrome right now, and I have never had that issue with any other images, even larger ones). Daniel Case (talk) 05:52, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  1. Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment -- same issue in chrome but not in Mozila firefox.Face-smile.svg --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 06:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - As I said, I have this problem in Firefox. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
@Dschwen: Is there a bug with zoomviewer? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 07:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Well I've tried it with three different browsers and even if I have a really good broadband, I still can't get any of these pics to open properly (they start uploading and showing only to blink out and vanish). I'm not voting on something this hard to see. The project is about easy access to good material and this is not like that. --cart-Talk 08:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Panorama von der Milseburg.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 12:35:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view (360°) from Milseburg-Summit in the Rhön Mountains
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jörg Braukmann - uploaded by Milseburg - nominated by Milseburg -- Milseburg (talk) 12:35, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Milseburg (talk) 12:35, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - The crucifixion is really dramatic and dominates the picture, in my opinion, with the rock outcropping as the secondary focus. I find the overall composition good, the sharpness and resolution very good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:12, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sure --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:35, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't feel the 360 panorama is producing a successful composition. I suggest your start and end points aren't the best. If you shift the centre to be on the cross then you end up with a 360 that makes more sense to my eyes, starting and ending with the rocky outcrop. That seems like a more typical 360 panorama, and worth uploading. But now the cross is centred and Christ facing left. So then I might crop the a bit off the left hand side to remove the rocky outcrop, and more off the right hand side to place the cross roughly one third or one quarter in from the right. That to me is a better composition -- it makes sense that you are then standing on the same hill as the cross, and have some context/scenery either side, but Christ is facing into most of the frame. -- Colin (talk) 17:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I think Colin's suggestion is a good one, and I'd like to see the result if you choose to try it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many blown areas on clouds, common to exposures made at ISO 80 in my experience. Daniel Case (talk) 05:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
    • I don't have any problem with the bright areas on some clouds. The clouds are one of the best features in the photo, and it is a shame there isn't a bit more vertical room. -- Colin (talk) 08:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
I like clouds like this too; I just find that when you shoot them at 100, you get something more realistic, clouds that look like what you actually see, rather than toothpaste globs. Daniel Case (talk) 17:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin & Daniel. INeverCry 06:23, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the scene at lower half part is darky because of the clouds' shades --Zcebeci (talk) 12:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Utö kyrka October 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 08:58:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Utö kyrka (church), Utö island, Haninge Municipality, Stockholm archipelago. The church was built in 1849-50, architect Johan Fredrik Åbom.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created &uploaded by ArildV - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:58, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love this composition, the light, and the counterpoint between the clouds and the autumn leaves. The church is sharp. There's some unsharpness at the left, but I don't think it ruins the photo at all. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:58, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 09:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ezarateesteban 12:00, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 12:28, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:06, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, a very good QI with no doubt, but nothing special enough for a FP in my opinion. Especially the church is just common.--Jebulon (talk) 17:08, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - If this were just a picture of the church in a dull or blue sky, I might agree with you, but not with these clouds and autumn leaves. Mais chacun à son goût. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the autumn colours of the leaves, the interesting sky and the painted church in between. There are subtle features also leading the eye towards the church. The wide-angle view over-exaggerates the perspective of the church a bit perhaps. -- Colin (talk) 17:15, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The whole is greater than its parts, and that's saying a lot considering how strong the parts are—the church steeple severe and solitary against the mackerel sky, the leaves on the ground accentuating the message the gravestones around them convey of the impermanence of life. You could not do better if you were to pick a scene on which a hypothetical Bergman movie were to begin. Daniel Case (talk) 22:08, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:03, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 07:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:23, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zcebeci (talk) 12:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:30, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - per nom. Excellent lighting and nice composition. Nikhil (talk) 06:09, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Arctic tern (Sterna paradisaea) attacking, Amsterdam island, Svalbard.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 08:36:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Arctic tern attacking
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Family_:_Sternidae_.28Terns.29
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by AWeith -- AWeith (talk) 08:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment When breeding, these guys are extremely aggressive and protect their nest or hatchlings from the air by painful strikes with their beaks. The only way to protect oneself is either to stay at a safe distance or to lift something like a walking stick (or the telelens) above the head. I'm trying to explain that this image resulted from a risky departure... -- AWeith (talk) 08:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Great capture, and the areas that are blurred by motion are quite OK, under the circumstances. I didn't realize when I first saw this photo that you were the object of the attack! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:04, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • There were three of us and we've all been victims; one after the other. --AWeith (talk) 09:42, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Going by our usual (extremely high) bird-standards this is a rather small and not as-sharp-as-usual photo, but as an action shot of a bird protecting its own, it's superb. The action is embedded in the motion blur of the slightly distorted feathers, creating a beautiful silhouette. (Being picky, I could ask for a few extra lines of pixels at the top since the wing tip is rather close to the edge.) That is one angry bird... --cart-Talk 10:14, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:05, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 6.6 megapixels is fine for a bird-in-flight photo and the head is sharp. Behavioural shots of wildlife are especially valuable and uncommon. -- Colin (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Per Ikan. I will add for myself that having seen similar behavior from Arctic terns in the Arctic, and having made a few attempts to photograph them in normal flight, this is no mean feat. Image's technical deficiencies are more than adequately compensated for by what it captured. Daniel Case (talk) 22:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 04:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 06:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:16, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 07:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:23, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zcebeci (talk) 12:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great bird in flight shot. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:54, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Maria Taferl Basilika Kuppelfresko 03.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 06:47:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fresco in the dome of Maria Taferl Basilica (Lower Austria) by Antonio Beduzzi (1714-1718): Life and assumption of Mary

File:President's Summer home, Rio Negro Palace, Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2016 at 01:07:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

President's Summer home, Rio Negro Palace, Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info President's Summer home, The Palácio Rio Negro (English: Rio Negro Palace) is a palace located in Petrópolis, in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. All by -- The Photographer 01:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- The Photographer 01:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Weird light, not very sharp and several dust spots just above the building toward the left. I'd love to see a similar motif with more sharpness in better light, maybe with a tighter right margin to eliminate the partial inclusion of some uninteresting buildings. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unsharpness especially in lower left and lower right; I feel like standards have risen to the point where a standard centered architectural shot will either need a really good lens or panorama stitching. I disagree with Ikan on the lighting though, I think the cloudy day is great for bringing out the beautiful colors of the building and grass without worrying about shadows. --King of ♠ 03:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, far from being sharp enough, leaning to the right (at least it seems so to me) and the light's not pleasing. --Code (talk) 07:26, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per unsharpness at depth (look at the areas to the sides of the building) and slight tilt noted by Code. Although I wasn't bothered by the light—for a light-colored building like this, it may have been a good idea. Symbol support vote.svg Support now that those concerns have been addressed. Daniel Case (talk) 20:31, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for the reviews, I did the follow changes:
    • ✓ Done Sharpening and composition (with another picture of the same section) in corners and dust spots. @Ikan Kekek:
    • ✓ Done I cut the border to eliminate the partial inclusion of some uninteresting buildings.
    • ✓ Done Leaning to the right fix. Thanks @Code: @Daniel Case:
This picture was done on a travel to Petropolis, Brazil and this picture was taken using tripod. Anyway I hope had improved the picture, thanks again --The Photographer 22:48, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - You improved the composition, but it still isn't up to FP level to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:15, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Sultan Pasha Al-Atrash2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2016 at 09:14:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Fuerte Bordj el Kebir, Mahdia, Túnez, 2016-09-03, DD 34-36 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2016 at 03:42:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night view of the fortress of Bordj el Kebir and the moon over it, Mahdia, Tunisia.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Well, making the stars almost completely invisible is one way to deal with the issue, but I find it very disappointing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Ikan: I removed them all and took me a while to do so, editing each of them to make them look like spots is a request that I've never got so far and would take me much longer. If other reviewers agree with that I can do it, but right now I hardly have time for that, I could give it a try when I am back home and still I'm not 100% convinced about that approach. Sorry, as said, I only was able to do this change in the time frame I've now. Poco2 07:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • OK, I understand. I think the stars improve the composition somewhat, but if the only way to get rid of the trails is to delete the stars, I still find the resulting picture featurable. Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colors; a little soft near the top left of the fort but ... it was a long exposure. Daniel Case (talk) 06:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 08:29, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) at Magdalen fjord, Svalbard (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2016 at 21:42:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Harbor seal at Magdalen Fjord, Svalbard
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Phocidae_.28Earless_seals.29
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by AWeith - uploaded by AWeith - nominated by AWeith -- AWeith (talk) 21:42, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I know the filesize is somewhat small; however this guy was nosy yet very, very shy and would not come any closer. Therefore, I had to crop the image rather extensively. Nature photographers designate the view of the white in a seal's eye the best they can ever achieve. I guess spotting yourself on your RIB in its eye is not much worse ... -- AWeith (talk) 21:42, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 23:21, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose light flares, dust spots and noise, fixable of course. Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent clean job, It's ok for me, maybe now you will need ping everybody that already voted --The Photographer 14:06, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Since AWeith is rather new to Commons he may not know how the 'ping' is done, so hereby I 'ping' those who voted before the cleanup to let them know what has been done: @INeverCry: & @King of Hearts:. cart-Talk 16:31, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I think that what you are referring to as "dust spots" might be out of focus water drops from general splatter or from the the seal exhaling near the surface. But if you see something that needs fixing, please make notes of it on the file page and let AWeith fix those minor flaws himself if he likes to, instead of doing your usual own fixing. cart-Talk 09:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your recommendation, I have added the notes. --The Photographer 11:06, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your time to indicate the critical spots! I am entirely with W.carter on the origin of them; however I agree they are disturbing. I have, therefore, just uploaded a new version with removed spots and reduced noise. I'd appreciate your second look. --AWeith (talk) 12:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mostly for the sheer artistic quality of the photo. --cart-Talk 09:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 14:08, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm tempted to vote for this photo on the same basis as W.carter, but was the seal really that blue? Other QIs of harbor seals seem to show them as white and gray. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:31, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • The seal is wet and therefore he's reflecting the sky the same way the water does, so he takes on the color of the water. Our grey seals here in my town looks the same when wet. (Yes, we have seals and "seal safaris" here.) --cart-Talk 16:35, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Exactly that is the case. The other seals of this herd not swimming (e.g. resting on the flat rocks) are rather beige in their fur color (see also my QI pic with the "dry seal" and the wet one tempting to climb onto the same rock as the dry one). On top, it was the blue hour in the shadow of Losvikfjella, which is 1083 meters high.--AWeith (talk) 16:46, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Thanks for the explanations. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 19:18, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 20:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 22:12, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - absolutely! I know full well how difficult it is to shoot seals, otters and the like when they're in water. This one made me smile! Good job, AWeith. Atsme 📞 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per cart's !vote, I like the way it almost looks like it was shot in monochrome. Daniel Case (talk) 05:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Very nice. —Bruce1eetalk 06:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 20:23, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great capture! and the reflection is superb! --SuperJew (talk) 13:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:NSB El 18 Hallingskeid - Finse.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2016 at 21:17:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

NSB Regiontog near Hallingskeid
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Kabelleger -- Kabelleger (talk) 21:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This was a rather difficult shot to get. Apart from the good weather, which was just a lot of luck (and by "luck" I mean "LUCK!!!"), the location is hard to get to. It's inaccessible by car and the nearest train station is a one-hour hike away (which is a nuisance) and has very limited service (which is a problem). Our solution was to to rent two bikes at Finse and follow the Rallarvegen. My butt still hurt two days later, as I have not ridden a bike for like 10 years and the Rallarvegen is not in good condition in many places...
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author -- Kabelleger (talk) 21:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:36, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 23:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I particularly like the reflections, and much respect to you for the great efforts you made to get this shot! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 07:28, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and for future treks: Norwegian roads are not made for bikes but for walking or Gå på tur. :D --cart-Talk 09:20, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:09, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 16:36, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is no embedded colour profile and the Colorspace EXIF tag is "Uncalibrated", which means "not sRGB" and so suggests the image might be in AdobeRGB colourspace. Is this an out-of-camera JPG and if so have you set your camera to AdobeRGB for JPGs? A colour profile is absolutely required for non-sRGB images to display properly for almost all users, and required even for sRGB images for those users viewing with wide-gamut monitors. If you are unsure how to fix the image, ping me. I can also insert the relevant tags (without affecting the JPG quality) if you know what colourspace it is. Other than that, it's a great photo. -- Colin (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's sRGB. I use sRGB everywhere because everything else is likely to cause problems sooner or later. However, I store the JPEGs (in current PS) without color profile because I found that it's not needed. Maybe that's not the best idea? As to where the EXIF tag comes from, no idea. --Kabelleger (talk) 20:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
      • Yes, if your software you use to develop your raw files can export a JPG with an embedded colour profile, that's excellent and needed to ensure accurate colours. User:Colin/BrowserTest explains the problem, though it is hard to appreciate without a wide-gamut monitor. Jeffrey's Friedl's Image Metadata Viewer is a useful tool, as is EXIFTOOL upon which it is based. -- Colin (talk) 20:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
        • I've uploaded a new version with color profile. Note that it has small changes in brightness, these are because I did some corrections after the raw import, and I don't have the exact values of those anymore. --Kabelleger (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Almost looks like it's on another planet. This and some of your other FPs have prompted me to create Category:Water reflections of rail vehicles Daniel Case (talk) 20:47, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Chertkov Mansion, left wing, windows.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2016 at 20:25:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A fragment of the façade of the Chertkov Mansion, Moscow, Russia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dmitry Ivanov - uploaded by Dmitry Ivanov - nominated by Dmitry Ivanov -- Dmitry Ivanov (talk) 20:25, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry Ivanov (talk) 20:25, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unbalanced composition, hash contrast, lef column shadow is distracting --The Photographer 00:08, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the composition. Of course it would be better if the column were on both sides, but I like the composition, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:47, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 06:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great composition, but without that left harsh and bulky shadow please. cart-Talk 09:25, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. I think the two window arches and designs above/below make an interesting geometric abstract. But the statue on the left, and its shadow, detract. Not sure whether this is fixable at another time of day. -- Colin (talk) 19:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per cart. Daniel Case (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 20:26, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Red admiral butterfly (Vanessa atalanta) underside 3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2016 at 09:53:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red admiral butterfly (Vanessa atalanta)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 09:53, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Charles (talk) 09:53, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Washed out details, especially on the red parts of the wing. Postprocessing has gone too far or the lens are not up to task? --Ivar (talk) 12:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I do hope you are not being serious. Please search the Internet for other images of the ventral side of this butterfly. Charles (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment How about this one: Admiral auf einer Mostbirne 1.JPG --Ivar (talk) 15:36, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I rest my case. The colours on mine, including the 'red', are stronger. Charles (talk) 17:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
          • Red channel blown; I think. White to on the extreme end. Jee 17:12, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
            • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I concur, perhaps too much contrast was added in postprocessing? In that case it should be easy to fix. --Ivar (talk) 17:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Unsharp foreground is distracting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:50, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Lovely bokeh, and great work on the butterfly, but the flower in front is just complex enough to be too much of a distraction from it. Daniel Case (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Kalahari lion (Panthera leo) male 6y.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2016 at 09:55:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Six-year-old male Kalahari lion (Panthera leo)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 09:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Charles (talk) 09:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Can you add some more exposure? --Ivar (talk) 12:12, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't understand your request. You want it darker or lighter? Charles (talk) 15:23, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Add exposure compensation. --Ivar (talk) 15:39, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Very mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the head and body of the lion. I also like the composition, except that I don't love the crop on the right side or the unsharp foreground. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as it is. The lion's head is absolutely beautiful at full size, but the photo is a bit too dark and the right crop is not good. As it is now it's distracting since I keep wondering what has been cut off; is it a tail, another lion, leftover from the dinner gasell or... cart-Talk 09:32, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per cart. (a minor issue, possibly fixable is the sky is rather noisy especially chroma noise and a bit of posterisation). -- Colin (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per cart, who as she often does says everything I was going to. Daniel Case (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Charlesjsharp: This is a great photo, but everyone seems to agree it is too dark. Could you please fix? --King of ♠ 00:20, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Kloster St. Trudpert - Gesamtsicht1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2016 at 05:59:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Trudpert's Abbey, Black Forrest, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 05:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 05:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I detected some dust spots in the sky. For sure I'll erase them this evening. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    Erased now. --Wladyslaw (talk) 17:35, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support First class. -- -donald- (talk) 06:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Beautiful landscape and excellent quality, but there is a rather noticeable halo between running the entire length of the border between the sky and the top of the mountain; did you make any unusual local contrast adjustments? --King of ♠ 07:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    No. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:45, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support despite the slightly strange sky. --King of ♠ 23:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 08:36, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a bit centered... otherwise just great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:15, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice landscape! --Ivar (talk) 12:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Would be better to remove the "UFO's" in the sky :-) --Laitche (talk) 14:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Color space in EXIF says: 'Uncalibrated'. Why? -- Slaunger (talk) 19:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 21:51, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very nice composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Schön! Another landscape I want to walk in. Would be nice to have a geotag, though. Daniel Case (talk) 03:23, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Gastdozentenhaus Universität Stuttgart 2015 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2016 at 02:34:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The "Gastdozentenhaus" on the campus of the University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart-Vaihingen, Germany.

File:Royal Albert Hall - Gallery View.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 22:36:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Royal Albert Hall - Gallery View
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A 225 megapixel panorama of the Royal Albert Hall from the gallery. Taken when the hall is open to visitors on the weekend of Open House London 2016. The large purple mushrooms / flying saucers are fibreglass acoustic diffusing discs, installed in 1969 to solve an echo problem. They are lit by an array of LED stage lights. The stage is empty and strangely grey compared to the colour surrounding it. If you have problems viewing this image in your browser, use the interactive large-image viewer, or one of the smaller downsized versions, all of which are linked from the file-description page. It's a 16:9 aspect ratio, so viewing fullscreen is best (Press F11 on Firefox). All by me. -- Colin (talk) 22:36, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 22:36, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support New size standard and excellent sharpening. Colors a bit purple aura, however, it look like reals colors. Maybe my favorite picture this month on FPC. The composition look also excellent, however, I would like to see more in the bottom, what happend?. Anyway, congratulations for this contribution --The Photographer 22:47, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. The purple colour is the result of the fairly monochromatic stage lights, which are a pain to photograph. Coloured stage lights are always artificial in their effect, but these LED ones seem especially unnatural. As for the bottom, well that's the lowest I've got. The balcony handrail prevents being able to see much more below and I wasn't prepared to dangle my camera over the edge to get a better view. -- Colin (talk) 22:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your explain --The Photographer 11:15, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice, but who need this size of an image??? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:58, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
The other day Slaunger told me he was proud to see one of his large panoramas on display as a huge poster. The interactive viewer makes it possible to explore the scene, rather than just look at it at 1980x1024. I think this is a rich enough scene to reward exploring in detail. It also looks great on a 5K monitor ;-) -- Colin (talk) 23:13, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Absolutely flawless. --King of ♠ 23:10, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Great achievement! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --Code (talk) 05:39, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 09:05, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support stunning --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:12, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. I guess a lot of effort has been put into this picture. --Ximonic (talk) 13:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Size, sharpness and colors are impressive. But that's not all. Cut and composition are unbalanced und suboptimal. A full spheric projektion from a more central shooting location would have been the better choice here. --Milseburg (talk) 13:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    • I have another panorama taken (but not yet processed) taken from a central box, lower down. I suspect it will have symmetry that is pleasing, but also contain a lot of the empty stage, which is less photogenic at this time. I felt this view showed more of the audience as well as the stage. While I won't argue about your opinion on the composition, I disagree that there is necessarily one best view -- a venue like this merits photographs from many locations A 360 projection like here would be wonderful but note that we were only given access on Open House day to a few boxes and to part of the gallery, neither of which are great for 360 views, and would be cluttered with fellow Open House visitors. Diliff told me has been trying for a long time to get photo access to the Albert Hall, and was not successful -- they are always busy setting up for performances and couldn't find a slot for him to be free to take photos. Category:Interior of the Royal Albert Hall shows this is not a frequently photographed venue, and most other photos are snapshots during a concert. -- Colin (talk) 15:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 14:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Technically excellent, but the colours are not typical of the Albert Hall in normal lighting. Charles (talk) 15:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Charles, as a concert venue, lit by whatever lighting the team wish to put on, I'm not sure what one would regard as "typical". See View from your seat and virtual tour for various examples (though since the JPGs on that site do not embed a colour profile, they appear way too saturated on my wide-gamut monitor with most browsers). Here's an example from Open House 2014 that has the discs coloured red. Here's one that is blue. Here's a single-shot photo take from a similar position with similar colours, though this time there's a red light on the roof and their saturation is higher. Do you have an example image that shows typical colours, or "normal lighting"? -- Colin (talk) 15:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No I'm afraid not Colin, but I've been there 20+ times, hence my comment. The acoustic discs are off-white. Charles (talk) 17:04, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
        • Charles, Ha! Yes I know what the colour of the discs are when there are no stage lights on ... because halfway through taking photos for this stitch, they turned off all the lights. Thinking my stitch was ruined, I held my breath for 90 seconds before they turned them all back on again. Whew! The unlit discs are like this photo. Not pretty, and probably would work better in a photo taken from lower down where the discs are not so prominent. I too have been to a classical concert, many many years ago, where the discs were not lit. But all the photos on the Albert Hall official site show them lit colourfully. This older classical concert photo shows the neutral lighting one might expect (though it doesn't include the discs, there's not purple in the gallery or on the organ), yet this recent classical concert photo shows the purple stage lights in the gallery and a purple organ, so I suspect would also have purple discs. A Google Image search for "Albert Hall Interior" has coloured discs vastly outnumbering unlit discs. So I disagree that there is "normal" lighting for the Albert Hall, which hosts many concerts and events with differing requirements for light, and suspect that un-coloured discs are now actually the minority situation, rather than "normal". -- Colin (talk) 17:31, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! A very hard to get to subject. Well done, excellent technique, very pleasing composition, very high detail level. Valuable. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the colors ... slightly surreal, perhaps, but they add interest. And they make those accoustic discs look like what I thought them to be at first ... some way of trying to figure out how many holes it takes to fill the building (Sorry; you knoew someone was going to try that one Face-smile.svg). Daniel Case (talk) 20:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 21:52, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Kolvitsa river.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 21:16:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kolvitsa river in Kolsky peninsula

File:Langkofelhütte Gherdeina.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 19:42:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saslonch mountain range and "Rifugio Vicenza" in the Dolomites
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 19:42, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 19:42, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor lighting; the sun seems to be right above the subject. Unfortunately this leads to dull colors. --King of ♠ 19:57, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
    • I'd like you to pay a visit here. I'd be more than happy and honoured to give you hospitality--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:05, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per KoH. INeverCry 20:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no FP because the mountains are unsharp = false focus point!?! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:16, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree both with KoH and Alchemist-hp. I find the place very beautiful, the composition good, and the picture more than good in general.--Jebulon (talk) 21:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Jebulon. It seems excessive to require mountains to be totally sharp when they're in the background or at least middleground. I think they're sufficiently clear to make sense in this picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:23, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Regretful Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - beautiful scenery, but not sharp enough --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. Very striking perspective to the mountains but at first I though the lighting is somewhat bland. I think there has happened a little focus error. --Ximonic (talk) 13:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Has an embedded AdobeRGB color profile. Some popular web browsers ignore embedded color profiles, meaning users of those browsers see the wrong colors for this image. For web use the recommended color space is sRGB. An AdobeRGB version is OK as an alternative as it may be slight better suited for making prints. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:48, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • (Edit conflict)Symbol oppose vote.svg Deeply regretful oppose As much as I love Wolfgang's images of the Italian Alps, and really thought he had nailed it in entirely new ways with this one, the opposes are right: the summits are far too unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 19:49, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 08:34, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco, California LCCN2013633353.tif[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 17:41:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden Gate Bridge at night.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Carol M. Highsmith - uploaded by - nominated by -- (talk) 17:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This photograph is part of a batch upload project from the Highsmith collection at the Library of Congress. Motivated by the lawsuit against Getty Images, see Village Pump archive. As the TIFF is a large download, over 100 MB, the Commons full size jpeg version is a useful alternative to view. -- (talk) 17:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:49, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:58, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 09:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer 11:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bijay chaurasia (talk) 21:03, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good composition (but disturbing lower left corner), poor choice of aperture and lens. Yes I know, its a professional photographer but f/5.6 and a zoom lens is obviously not optimal. The quality (photo and camera from 2012) and depth of field s not impressive, not very high wow imo. --ArildV (talk) 21:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Cabo de Gata, Andalusia, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 17:26:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cape Gata, Andalusia, Spain.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 17:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cabo de Gata, a natural mediterranean site near Almería, Andalusia, Spain.-- Jebulon (talk) 17:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, rather dull light and boring "mediterranean" architecture, sorry--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:47, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Paw. aaaargh. I'm dead. Please call an ambulance (or the coroner, better).🤕🔫--Jebulon (talk) 19:06, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
      • Is it really necessary to make fun of a serious comment? Wladyslaw (talk) 19:28, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
      • Nothing is really necessary. Nor participating, Neither useless comments, neither lessons. Sadly. Only fun is necessary. Always.--Jebulon (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I know, this is the way to kill candidates ;-) but, it's unfortunately (for you) the way I feel about your picture. Salue --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 19:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Salut ! Happy to see you understand what I mean. It is not the case for everyone here, as I can see... Well nothing "unfortunate for me", just a nomination of a picture in FPC. Nothing serious, then. Thanks for comment and vote, caro amico.--Jebulon (talk) 21:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd like to see some clouds, but otherwise I like how the shapes work together. Any other composition would've thrown it out of balance. INeverCry 08:48, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Moroder --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - The interesting landforms are really what make the difference for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:23, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Wakefield Cathedral Choir, West Yorkshire, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 13:29:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wakefield Cathedral
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kasir (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice image, good composition. Looks like perspective problems at the top. Lights at the windows (and background) may be a bit overexposed.--XRay talk 15:11, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 17:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 19:01, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:51, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Moderate Symbol support vote.svg Support per XRay. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:17, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Is there somewhere I (and probably the many others who might like to do this) could just go and say "our signatures on this page constitute a support !vote for all of David Iliff's tonemapped images of church interiors; should we want to !vote otherwise we will make that clear on the FPC page"? But then again I often leave comments with those support !votes. Daniel Case (talk) 05:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 08:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:05, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ximonic (talk) 13:34, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 16:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:14, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

File:On the balcony, Paris August 2016.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 09:19:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by besopha (Flickr) - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 09:19, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 09:19, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as it is now. The perspective is a bit distorted and a bit at the bottom could be cropped off for a cleaner and more balanced photo. cart-Talk 10:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Done. Thank Carter!--Paris 16 (talk) 11:03, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Perspective is fine now, thank you :), but I'm still bothered by the 3/4 "main" down left. IMO cropping away that (see note) would also result in a cleaner pic (the pic would depict exactly two floors), but other users may have another opinion. Let's wait and see. cart-Talk 12:08, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just as a Parisian, for reviewers: it is really typically parisian. For the rest I agree with cart.--Jebulon (talk) 17:34, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes I know, I've been there many times and I love it. :D cart-Talk 17:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This is a nice, pleasant picture and I like it, but I don't find it special enough for a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:30, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A very Parisian image, as Jebulon says, and one I would expect to see in a decent magazine article or travel guidebook perhaps. But, that said ... per Ikan it doesn't work as a featurable image. There's too much going on. I do think that the photographer is on to something, and that an FP in this vein might yet be produced. Daniel Case (talk) 05:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 08:51, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:00, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Westminster London June 2016 panorama 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 06:18:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Westminster at sunrise
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♠ 06:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 06:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 07:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically perfect as always and kudos for getting up that early to get this place without any people, I bet it's packed a little while later, but the light is too dull in most of the picture and it does not give me a wow factor. One of those moments where it probably felt magical to be there but it doesn't quite translate to the photo. Sorry. cart-Talk 10:37, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:27, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per cart about the light, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 17:35, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:22, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This doesn't quite make it for me because of a combination of the light and its not being as sharp as I'd like. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per W.carter; an excellent job getting us there but not much there to get to. Daniel Case (talk) 05:14, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Lifebelt on a small fishing boat.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2016 at 22:31:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lifebelt on a small fishing boat.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Boats
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info So, here is the new tweaked version of this picture. (Hope I did the nom right with all the formal things.) As I've said before at QIC, I sometimes think I'm partially blind when it comes to my own pictures. I miss things that I easily see in other users' pictures. So those second pairs of eyes this site provides are invaluable, this time it was Daniel who gave me a push in the right direction. And since it was he who did it, I got the idea for a square crop instead. :) Don't know if it is perfect, but I think it is far better than before. All by me, -- cart-Talk 22:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- cart-Talk 22:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This doesn't quite work for me as a FP. The vertical vs. diagonal is interesting but makes me feel a little off balance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:36, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support since it's pretty much what I suggested. Daniel Case (talk) 07:02, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In the original, the railing looks like you could lean on it; now it looks like you might have to climb it. I like the idea, but the proportion of the railing is off now. INeverCry 07:46, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose random crop and no wow for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:07, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Honestly, you really call a crop "random" when several lines end perfectly at the picure's borders in carefully chosen spots? I wouldn't mind if you call it "bad" but I don't think "random" is the right word here. cart-Talk 15:49, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I wrote: "random crop for me". So it is. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:24, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

File:El Paraíso tunnel main gate of Caracas.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2016 at 19:03:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

El Paraíso tunnel main gate of Caracas
Yes, however the other one has more merit IMHO, because @Rjcastillo: risked his life (leave the car to take a picture in the most dangerous city in the world[1]) --The Photographer 16:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel. The quality is very good considering you were on the road. --King of ♠ 02:13, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 07:50, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per below. Great colors, they look almost poserized until you open the pic and see that they are actually true. cart-Talk 10:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 10:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:22, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 13:33, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:28, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing new and no change since this 2014 failed nomination under another name.--Jebulon (talk) 17:39, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
I do not think it has been a bad nomination as the result of positive votes was 4 times higher than the negative. On the other hand, your comment on "under another name", makes me feel bad like I was hiding something that is quite public in the description of the image and I can't understand how you are able to see this other nomination but you are not able to view the file history of changes showing a selective noise reduction which was a huge job (it was not an automated tool) recently. --The Photographer 18:17, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad composition and denoise artefacts -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 21:10, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg strong oppose per Jebulon and Dmitry A. Mottl: denoise artefacts! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:31, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done I rebuild the image, please, let me know if the "denoise artefacts" is gone. Thanks --The Photographer 22:29, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, but not done: this image is still ruined reworked. Take a look to the tree over the red car in your original and the newest version ... I also wrote: per Jebulon! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment and I think that the problem is gone (I uploaded another version). IMHO this last version is considerably better that the originally uploaded.  :) --The Photographer 23:15, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - That may be, and I'm OK with the changes you made, but I think you should ping everyone who already voted and see what they think. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since we are heading into another one of these confusing edit wars with tweaking a pic during nomination, I'm withdrawing my vote and sit this one out. cart-Talk 09:14, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
I think that it's a valid recomendation and thanks Ikan Kekek for your idea. I'm pinging everybody King of, @INeverCry: , @Johann Jaritz: , @Martin Falbisoner:, @Kasir:, @ArionEstar:, @Jebulon:, @Dmottl:, @Alchemist-hp:. Please, feel free of change your vote if you think that this version is not in line with the version that you voted. --The Photographer 11:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per W.carter. INeverCry 07:02, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
@INeverCry: and @W.carter:, This is not a completely different picture, is an alteration of the original photo, just noise reduction and performe small fixes pending a nomination is in line with the spirit of this section provide better quality images to commons and improve our quality as photographers and photo editors. If you are stopping someone improves a photo based on a valid criticism you are curtailing the ability of feedback, learning and improvement provided by this section and I'm not here to accumulate awards, I'm in this section primarily because of those negative votes that help me improve and I love that feedback and This is something that has been happening in the past and more drastic changes in the photos. Please do not limit the learning process. --The Photographer 11:00, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm not stopping you in any way, I'm simply choosing not to vote here due to too much confusion about what version I'm voting on. cart-Talk 11:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I'll switch to neutral, as an oppose is too harsh. Perhaps I should take a break and re-think my participation here if I'm getting in the way. I knew what I was doing with my Minolta XE7 and Mamiya RB67, but digital photography can be a challenge to understand. My votes and comments aren't very technical here, because I'm not that technically knowledgeable. I usually vote support for what impresses me and oppose for what doesn't. I may not be qualified to vote here. I came here for enjoyment of the images, but that doesn't take voting. I can just look but not touch in future. Face-wink.svg INeverCry 11:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • @INeverCry: Please drop a vote now and then if you feel like it, a good healthy gut feeling about a picture is more vital than all the tech talk. I can keep up with the tech stuff, but I don't think those points have the final say in whether a pic should be FP or not. Btw, speaking of what we use to take the photos, I think you will find the 'Equipment' section on my user page of interest. ;) cart-Talk 19:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
@INeverCry: Well my camera has 10 years old and it was a gift from a globally locked user. Btw, you don't need have a D800E to became a good photographer, a good photographer need only a insatiable hunger for photographic knowledge and exactly like any wikimaniadict. And more important is be a good person and be polite with others users respect their work and contributions are crucial and I'm not the best example (I am very easy to irritate). --The Photographer 21:07, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Set design by Philippe Chaperon for Act1 sc2 of Aida by Verdi 1871 Cairo - Gallica - Restored.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2016 at 03:24:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aida Act I, Scene 2.

File:Cobeta, Guadalajara, España, 2016-01-05, DD 19.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2016 at 03:03:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

General view of the municipality of Cobeta located in the province of Guadalajara, Castile-La Mancha, Spain.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info General view of the municipality of Cobeta located in the province of Guadalajara, Castile-La Mancha, Spain. The population of Cobeta is (according to the 2004 census) 108 inhabitants. Note: this picture belongs to the project No municipality in Spain without a photograph. All by me, Poco2 03:03, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 03:03, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Moderate Symbol support vote.svg Support - You mean "No municipality in Spain without a photograph". I like the photo, but I wonder what it would have looked like if you had cropped to the right of the building that's cut off. Did you take any wider-angle photos? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:51, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
    Yes, sorry, Ikan, I meant without photograph, I corrected it. I've uploaded a new version with more image on both sides, but the building on the right is still cropped. I don't know whether I've another version of it. I have only a few RAW files with me. Poco2 17:16, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a bit oversaturated?! but enough wow. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:52, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral pending correction of that leaning tower on the left which has been noted.< Daniel Case (talk) 16:53, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Symbol support vote.svg Support now that that's been done. A landscape that confronts the viewer with what a Spanish winter is and isn't. Daniel Case (talk) 04:14, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
    Daniel Case: True, I've ✓ corrected it. Poco2 17:16, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fine technique and light, but the composition is not at all FP level in my opinion. Especially the right hand side appears rather arbitrary with the cropped buildings and the electrical wires coming down in a distracting way. Wires can be OK if they add to the composition of a photo. In this case they do not for me. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:20, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ezarateesteban 22:37, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger. INeverCry 22:55, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 03:02, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too ordinary composition for me, sorry. --Laitche (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Laitche, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 17:48, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:19, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Wesel, Zitadelle, Haupttor -- 2016 -- 4340-6.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2016 at 15:34:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Citadel in Wesel, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by XRay -- XRay talk 15:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 15:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice symmetry! Although you are half a metre of centre :-) --Basotxerri (talk) 17:47, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice but little wow, sorry, for composition and lighting. I am aware this kind of light has been chosen on purpose yet I don’t like the facade being entirely in shadow, making the foreground (which already covers almost half of the frame) much brighter than the actual subject of the image, making the latter look dull. Then, it’s rather soft considering what’s possible today (due to f/13 diffraction I fancy). A stitched panorama of this static object, for instance, could have easily been taken as well, giving way more detail and crispness. Und eine einzelne Aufnahme ist per definitionem kein HDR-Bild, auch nicht nach Tonemapping. HDR heißt „mehr als eine einzelne Belichtung an Dynamik zu fassen vermag“. --Kreuzschnabel 19:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. INeverCry 22:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ezarateesteban 22:35, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - I like the composition a lot. I like that the cannons are more or less facing toward us, I find that the building being in shadow actually emphasizes it (in somewhat the same way that a listener will really perk up their ears when there is a contrasting soft section in the middle of moderately loud music), and I like the view through the archway in the center of the building. I'm very tempted to support a feature. But what gives me pause is Kreuzschnabel's point about the softness of the focus. To my taste, this is a very good photo in almost every way. In a way, it's like my heart supports a feature but my brain is just not sure. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:04, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the golden lighting + dark clouds. The lack of illumination on the facade doesn't bother me that much. --King of ♠ 01:37, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, a bit soft, but that's no dealbreaker here --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel. The lighting may be golden on the grass but that's not really the subject. I think for a photo like this to rise above QI it needs to have great lighting of the building, or the building more amazing, or far higher resolution/sharpness. We have so many greater building FPs. -- Colin (talk) 07:12, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice perspective, light a bit suboptimal, but still ok for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:53, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Alchemist. Gets enough right. Daniel Case (talk) 16:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's nice and sharp but with this light, the lawn actually looks more interesting than the building and it has no wow factor for me, sorry. --cart-Talk 16:30, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My impression is exceptional. --Milseburg (talk) 21:32, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per opposers. There is too many empty grass/lawn IMO, and I miss something "more" regarding the famous "wow" factor. Sorry. Not a bad picture, of course.--Jebulon (talk) 17:49, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per other opponents. --Karelj (talk) 21:24, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Duisburg, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord -- 2016 -- 1253.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2016 at 15:29:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord in Duisburg, North Rhine-Westphalia, German
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Industry#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by XRay -- XRay talk 15:29, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 15:29, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 16:33, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:48, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting shapes and good work but I don’t see anything outstanding. If only the nearest arc wasn’t cut by the frame on the right. --Kreuzschnabel 19:19, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. INeverCry 22:14, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting and rather unique shape. --King of ♠ 01:36, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support So interesting compositionally (it feels like another album cover for some cool Krautrock group that I've never heard of and would want to hear if they used images like this on their album covers) that it offsets the depth of field that I wish was sharper on the bricks. Daniel Case (talk) 01:41, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Interesting and offbeat, and I like the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:40, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice view, but not enough wow, a bit too boring for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:55, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition. Like the rough industrial look. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:26, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think this kind of photos must need some impressive element or factor, the only nice composition doesn't deserve FP, imho. --Laitche (talk) 17:26, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The kind of picture I like. Excellent composition and light, but sharpness is not enough IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 17:45, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. --Karelj (talk) 21:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:04, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Хотинська фортеця в місячну ніч.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2016 at 07:34:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Khotyn Fortress on full moon night
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by User:Ryzhkov Sergey - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I just saw this photo at QIC (it was promoted), and I find it poetic and beautiful. I'm also impressed with the photographer's light control. I guess the moon and a bit of its reflection on the water may be a tad blown and posterized and the very tops of the towers are just a bit soft, but they're good enough for me in context, and for a picture in low light conditions, the fact that the fortress is so clear and the stars visible in the sky aren't traily at all is impressive to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 07:50, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 10:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:55, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ryzhkov Sergey could you please upload a higher resolution version of this? This appears to be downsized 50% and thus only 9.7MP from 36MP camera. -- Colin (talk) 11:44, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:03, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Where so many attempts like this often fall short, this has succeeded. Daniel Case (talk) 20:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not sure if I want to see how it looks at 36 MP. It is just excellent as it is. Period. --A.Savin 21:45, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:17, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 01:39, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 02:28, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:24, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Mild oppose. The shadows, or whatever it is at the castle has some very strange greenish and wrong color (see annotation). A postprocessing mishap? Otherwise very nice and atmospheric. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:37, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice however it wants a bit more space on the top. --Laitche (talk) 17:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 10:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:20, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)