Commons:Candidatas a imagens especiais

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

Estas imagens são as candidatas para se tornarem em Imagens especiais. Por favor note que isto não é a mesma coisa que a imagem do dia.

Para ver o arquivo de nomeações prévias veja: Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log

Contents

Formalidades[edit]

Nomeação[edit]

Se acha que encontrou ou criou uma imagem que possa ser considerada especial, então por favor adicione-a em baixo na secção de nomeações, no topo da página, editando este link.

Mas antes de o fazer, assegure que a imagem tem uma descrição apropriada e licenciamento.

Por favor vote ao usar a palavra na sua linguagem nos modelos em baixo:

Política de candidatura a imagem especial[edit]

  • Período de votação de 9 dias. O resultado será determinado no 10º dia após a nomeação.
  • As nomeações feitas por anónimos são bem vindas.
  • As contribuições para a discussão feitas por anónimos são bem vindas.
  • Votos de anónimos não são contados.
  • As nomeações não contam como votos. O voto deve ser feito usando o modelo de voto.

A imagem candidata passará a ser uma imagem especial de acordo com as seguintes condições:

  1. Licença apropriada.
  2. Pelo menos 5 votos positivos.
  3. A relação de votos positivos/votos negativos terá de ser pelo menos 2/1 (uma maioria de dois terços, ou seja pelo menos 67% de apoio).

Para ver instruções sobre como lidar com nomeações antigas, veja Template talk:Featured pictures candidates#What to do after voting is finished.

Propostas[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:The Love of Paris and Helen by Jacques-Louis David.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2017 at 10:53:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Love of Paris and Helen by Jacques-Louis David.jpg
  • Has frame; so {{Art photo}} if needed. Jee 16:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 16:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 19:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Glardon Vallorbe LA2442-0 140 mm Swiss cut 0 6-piece needle file set.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2017 at 09:14:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Needle file set
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Tools
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Swiss made needle file set. All by Lucas.
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLucas 09:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 10:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - More great work! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--LivioAndronico (talk) 10:58, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I know this is just a b&w image, but can you restore the EXIF information and colour profile please. Perhaps a stage in your stacking workflow is removing the EXIF data. It is possible to copy EXIF from one file (tiff, jpg, etc) to another using EXIFTOOL. Btw, if these are thin files, why is focus stacking necessary? And how would a 20mm increment help -- surely they are less than 20mm thick? Also, information about stacking and stitching is best put on the file description page, and there are templates to help with this. -- Colin (talk) 12:50, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
    @Colin: 1. I restored the EXIF as you wished. Which is a bit important as this image is not grayscale, it does contain color. 2. Focus stacking was necessary because at f/8, the best aperture of my lens, the DOF wasn't large enough. The 20 mm increments are from left to right in the image, not in depth, I moved the camera along the files to get more resolution. I added that info to the description texts.– Lucas 13:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Bombus soroeensis - Jasione montana - Tallinn.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2017 at 18:34:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Broken-belted bumblebee
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Broken-belted bumblebee on the sheep's bit scabious. All by Ivar (talk) 18:34, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:34, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bee looks good and sharp as does a good part of the flower. I like the other little bug under the flower. lNeverCry 01:12, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:22, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:26, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose This image feels a bit too normal to me. I have some of such images in my own collection, not with pollen but they look very similar. Going through the FP category, there are some images with bigger, more visible pollen than this one, and in terms of visual impact / lighting this one is a bit boring and flat, IMO it doesn't stack up with the majority of the other FPs of bees. – Lucas 09:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 09:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--LivioAndronico (talk) 10:58, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Haltern am See, Stausee, Anleger -- 2016 -- 2859.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2017 at 16:48:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chain of the jetty at the Halterner Stausee (at evening), Haltern am See, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

File:Nutria (Myocastor coypus) in a partially frozen river Ljubljanica.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2017 at 15:42:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nutria (Myocastor coypus)

File:Sandvikens AIK vs Västerås SK 2015-03-14 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2017 at 10:49:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Swedish bandy championship final game of 2015.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sandviken player Niklas Gälman defense against Hammarby players in the Swedish bandy championship final game of 2015. I like this image since it shows the beauty of Bandy. Bandy is all about speed and movement. Unlike (ice) hockey bandy is non-contact sport and played on a rectangle of ice at the same size as a football field (allowing the players to build up very high speed before receiving a pass, making it difficult to defenders). Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 10:49, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 10:49, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The focus is on the guy with his back to us, rather than on the ball or on the player facing us who is about to hit the ball. So my eye keeps getting drawn to someone's back. Other than that, it's not a bad scene. -- Colin (talk) 12:10, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin. lNeverCry 01:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Poertschach Halbinselpromenade Seeblick nach Osten 11012017 6019.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2017 at 03:44:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Lake Woerth from the peninsula promenade, Poertschach, Carinthia, Austria
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I have to admit, I find the cut-off tree at the right margin problematic. Forgive me, I am changing to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:53, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sorry, it wasn't my intention that others change their mind :-) --Basotxerri (talk) 20:00, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. lNeverCry 01:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination You are absolutely right. Those scares were also mine, a reason why I hesitated with the nomination so long. Anyway, I thank you all for your honest opinion. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Mohsen Makhmalbaf at Fronteiras do Pensamento Porto Alegre 2011.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2017 at 02:44:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mohsen Makhmalbaf at Fronteiras do Pensamento Porto Alegre 2011

File:Castillo de Zafra, Campillo de Dueñas, Guadalajara, España, 2017-01-04, DD 41-46 PAN.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 19:24:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Castle of Zafra, Campillo de Dueñas, Guadalajara, Spain.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of the Castle of Zafra, Campillo de Dueñas, Guadalajara, Spain. The castle was built in the late 12th or early 13th centuries on a sandstone outcrop and stands on the site of a former Visigothic and Moorish fortification that fell into Christian hands in 1129. It had considerable strategic importance as a virtually impregnable defensive work on the border between Christian and Muslim-ruled territory. The castle was never conquered and was successfully defended against the King of Castile in the 13th century. The successful completion of the Reconquista at the end of the 15th century ended its military significance. Poco2 19:24, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:24, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent image size, DoF and quality, hight EV, nice composition. --The Photographer 19:31, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • only Symbol support vote.svg week support <spam> because the resolution can be a bit higher ha, ha, ha ...  ;-)</spam> --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:06, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - LOL, Alchemist! I don't think you'll get any complaints about the sky or unsharpness with this one. It's just a pleasure to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment stunning image, but the bushes on the bottom right of the image are significantly more blurred than the ones on the lower left. Are they out of the DOF? I made a note in the image. --Lucasbosch 22:09, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • One of the source pictures probably suffers from shaking blur (the seam can be seen). - Benh (talk) 11:06, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 02:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:10, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:57, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 04:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:41, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 05:38, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:28, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 06:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ---Pudelek (talk) 11:03, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing view - Benh (talk) 11:06, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose as per discussion above, one or more of the source files are more blurred than the others, and the seamline between sharp and blurred images is visible. See image notes for an example of a blurred spot. I'm jealous of your 5DS R though. --Lucasbosch 11:11, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't think it is that big of an issue on such a large picture though and probably that most wouldn't see even on a moderate large print. The blurred area doesn't cover parts of much interest. - Benh (talk) 11:21, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • And depending on what kind of shots you do, you really needn't be jealous of the 5DS. As it's been discussed, If you are a macro, or still object guy, it won't bring you any much advantage over any other FF or APS-C given sensor of same generation. - Benh (talk) 11:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
@Benh: 1. I would love to support this image, but the different levels of sharpness and visible seamline because of it are bothering me. Would this image be of less resolution then it might no be visible even at 100%, but given the resolution, these shortfalls are visible. 2. I haven't followed these discussions. I'd love to have more resolution available for my studio shots, just for the sake of seeing more details, so I'm jealous. --Lucasbosch 12:28, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Lucasbosch, I agree a high-resolution sensor has an advantage for single-shot photos such as your studio. We try to avoid penalising photographers for uploading full-resolution photos or huge stitches like this. Try the 50% downsize I link below. That's still 28MP and very sharp. If you'd support that then there is no reason to not support this. Opposing over 100%-size pixel peeping of a >100MP image just encourages folk to downsize prior to upload, and then we lose detail that can never be retrieved. As I'm fond of saying, if your monitor is a standard 100DPI, then this image is over 4 metres wide, and you'd probably view it from a couple of metres distance at least, rather than normal monitor distance. -- Colin (talk) 12:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
@Colin: Thanks for your thorough explanation, I strike my oppose. I would welcome allowing/encouraging photographers to upload downsampled images instead of full sized ones like this, to hide flaws better and avoid pixel peepers like me. In fact I would have downsampled this in secret if I were in the same situation, as the resolution is plenty even downsampled. But I understand that having sharp parts of the image is considered more desirable for the Commons project than having less pixels but with the whole frame being perfect. --Lucasbosch 13:13, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Lucasbosch, if the software can downsize on-the-fly then why downsize on upload? Actually, for huge stitches most photographers already downsize a bit to ensure the detail is sharp, which it is for most of this image. I don't see the point in uploading full size if it is soft/blurry all over, and for big stitches there is no value in making people download a big file that is not sharp. When we get folk uploading 6MP landscapes that pass FP, it isn't really fair to to penalise others who don't downsize. -- Colin (talk) 13:50, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
@Colin: You say yourself that some people already downsize so others don't have do download a panorma that isn't sharp corner to corner. I don't think this image is any different, albeit being much more resolution. My opinion is that such a panorama should have equal sharpness over the full frame, and not rely on downsampling to achieve this. If there is a soft part, downsample until everything is constistent and thus the seamlines become invisible. I find a 100MP image which is soft on some spots and sharp on others kind of more wonky than a pristine 6MP image. I see your point, too, that you throw away detail on parts of the image in the process. So I wouldn't want to penalize him for not downscaling, but the different levels of sharpness which reveal seamlines, and I don't want to see seamlines. I believe in a pixel perfect uploaded file not reliant on downsampling to achieve even sharpness. Even if this requires downsamling before upload. Agree to disagree ;) --Lucasbosch 14:57, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
I appreciate you don't want to see the seamlines, and I wish the stitching was better. But you have a choice to examine the image at this level of detail. Nobody forces you to download the full size image and then display it on your screen at 100% while examining it closely. A good review test might be to judge the whole image fullscreen on your monitor, and then to examine for flaws at some intermediate resolution. If you'd support this at 12MP, say, or 24MP, say, then any extra resolution is simply a bonus. I think that unless the image was huge and very soft/noisy all over, then I'd be reluctant to complain about the size being too large. We have a culture here of pixel peeping that harms people's generosity in uploading/creating high-resolution images (vs Flickr where many images don't even fill one's screen). The result is some photographers really do upload 6MP landscapes from their 36Mp cameras and get and expect to get FP. Of course, minor errors only visible at 100% on a large image may be worth pointing out to see if they can be fixed. If you have a high DPI screen, then much of this pixel peeping concern simply disappears. Our standard 100DPI monitors are the equivalent of taking a magnifying glass to a print. -- Colin (talk) 15:54, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That bottom right is an issue, but given where it is and the image resolution, I think it can get away with it. -- KTC (talk) 12:45, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There is a flawed frame and perhaps the stitching could be improved (IIRC you just use Lightroom - have you tried PtGui with SmartBlend as the blend tool?). But the resolution of 111MP makes this visible at 100%. A reduction (see this link to a 28MP 50% downsize) hides such sharpness problems and the whole image is very sharp indeed. -- Colin (talk) 12:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've uploaded a new version where I cropped the right side a bit to get rid of the area that somehow wasn't as sharp as others. If the result is not satisfying I can offer also this other version with a far wider view. Thank you Benh and Colin for making understandable that images with more resolution are not always comparable with lower ones and users of a camera like 5DS shouldn't be punished for that. It is indeed not as easy as it was with the 5D Mark II to get all images sharp. Poco2 18:09, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Colin did most of the lobbying :) And, pardon me if you already knew, but If your pipeline gives you access to the seam mask, it's very easy to edit it and soften the transition from sharp to blurred area. This would give a better result I think, but this take for granted the "common" area between the source pictures is large enough. - Benh (talk) 18:43, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
The new crop doesn't just chop off a bit on the right, but introduces some to the left. I like the road on the left, but this is a different enough picture that I think you should ping all who have voted so far. It isn't like you just removed a dust spot. As for the other one you link, it is far too wide and also has quality issues. There is still an issue with a seam (to the right of the rocks) that could be handled better if, like Benh says, you took control over the join there (or used Smartblend, which I find is often better are placing seams and not crearting blurred seams). -- Colin (talk) 19:57, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
@The Photographer, Alchemist-hp, Ikan Kekek, King of Hearts: @Johann Jaritz, Tomascastelazo, INeverCry, Martin Falbisoner: @Code, Cayambe, Michielverbeek, Gnosis, Pudelek: @Lucasbosch, KTC, Colin: Dear all and sorry for the disturbance, I just wanted to let you know that I've cropped the image (mainly on the right) to get rid of the blurred are. I'm informing you just in the case that this change would affect your already emitted vote. Poco2 20:10, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Poco, I like the second crop the most. Now the main subject is no longer centered, and this is a bit weird IMO (but this still has my support). I don't garantee anything, but just in case, I offer assistance to implement the above mentioned solution. - Benh (talk) 20:34, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your offer Benh. Will look into it this weekend and probably come back to you then. Poco2 20:36, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
I prefer the crop from the time of original nomination. There's still a visible seam in the new crop, which wouldn't go away unless the you crop much closer to the rock. While now the rock the castle is sitting on is actually centered, the castle itself is now a bit off to much to the side to me. Then again, if the new crop was the only version offered, I would still had supported so I'm certainly not going to object now. -- KTC (talk) 21:40, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Please go back to v2 and ignore the naysayers. It was The Perfect Composition. KennyOMG (talk) 02:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I think that this one is "better", however, both are perfect to me, IMHO --The Photographer 11:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 18:21, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 17:40, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Антена пелистер 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 18:17:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pelister (2, 601 m), highest peak on Baba Mountain, Macedonia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Шпиц - uploaded by Шпиц - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:17, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:17, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Two dust spots below the cloud that's at the upper right corner must be removed before this photo could be featured. Chances are, there could be others, so the photo should be edited with a fine-toothed comb. However, once that's completed, I will vote to support. The motif is interesting, but what really makes the composition for me is the complementary snowy-looking cloud pattern. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: I will remove the dust spots, but could you please mark the areas on the image? Thanks.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done The dust spots have been removed.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:43, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, the composition with the large white areas and the antenna being so small in the frame doesn't work for me. I feel like much more would have been possible when having been there. – Lucas 14:50, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - To me, this is a snowscape photo that includes some man-made structures, not a photo that zooms in on those structures like a laser beam. The antenna is small in the frame because it and the other snowy structures are part of the snowscape, which extends to the clouds in the sky, as they look like streaks of snow, too. I find it totally appropriate for the man-made structures to be part of the picture without dominating it, and other details like the footprint track to the center left of the picture help, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Matka 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 18:03:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Boating in Lake Matka, Macedonia

*Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:40, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

@Basotxerri: and @Martin Falbisoner: take another look please. --The Photographer 17:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Thank you, The Photographer, that was very kind of you to fix the image. However, it still doesn't convince me to support it as FP but I'm willing to abstain. Perhaps others will support it now. --Basotxerri (talk) 19:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support now --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 10:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Despite The Photographer's work to improve it there is still a little bit more noise than I'd like. The area on the boat behind the man looks blown as well, something you wouldn't expect in this kind of light. And, frankly, the composition has too many clashing elements for it to work for me even if it were technically perfect. Daniel Case (talk) 18:26, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:1 panorama Dolomites 2009.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 17:53:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama of the Dolomites, Pordoi, Italy, 2009
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:06, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 04:26, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:40, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:31, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:22, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now - the CAs are too bad --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:31, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is a botched cloning stamp job right in the center. Follow the road in the background of the cliff and the two intermingle, the cliff in the foreground dissolves... --Lucasbosch 15:02, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Thanks for pointing this out. There's a lot of support for this picture. Do you guys think the nomination should be withdrawn? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Serious technical problems. --Ivar (talk) 18:25, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice but not excellent . Too many problems for an excellent vote. Je-str (talk) 19:03, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until the technical problems are fixed. Huge wow factor though. -- King of ♠ 00:26, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King and Ivar. The CA alone is so egregious that I didn't even bother to look at the noted cloning problems. Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Under the circumstances, I'd like to withdraw the nomination, but I have a question for everyone: If I withdraw and then Chensiyuan fixes the problems within a couple of days, can the nomination be reopened, since the deadline for voting is January 27? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Osnabrück - Piesberg - Feldbahn 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 17:42:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rails of the Piesberg quarry railway and bridge, after sunset. The quarry railway (narrow gauge) is operated during summer by an association and the Museum for Industry Culture. Osnabrück, Lower Saxony, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Industry#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Basotxerri -- Basotxerri (talk) 17:42, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 17:42, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I really like the peaceful natural scene, the light and the birds. The mood is somewhat spoiled by the plane and its contrail, and that's the only reason I didn't nominate the photo, myself. I think we should accept this as part of "nature" as we humans have made it, but that's a decision each person has to make, and it's really the major element of content in which the innovation of the Impressionists like Monet in "Impression: Aube" deviated from the tradition of idealistic depiction of pure nature for city people that goes back to ancient Rome. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:01, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request + Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment a crop of 10-15% of the empty sky, will be better works for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Thank you, I think you're absolutely right, it's better with less sky. --Basotxerri (talk) 21:23, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it works better now. Thanks, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I won't change my vote, but I consider the new crop unfortunate, because it crops out a higher-flying bird that was flying in the other direction. I think the composition was better and more peaceful with more sky. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:41, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 01:25, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have no problems with standing on the tracks since it is explained in the description that these are museum tracks used only in the summer. Daniel Case (talk) 02:13, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportAnd 7...--LivioAndronico (talk) 10:58, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Iturrieta - Fagus sylvatica 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 17:38:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dead trunks and beeches (Fagus sylvatica) on a foggy day in the Iturrieta mountain range. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
  • Thank you for your vote, King of Hearts. The background isn't sharp because there was fog, breaking up and closing again. Of course that could lead that someone could dislike this... --Basotxerri (talk) 19:18, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:03, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Special Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 01:25, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Monochrome was a great idea for this one. Brings out the texture. Daniel Case (talk) 02:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 10:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just for my curiosity: can I see please the color version too? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:19, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please give me a couple of days, I cannot prepare this right now. --Basotxerri (talk) 20:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Marmora Formation closeup.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 16:12:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Closeup of marble of the Marmora formation, Marmora and Lake, Ontario, Canada.
  • Category: Rocks and Minerals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info: all by СССР -- СССР (talk) 16:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- СССР (talk) 16:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Definitely a very interesting photo for VI, but no great composition, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Doesn't look like a FP to me for it being a flat texture, no visual impact. --Lucasbosch 17:23, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan and Lucas. Perhaps a smaller portion of it might have worked. Texture needs to be more uniform. Daniel Case (talk) 20:18, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Reflection of Parque Cultural Paulista building in Avenida Paulista, Brazil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 12:48:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reflection of Parque Cultural Paulista building in Avenida Paulista, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural_phenomena#Reflections
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Inspired in Alvesgaspar minimalist pictures . All by --The Photographer 12:48, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:34, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support first impression is that someone laid a grid over a regular sky shot. Nicely aligned! --Lucasbosch 17:26, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good idea and an awesome result! --Basotxerri (talk) 17:45, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This grew on me. I like the interaction of the windows and the sky. By the way, I don't consider this photo minimalist in the slightest. If it reflected a cloudless sky, that would be different. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 02:25, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:02, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 04:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Only the slightly off tones of some of the windows give it away as not being a gird overlay. And the distorted parts. Daniel Case (talk) 20:17, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 16:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Winter-Regnitz-PC310004.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 12:04:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The river Regnitz between Pettstadt and Bamberg, Bavaria

File:ANZAC Parade from the Australian War Memorial, Canberra ACT.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 09:53:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Poertschach Werzerpromenade Westbucht und Pyramidenkogel 11012017 6006.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2017 at 08:49:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Lake Woerth, the Flower Island and the Pyramidenkogel, Poertschach, Carinthia, Austria

File:Iridium-1 Launch (32312419215).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2017 at 21:38:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Falcon 9 rocket lifts off from Vandenberg AFB SLC-4E with the first ten Iridium NEXT satellites.

File:F-22 Raptor flies during the AirPower over Hampton Roads Open House at Langley AFB Va., April 24, 2016.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2017 at 20:58:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

F-22 Raptor flies over Langley AFB.

File:Sala de Conciertos, Berlín, Alemania, 2016-04-22, DD 22-24 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2017 at 19:12:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Concert hall, Berlin, Germany.

File:Kids playing Pallanguli.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2017 at 18:51:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me, sorry. --Lucasbosch 18:58, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Lucasbosch. If the two girls weren't partially cropped, I might very well consider it featurable, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:00, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per Ikan. Good idea, but composition isn't FP level. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:37, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Perhaps a VI or even QI, but otherwise per others. Daniel Case (talk) 19:39, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Regietów Wyżny (Рeґєтiв) - dzwonnica 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2017 at 18:09:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wooden bell tower in Regietów, Poland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I quite like this composition, but please crop out the stray bit of wood near the near left corner. I'm also wondering what the photo would look like if it were extended a bit further to the right to encompass more trees. I'm guessing that's not possible? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
    Unfortunately not, but I cut off to the left --Pudelek (talk) 23:29, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I'll live with this photo for a little while before voting, but as I said, I do like it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:56, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colors and clouds. -- King of ♠ 04:47, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per KoH --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 13:41, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Conditional support Nothing like this nice summery scene to grab my attention on a wet and cloudy January day. However ... it would be better if the purple tinging on the clouds could be fixed or somehow ameliorated. Daniel Case (talk) 19:38, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
    I think that the purple is not bad... the storm was near --Pudelek (talk) 20:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I really like that wooden bell tower, and the rest of the composition - especially the light and clouds (the purple doesn't bother me - I've seen purple-rimmed clouds with my naked eye) is good enough to satisfy me. I think this photo is special enough to be among the elite. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 04:34, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

File:2015 Winobluszcz trójklapowy 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2017 at 12:08:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:08, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:08, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 00:51, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Abstract. -- King of ♠ 04:47, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:54, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Figurative to me. :-) But I like it, too. Instead of calling it abstract, I'd say it has a very dynamic, flowing, satisfying structure. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:58, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 13:42, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, the image doesn't impress me enough. The crop is quite narrow, so there only are so many leaves in frame, instead of a whole side of a house. I can imagine the rest, but I'd like to see it to be more impactful than that. --Lucasbosch 14:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's pretty, but I'm not really sure whether the subject is supposed to be the leaves or the drainpipe (Or is it supposed to be some kind of woodwork? See what I mean ...). Daniel Case (talk) 16:57, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. lNeverCry 04:36, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportAnd 7... --LivioAndronico (talk) 11:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:08A112 in Chasha Depot.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2017 at 04:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"A5"train in Chasha Depot
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A5 Metro train was stopping in Chasha Deport, Canton, China. created by Towermega - uploaded by Towermega - nominated by Legolas1024 -- Legolas1024 04:13, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Legolas1024 04:13, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition. -- King of ♠ 05:46, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
    Again I made the mistake of judging on my 1366x768 laptop while forgetting I was on my laptop, and assumed it was large enough because it filled my whole screen. Switching to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral due to being minimum resolution without anything to compensate. -- King of ♠ 04:44, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Nicely composed, but unfortunately the glare on the rear carriages spoils it for me. —Bruce1eetalk 06:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice composition, but too small Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Perfectly good QI, I think (I guess it would remain to be seen whether it would pass if nominated at QIC), but compared to the great photos of trains in nature by Kabelleger, Poco and others, this palls. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:01, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose On the one hand, I would like to strongly encourage more photos of trains or rail vehicles from above or below the view plane rather than on it ... as this shows, it can add more interest. And I love all the cool colors.

    However ... as King notes the small size works against it, and I also think that large cloud flattens the light and distracts from the train a little. There are also perspective problems apparent at the right of the image.

    This, unfortunately, is why I wind up opposing so many DP/S images no matter how wonderful they otherwise could be. Daniel Case (talk) 16:43, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - What does DP/S stand for? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:44, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
"Digital point and shoot". In other words the type of low-end digital camera widespread before the advent of the smartphone. A lot of my early pictures here on Commons and Wikipedia were taken with one. Some of them actually made QI, but I'd never dream of nominating them for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 00:42, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Prague 07-2016 Wenceslas Square img3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2017 at 20:41:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Prague, Czech Republic. Art Nouveau sculptural composition on the roof of "Grand Hotel Evropa" at Wenceslas Square in the New Town.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by A.Savin --A.Savin 20:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 20:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 01:16, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 02:40, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:53, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 04:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:11, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me, just a very good QI --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Uoaei1. Dull colors don't work well against cloudy sky and the forms by themselves are not enough to overcome this. Daniel Case (talk) 03:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel. -- King of ♠ 04:47, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 06:53, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Lucasbosch 12:35, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose needs crop and better light (sun) --Mile (talk) 08:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
You're wrong in both points. --A.Savin 10:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Wire-tailed swallow[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2017 at 12:03:20 (UTC)

  • I had talked about it to him. It is from some tree parts. It is appreciated if someone having good processing skills help to remove it. Jee 12:11, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Manojiritty and Jee I removed the noise, if you think that it's not ok, simply revert me. Thanks --The Photographer 22:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Both images made my day this morning. --smial 13:04, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Amazing image, however, background noise, chromatic aberration and bird aura, different light background for the images --The Photographer 18:16, 16 January 2017 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer 22:05, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For a photo of a bird in flight / docking, at 420mm, and at around 10MP, this has good sharpness and is an excellent catch. I can forgive the slightly noisy background from ISO 1600 which really shouldn't concern us at 10MP wildlife photo, and would rather that than crude smoothing that risks losing detail round the birds. Shame the shutter speed changed between photos, but strangely the one with the longer exposure is darker. Were they processed the same? If the raw file is available then I can have a go, but am reluctant to process the JPG any further. -- Colin (talk) 19:13, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks Colin. He is away; will share the raw files after two days. Jee 04:53, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Plenty of wow-factor for me, and if Colin is good with the technical aspects, I can't see any reason not to support this impressive pair of images (and birds). lNeverCry 20:43, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--LivioAndronico (talk) 20:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The lighting is suboptimal, but the huge wow factor is more than enough to compensate. -- King of ♠ 01:01, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:13, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ! -- KTC (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:22, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:27, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 13:20, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Colin and King. Daniel Case (talk) 17:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! For technical information: The different look of the two pictures is based on different WBs, so if you adapt them (the right one is colder), they look rather similar. And there is some CA. --PtrQs (talk) 23:55, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:05, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The white balance seems to be off. Otherwise great images! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:42, 18 January 2017 (UTC) 
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I thought about this for a long time, and ultimately, I agree with the others that capturing a great moment like this is worth a little motion blur, which I figure is unavoidable in this situation, anyway. But harmonizing the white balance of photos taken just a moment apart would be the right thing to do, in my opinion, if you can do it without damaging anything. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • We'll get the raw files and hope we can solve that issue soon. Jee 11:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Colin, I just mailed you the raw files. Please check. Jee 03:06, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 04:01, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Just at the right moment, excellent --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:37, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Gnosis (talk) 06:54, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 07:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Procedural oppose to stop bot speedy closing this. Jee has sent me the raw files. I had a go at reprocessing them and sent him some draft copies, which he liked. I have fixed the issue where the exposure level is inconsistent, and also cropped them both such that the second picture is positioned relative to the first. I have lightend the exposure a little for both, as it seemed a bit under-exposed (shout now if you feel the exposure is currently correct). I haven't uploaded anything as I still have to Photoshop out the brown blur on the RHS of each, and hope to find time for that tonight. -- Colin (talk) 09:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Please @Colin:, could you upload the raw files to commons archive Thanks --The Photographer 12:28, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
User:The Photographer you will have to ask the creator, Manojiritty, to do that. And most people don't upload their raw photos as it lets them retain some ownership. -- Colin (talk) 12:31, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I underestand, sorry --The Photographer 12:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:1 tianzishan wulingyuan zhangjiajie 2012.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2017 at 09:09:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view from Mount Tianzi Shan
  • Yes I noticed that. Pinging @Chensiyuan: for comment. Otherwise we might just have to rotate/perspective correct and reupload ourselves. -- Thennicke (talk) 00:50, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, Thennicke, you said we should have more China FPs, and then you found this ... wow! Can't find a more Chinese landscape than this. I hope I get to go back there again, and when I do I want to see this place. Daniel Case (talk) 15:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: Yes it's a great image isn't it! I'll be nominating more panoramas from this uploader; some are even better than this one -- Thennicke (talk) 00:50, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

File:De zon probeert door de mist te breken. Locatie, Langweerderwielen (Langwarder Wielen) en omgeving 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2017 at 06:00:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The sun tries to break through the fog. Location, Langweerderwielen (Langwarder Wielen) and surroundings. created all by User:Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:00, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:00, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 06:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 07:14, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:29, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the combination of the traditional "landscape-in-fog-mood" and the double sun; it gives an almost surreal expression. --Pugilist (talk) 07:34, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Best here is you dont see the horizon. Love winter colors. --Mile (talk) 08:09, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I had this in my list of possible nominees, too. Great photo, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 12:14, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 20:47, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:48, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Reguyla (talk) 21:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 02:44, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support "I look around / Leaves are brown, now / And the sky is a hazy shade of winter". I have taking a few pictures trying to capture that concept; none of them have come anywhere near this one. Daniel Case (talk) 07:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:29, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 04:02, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Paris-7957a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 21:13:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night over Pont Royal and Pavillon de Flores.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by idobi - uploaded by idobi - nominated by Idobi -- Idobi (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Idobi (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Stunning. I love the way the moon appears. Quality could be better especially on the right side but sufficient for FP. -- King of ♠ 23:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 01:45, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose great composition, vivid colors, excellent mood - if only image quality were better --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like composition, perfect moon-clouds situation. Its not so sharp, but saw camera is not the latest model.--Mile (talk) 07:38, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - It either is or is not an FP, based on the results, regardless of what equipment is used. And in this case, I think it's too noisy and unsharp to be one of the greatest night cityscape pictures, although the composition is beautiful. I would welcome any efforts by idobi to address these issues, because I'd love to be able to support this picture, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:16, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I find it a beautiful picture, but the quality is not great.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose per Famberhorst. Even given that it was a long exposure, we've seen that these images can be less noisy. Daniel Case (talk) 02:29, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Gedore No. 7 combination wrenches 6–19 mm.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 17:29:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gedore No. 7 combination wrenches set from 6 to 19 mm. This is a shift panorama using the Canon TS-E 90 mm because my acrylic plate wasn't large enough for the whole set, additionally it's a focus stack of 5 to 6 images. Post processing to remove dust and make the background pure black.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Tools
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Gedore No. 7 combination wrenches set from 6 to 19 mm. This is a shift panorama using the Canon TS-E 90 mm because my acrylic plate wasn't large enough for the whole set, additionally it's a focus stack of 5 to 6 images. Post processing to remove dust and make the background pure black.
    Created by Lucasbosch -- uploaded by Lucasbosch -- nominated by Lucasbosch -- LB 17:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LB 17:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 17:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a good job --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 23:04, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 01:48, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 04:30, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:05, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • LB Did you check "landscape" version ? --Mile (talk) 07:40, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@PetarM: What makes you ask? Could be that I missed to set it appropriately, but there seems to be no place to check that as far as I can see. What would happen if it is set wrong? --Lucasbosch 12:02, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Lucasbosch Nothing is wrong with the set. Try to rotate it for 90 degress. It works better. --Mile (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@PetarM: For my taste it looks fine the way it is and it is more space saving when being placed on the right side of articles. Also, the majority of the text on the wrenches is oriented this way, so it's easier to read. --Lucasbosch 14:33, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Look forward to many more contributions from you. - Benh (talk) 19:06, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
    +1 lNeverCry 20:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Reguyla (talk) 21:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 02:45, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Again, not my favorite subject, but this level of excellence deserves recognition, and that means a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:09, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Lez River, Saint-Clément-de-Rivière cf01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 09:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lez River, Saint-Clément-de-Rivière, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:32, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 17:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 19:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a good job --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:27, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 04:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose All water reflections of trees are beautiful. I think this picture is missing something, like brilliant colors or an outstanding composition, that would set it apart from the others. -- King of ♠ 04:58, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Ikan Kekek, King of Hearts, Jkadavoor, Michielverbeek, Martin Falbisoner: @Livioandronico2013, INeverCry, Agnes Monkelbaan: I added more saturation. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The colors are nice, but nothing quite worthy of FP in terms of the subject IMHO, it's not so interesting. I would have liked better separation of the trees in front and the background trees, to make it more visually appealing. --Lucasbosch 14:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the contrast beween the dark trees in the foreground and the brighter trees in the background --Llez (talk) 15:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Llez. I also have to say, particularly in response to King, that having looked at more than my share of water-reflection images while creating and populating those categories, this one did make me stop while scrolling through here. What to me works is that the trees sort of suggest a colonnade, and a slightly irregular one at that. Daniel Case (talk) 19:01, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Daniel Case, thanks for putting into words what I think a lot of us had probably noticed unconsciously. Christian Ferrer, the slight change in the new edit is fine with me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:58, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Reguyla (talk) 21:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 02:47, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job Christian. Quite a nice natural abstract. -- Thennicke (talk) 11:29, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Berdorf (LU), Aesbachtal -- 2015 -- 4550.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 19:46:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Plants in Aesbachtal near Berdorf, Luxembourg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by XRay -- XRay talk 19:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 19:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Unsharp foreground on the left is slightly distracting to me and might be cropped out, but I don't know what that would do to the composition. And the composition is the main reason I support this picture. It's a kind of lovely miniature landscape, with the cobwebs between the plants accentuating their formal relationship in the picture frame. It's best viewed at full screen. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:25, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 04:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm too distracted by all the plants on the bottom. Daniel Case (talk) 04:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel Case, a tighter crop would to accentuate the main subject would be nice.--Lucasbosch 14:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I think I'll crop out a part of the bottom within the next days. --XRay talk 19:48, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel Case. Too many random plants that are in focus distract the viewer. -- King of ♠ 01:02, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others an no wow for me --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:38, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • ✓ Fixed @Daniel Case, Lucasbosch, King of Hearts, Uoaei1: Crop is now improved. Hopefully it's better now. Thanks for your advice. --XRay talk 16:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
    Sorry, still doesn't work for me. There are a lot of in-focus plants on the ground, so I don't think there's any way to fix it by cropping. -- King of ♠ 01:59, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Wow, this is the first time I realized that you're objecting not to out-of-focus plants but to in-focus plants! You're considering this a macro of the two plants, not as a miniature landscape. I don't think in a landscape you'd normally want everything but 2 large trees to be a blur, would you? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:17, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Caye Caulker Belize aerial (20688990128).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 19:08:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by dronepicr on Flickr - uploaded by User:Dronepicr - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:08, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this is an outstanding drone picture. My only hesitation in nominating it is that I hope people don't vote against it because the angle of the photo makes the ground diagonal, instead of straight, but I nominate it, anyway, to see what you all think. P.S. I didn't see a category for drone or aerial pictures; if you know of a good subcategory to add to the "Category" line, please feel free to add it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:08, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No, I find the ground fine; as long as the horizon is level, which it appears to be. Great find too! Really lots of wow, and for a drone pic image quality is ok, but could be better -- Thennicke (talk) 02:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I really should involve myself with Photo Challenge more, but I wish there was some "QI" barrier to the nominations or something - unfortunately some of the winners are shocking from a photographic perspective -- Thennicke (talk) 01:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I think that's because the judges have to work with the submissions they get. When they get higher-quality submissions, the results improve. Quite a few FPs have been among the top 3 results in photo challenges over the years. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:12, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just not enough wow for me. Daniel Case (talk) 05:25, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • You will have to rework the colors here, think blue is +, green is missing. Some saturation maybe. --Mile (talk) 21:17, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the colors and composition. -- King of ♠ 04:59, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, I struggle to decide what the subject is --Lucasbosch 14:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - No argument on "no wow", but to me, anyway, the subject seems obvious: the bright area smack dab in the center of the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:10, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: The file name is, mainly, "Caye Caulker Belize", which describes the islands, so already the file name is not optimal/confusing if the white thing is the main subject. Also the white thing seems to be only captured in part, there is a missing part on the bottom left, confirmed by satellite images. --Lucasbosch 19:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for expounding on your point of view. I don't share it, but I understand it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 02:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Talleitspitze, Ötztaler Alpen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 13:22:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Talleitspitze, Ötztal Alps.jpg

File:Moscow ParkKulturyR vestibule 04-2016.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 07:58:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Moscow, Russia: entrance pavilion of Park Kultury (Red Line) metro station, built in 1935
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by A.Savin --A.Savin 07:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 07:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love the colors and enjoy the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 08:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I just can't keep my eyes off the power lines. The left crop is also a little distracting. -- King of ♠ 09:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Power lines. Yann (talk) 12:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, per King of Hearts. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:37, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not enough wow for me --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:51, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cables in foreground and lamppost to the left leans distractingly much. Main subject itself is quite nicely lit, but the overall composition does not convince me, sorry -- Slaunger (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Very weak support I have faced this same dilemma so many times myself ... great angle but for the wires. And so many times I've sighed and put the camera down. So молодец for trying where I usually give up. And for doing your best to make them less distracting instead of cheating entirely and cloning them out. Daniel Case (talk) 23:02, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Per the others, sorry -- Thennicke (talk) 01:53, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The curves in the photograph are great, even if the power lines distract from it some. WClarke (talk) 23:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Orange hibiscus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 00:23:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Orange hibiscus
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination All by LivioAndronico (talk) 00:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico (talk) 00:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - You might have moved the blue chairs (I think they are) away, but they arguably add interest to the background, and pro or con on the chairs, this is a great closeup of the flower. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The blue object/s aren't natural. I would've moved them. They distract from the flower. lNeverCry 03:07, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose, background is noisy and it seems a little underexposed to me. Nice color though. Daniel Case (talk) 16:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background elements. Center of flower is not as crisply resolved as I would anticipate in a a flower FP, sorry. Colours are good though, and it is refreshing to see other topics than church interiors nominated by you. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks Slaunger, but unfortunately it is a rumor. I have [1] FP of paintings, statues, panoramas etc ... it is logical that something is more common as many people have more of FP of flowers, insects, or ... churches. Greetings.--LivioAndronico (talk) 19:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Livioandronico2013: Thanks for clarifying, that you are not a church interior only FP creator. It was the only type of FPs I recalled having seeen previously, but I did not double-check.-- Slaunger (talk) 19:59, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --LivioAndronico (talk) 10:42, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Natural nude tree.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2017 at 20:04:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Please tell us why you think this photo should be featured. I'd like to have your thoughts on that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Well, I could tell you it is a study on texture and volume, or that the forms on these trees are interesting, or that I and some others have a dirty mind... ;) Please see #REDIRECT[[2]] and #REDIRECT[[3]] --Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reject. Charles (talk) 21:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, it was clear for me after a split second, why you nominated this, Tomas. Hahaha. Well spotted. A brilliantly illuminated trunk, nice texture and shape. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me. File:Enterolobium cyclocarpum 01.jpg has much greater visual impact. I would support that. lNeverCry 02:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I tried to explore some suitable categories. Jee 04:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, nothing featurable here. Daniel Case (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - So ultimately, I think this is a moderately funny joke, since it was explained to me, but the composition doesn't really add up for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Russian chapel at Fort Ross (2016).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2017 at 07:36:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Frank Schulenburg - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:36, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:36, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 08:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Good shot of interesting stuff. I would decrease sky noise a bit, and put into description is it active or a museum. --Mile (talk) 10:35, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I slept on this photo, and my verdict is that it's beautiful. Decreasing the sky noise would be fine, but it's a very fine grain that doesn't bother me at all. I really like the texture of the wooden chapel and fences. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A good image but the shadowed fence make it not outstanding. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose per Christian. Daniel Case (talk) 17:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - For what it's worth, I like the alternation of light and shadow and think it contributes to the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:34, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
I actually agree. The main subject is literally in the "spotlight" this way. I'm not sure whether it would have resulted in a better outcome had I waited for afternoon sunlight to also shine on the palisades. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:08, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Delicate light and colours on the main subject and very balanced composition. I do not mind the fence in shadow. Sky could be selectively de-noised, but it is really only noticeable if you pixel peep. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:14, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:16, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The shade is not so prominent in a large view. Jee 04:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 06:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I would say edu. value as first here.--Mile (talk) 07:02, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nicely done -- Thennicke (talk) 09:52, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well composed! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:36, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:52, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Reguyla (talk) 21:47, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Heaven Shall Burn - Rock am Ring 2016 - Leonhard Kreissig - 25.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2017 at 00:53:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Concert Shot
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by LeoDE - uploaded by LeoDE - nominated by LeoDE -- LeoDE (talk) 00:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LeoDE (talk) 00:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The singer is in a strong pose, but the background is unattractive. This would've been better if he was at left in the frame and some of the audience took up the right of the frame. lNeverCry 01:23, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info Just for Information: Audience wasn't possible due to the huge pit. But thanks alot for your feedbak --LeoDE (talk) 12:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per INC. Daniel Case (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very powerful concert foto. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 06:18, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Frank! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition, background lighting, sharpness. Charles (talk) 12:57, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this is a good and expressive concert photo, and I like the background stage illumination. It is as if it pushes the singer towards the audience. The crop of the foot could have been better but oh well. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:10, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles + random compo. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is for sure not one of the very best --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:02, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like this photo, but ultimately, Uoaei1's argument really cuts to the heart of the matter and carries the day for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Window detail De Bazel Vijzelstraat Amsterdam 2016-09-13-6627.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2017 at 22:05:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Facade detail of De Bazel, Amsterdam
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info De Bazel is a monumental building in Amsterdam named after the architect Karel de Bazel. It was completed in 1926 and stands as an example of Brick Expressionism. This nominated picture is a detail of the facade, including four windows, and shows how bricks are used as ornamentation in complicated patterns. Today, the building houses Amsterdam City Archives. Created, uploaded, nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 22:05, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 22:05, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Splendid! Daniel Case (talk) 23:03, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 23:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 07:03, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture. Love detailed images like this of architecture, and the blue contrasts well with the brick and stone. WClarke (talk) 03:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and the seventh :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:37, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 02:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Worker in São Paulo city.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2017 at 12:22:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Worker in São Paulo city
Obrigado caro Arion, por qué vc paro de nominar minhas fotos? --The Photographer 16:25, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
@The Photographer: Olá meu parceiro, na verdade eu pausei minhas atividades no Commons, por motivos pessoais. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support The monochrome brings out the grittiness of his work, and the chaos of his space is nicely contrasted with the geometric orderliness of the surrounding facade. Another great bit of street photography. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:36, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great scenary. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 23:06, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The B&W adds a nice sentimental touch, but when I ask myself "Is this the best we have to offer?" I think it falls short. His pose and facial expressions are all rather ordinary. -- King of ♠ 00:29, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - If you had cropped this closer, I might want to feature it. But as it is, the door to the worker's right (viewer's left) distracts me too much, when what I'd really like to focus on is the scene in his workshop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow + per King. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel Case. --LB 19:43, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 10:02, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Panorama of Auxerre.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2017 at 20:41:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Your note hasn't shown up yet. Daniel Case (talk) 07:25, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd also suggest a tighter crop (see my note - I couldn't find Miles' yet) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Hope now is there. --Mile (talk) 07:42, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - My problem with the photo as is is that I don't really like the right crop, which cuts through a boat (and also what seems to me to be a concession stand, but I care less about that). However, I'm not sure if either of the two suggested crops solve the problem for me. My main hesitation in terms of Martin's crop is that although it's neat, cropping out the tall tree might have an adverse effect on the form, making it unbalanced between right and left, plus I'd just miss seeing that tree and its reflection. Something similar to Mile's crop might be helpful, but I wouldn't suggest bisecting the reflection of the trees near the near right corner. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Whilst this is well-processed and it's a lovely image, the right crop is too bad and I don't think this can be rescued in post. This kind of thing needs to be thought about in the field, unfortunately. Turning the camera a little to the right would have saved this. The reflections and processing are definitely impressive though. I hope my review is helpful. -- Thennicke (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition does not work for me, too much foreground water, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 23:38, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. Jee 03:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Gut feeling: Even with this crop, this is a good to very good picture but not one of the most outstanding on this site. No offense intended. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral An attractive picture (I love the autumn colours of the trees on the right), but it's a bit unbalanced with the left side "higher" than the right. I also find the NR (?) smears too many details away. - Benh (talk) 15:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

File:2016 Minox C 8.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2017 at 17:53:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sub-miniature spy camera Minox C

File:Komatsu bulldozer pushing coal in Power plant Ljubljana (winter 2017).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2017 at 07:44:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Komatsu bulldozer pushing coal in Power plant Ljubljana (winter 2017)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Other land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Komatsu bulldozer pushing coal in Power plant Ljubljana (winter 2017). My shot. -- Mile (talk) 07:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 07:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Just like Kabellerger's shot of the train going across the bridge, the color pops against the natural winter monochrome behind it. Daniel Case (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:46, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 03:06, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This image is good, but I feel uneasy looking at it because you seem to have rotated it to make the bottoms of the tracks horizontal - really, what needs to be horizontal is the bucket, because that is what is in the center of the image - and at the moment the bucket is tilted heavily to the left. Which would be fine if the dozer was going uphill, but the composition does not contain clues to that, and therefore this is uneasy on my eyes. I also think this is slightly overprocessed - too much contrast. Good, simple composition though, and Daniel's comment about the colours is spot on. I'll definitely support if you fix the problems I've noted -- Thennicke (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Thennicke Good, first, i couldnt say is bulldozer in normal position by nothing here seeing vehicle alone, but look i have some luck. See note, there is part of high building on right side, you can see vertical line is positioned good. This was one of quick images, nothing much to change, contrast same, but offset changed to my taste to -0.0124. Offset and crop. So, no rotating, this path goes some 10-12 % uphill. --Mile (talk) 12:47, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, now that you point it out I see it. However, a person looking at the thumbnail will not notice it, so that isn't good. And for that reason, I stand by my statements. -- Thennicke (talk) 13:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. No problem with the angles for me, and the distant buildings on the right confirm that no rotating has taken place. —Bruce1eetalk 17:28, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the contrast between the yellow dozer, the black coal and the white snow. Nice and creative idea. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - There is a lot of energy in the picture. Nice composition and I am not worried about the angles. --Pugilist (talk) 07:43, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Reguyla (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 02:52, 17 January 2017 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

File:北京市民俗博物館·東岳廟·北京朝外大街·(二道門).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2017 at 03:52:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The first gate of Beijing Dongyue Temple. The gate is located in Chaoyangmenwai Street, Beijing, China. And it is one of the MHCSPNL (Major Historical and Cultural Site Protected at the National Level)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The first gate of Beijing Dongyue Temple. The gate is located in Chaoyangmenwai Street, Beijing, China. And it is one of the MHCSPNL (Major Historical and Cultural Site Protected at the National Level) created by Legolas1024 - uploaded by Legolas1024 - nominated by Legolas1024 -- Legolas1024 03:52, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Legolas1024 03:52, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose It's a good subject and you're using a good camera, but for these kinds of low buildings you're almost always best using a landscape orientation. The processing is not great either, but that just requires practice. Also, at 1/30th of a second, you'll struggle to get truly sharp images. One thing I do like about this image is that it's quite symmetrical, and it's great to see nominations from China - we don't get enough of them. If you'd like more feedback to improve your photography skills, have a look at commons:Photography critiques -- Thennicke (talk) 04:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Excellent composition, but I dislike the sky (and trees) enough to oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:17, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Thennicke. Daniel Case (talk) 17:41, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The symmetric view through the gate is good, but the light is dull, the sky burns the leaves of the trees and the portarit aspect ratio is not the adequate choise. Actually, a square crop may have been better. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 16:19, 16 January 2017 (UTC)