Commons:Featured picture candidates

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

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

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

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and current month.

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

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

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

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


Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents

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

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

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

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

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

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

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

Photographs

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

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

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

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

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

Video and audio

Set nominations

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

Adding a new nomination[edit]

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

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

All single files:

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


All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".



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

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

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

Recommended: Please add a category from the list at COM:FP.

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

Voting[edit]

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

You may use following templates:

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

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

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

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

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

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

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

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

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

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

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

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

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

Above all, be polite[edit]

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

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

See also[edit]

Table of contents[edit]

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

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

Contents

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

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File: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)

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)

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)
  • 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)
  • 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)

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)

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)

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.

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)

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)

File:Boeing 737 ES-ENH Madeira Funchal airport 2016 3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2016 at 10:53:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aircraft registration SP-ENH Boeing 737, low cost polish aerolines Enter Air taking off from Madeira Funchal Airport, Madeira
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Karelj -- Karelj (talk) 10:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 10:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Small resolution, empty space at the bottom. The background is disturbing. I would expect more panning, may be better with 1/100 s instead of 1/200 s. --XRay talk 15:17, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per XRay, Nice photo but not an FP imho. --Laitche (talk) 17:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per XRay. INeverCry 20:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad crop, distracting background. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alchemist-hp. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 05:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination I withdraw my nomination: --Karelj (talk) 11:49, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

File:On the balcony, Paris August 2016.jpg[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)

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:Sunset at old Rixö quarry.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2016 at 20:49:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset at old Rixö quarry
  • That would be the "or something". Only thing I've done with this is to denoise the sky, the rest is untouched. cart-Talk 20:34, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel. I bet there's an FP composition there if you could nail it down though. INeverCry
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose some soft and unsharp areas, otherwise nice. Technicaly not ok for me. Did you try a focus stack of 2-4 images for this kind of shoots? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:28, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • No, this was just one picture. I'm not that familiar with focus stacking yet and I don't have any program for it, so for the time being I mostly point and shoot. I have pieced together a couple of panoramas manually but that's all. I got some good response on this photo from others so I thought I'd give it a try here. Still learning the more intricate and sophisticated ways of manipulating a picture that are used on this site, this is more of a light hobby for me. I carry a camera at all times and shoot things I find interesting as I stumble upon them. In my job I assess other photographer's photos, but actually taking the photos myself on a professional level is still fairly new to me and it's a whole other ball game. But I'm learning. :) cart-Talk 21:57, 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)

File:Oversnow heavy tractor Kharkovchanka.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2016 at 18:11:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

HSM-92 Oversnow heavy tractor “Kharkovchanka”.
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places#Antarctica
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Oversnow heavy tractor “Kharkovchanka” that was used in Antarctica from 1959 to 2010, a unique historical sample of engineering-technical developments made for exploration of Antarctica. Historic Site or Monument in the Antarctic No. 92. All by Tsy1980 -- Tsy1980 (talk) 18:11, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tsy1980 (talk) 18:11, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is a nice start, but unfortunately the sun is not well handled. Daniel Case (talk) 00:59, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel. INeverCry 07:51, 25 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:Wooden Window inside Patan Museum-IMG 3651.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2016 at 04:10:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wooden Window in Mul chok Courtyad, Patan Durbar Square.

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:Herbstzeitlose, 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2016 at 13:44:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • 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) 13:44, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The flower is very clear, but the fuzzy grasses on the left side do nothing good for the picture and look especially bad at full size. I'd recommend cropping out at least the leftmost third of the picture. And while the flower is very nicely photographed and would get my support for a feature if it were photographed that well by itself, since I don't like anything else in the picture (the rest of it feels almost pointless to me), I won't feel wowed even if you take my crop suggestion. I suspect others will be more wowed; we shall see. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose The flower itself is sharp and fantastic, but this is one of those times when it could have been best with a little "analogue edited", that is plucking away some of the more intrusive grass straws in front of the flower (and that sturdy cut one on the left that is stealing the attention of the flower). The idea of a sharp flower between blurry/bokeh straws is nice in theory, but it seldom as good in practice. Only time it works is when the straws in front of the flower are so far from it and so close to the camera that the bokeh of the straw becomes almost transparent (example). Sorry. cart-Talk 19:32, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 22:15, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan (your suspicions will, I suspect, not be borne out). Daniel Case (talk) 01:36, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The light and colors are very good on the flower and the drops of dew attractive, but I also have to agree with the review of W.carter regarding "analogue editing". -- Slaunger (talk) 19:30, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice quality! A little bit disappointed framing... --Laitche (talk) 17:40, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of no more chance of success, and to many reasons for oppose. Sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 11:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

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)

File:Landsort August 2016 10.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2016 at 07:13:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landsort lighthouse
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Arild Vågen (ArildV) - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - ArildV has been submitting a whole bunch of excellent photos of the lighthouse and abandoned artillery bunker at Landsort to QIC. This may be my favorite. The clouds and land rhyme in a wonderful way and I feel the wind and desolation of the scene. I also find that the distance from the lighthouse and the way the clouds give the illusion of streaming from or at least through it emphasizes the lighthouse more, or at least differently, than if it were closer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support maybe a bit too centered but very impressive! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Your Landsort pics makes the place look very eerie, foreboding and dramatic which is fun. Its a really nice, friendly place and the first harbor (and bakery) to welcome you after a long crossing of the Baltic Sea. --cart-Talk 09:29, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Sidebar: If this goes through, I think it will be some sort of a record. I don't think many other photographers have managed to get 2 going on 3 FPs of the same relatively small building. ;) --cart-Talk 19:09, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I think more of his pictures of Landsort may be featured in the future. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:10, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really good, congratulations! --Basotxerri (talk) 17:57, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • (Edit conflict)Symbol support vote.svg Support Another one of these "only in Scandinavia" images. Daniel Case (talk) 20:10, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:18, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 01:40, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:43, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The framing is suboptimal - too centered, but everything else is awesome. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:42, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral An obscure theme. --Laitche (talk) 18:05, 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 15:23, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 21:29, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Karlskirche Vienna, September 2016 -3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2016 at 17:55:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Karlskirche in Vienna, Austria
  • Hmm, the color profile should be fine, cf. extended details in "Metadata". I always embed sRGB by default. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:31, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
See this. What software do you use to generate the JPG? -- Colin (talk) 19:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Hmm, that's odd... According to this tool, many, if not most of my pictures here lack a proper color profile. Honestly, this can't be correct. I've never detected any problems viewing my files on different systems and never did anybody approach me about that. What's more, some of my images seem to actually possess a correct profile. But my workflow has been the same for many years: I always create jpgs out of raws developed with DPP. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
P.S. And - theoretically - would there be a real problem at all? Let's assume that the affected files just "claim" to have an sRGB profile that is actually missing. What would happen? Every single program, browser, picture viewer would still present the images correctly, either assuming that there's no profile at all and applying sRGB by default as minimum standard, or detecting sRGB as defined profile and treating the images the same way. Since I always use sRGB - and never Adobe RGB - what's the difference for practical purposes? --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:43, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Another PS: I haven't noticed the ongoing discussion on color profiles until now. Your browser test is very interesting. I'm a bit confused about what to do now regarding my post processing workflow... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Martin Falbisoner, it's getting a bit off topic. People with standard-gamut monitors (most) viewing images that are sRGB whether they embed a profile or not, will not see any issues. But anyone with a wide-gamut monitor will see very much the wrong colours (super-saturated) for most browsers. And some software will complain about a lack of profile. Obviously, posting an AdobeRGB image without a profile will cause most such people to see a really dull image. Its the sort of issue you won't be aware of if you don't have the equipment to see it. Ping me on your talk page or email me and we can try to figure out how to get your software to embed the profile. Failing that, there is a tool (EXIFTOOL) that can insert one into a JPG, but I would really like to know how, for each professional image program, to set them up to export JPGs correctly. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - This is better, but Colin is right. I'm not feeling impelled to support this photo but haven't decided whether to oppose, because it's very pretty at full-page size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:04, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin and Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 01:55, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 07:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Building on Avenida Paulista.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2016 at 12:12:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Building on Avenida Paulista
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Brazil
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- The Photographer 12:12, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Focus is a bit soft at full size, but I love this composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:23, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support These building pics are great documentation of everyday life as well as artistic like some kind of abstract art. Can't deny that I feel like some kind of perv though, pixel peeping into other people's apartments and their activities... ;) --cart-Talk 13:22, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
This view remember me the Rear Window, I never used a tele lens, however it was a temptation see --The Photographer 14:33, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:37, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:58, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very nice as with all of your building close-ups, but many of the white parts are blown out. My guess is they aren't blown out by much, so any chance you could rework the raw to pull them back a bit? --King of ♠ 00:19, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
    White parts look blown yes because it's white and depending on the weather on that day colors may be less white, however, even on cloudy days this white is really white. You could take a look to google street map or google images of this building --The Photographer 01:52, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
    I know whites are always hard to handle, but I try to handle them anyways. For example, my usual settings for photographing a lake on a sunny day are 1/250s at f/8, but the instant I see white boats, I dial it to 1/400s or so and lift the rest of the scene in post while keeping the boats just below the threshold. --King of ♠ 02:52, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
    Thanks King for your recommendation and yes if you take the picture using 1/400s with f/8, your white boats are just below the threshold, however, the scene in general will be underexposed?. --The Photographer 12:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
    I raise the exposure by about 2/3 stop in Photoshop in that case. Obviously that will cause the highlights to blow out again, but the highlights slider can take care of that (at 1/250s, moving the highlights slider may cause the blinking red highlight indicator to disappear, but that doesn't mean that the data has really been recovered; at 1/400s the data really is there). The noise increase will be negligible. -- King of ♠ 00:43, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A perfect desktop background for ... Windows! Daniel Case (talk) 01:53, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Or Mac :) --The Photographer 02:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Pfft, Daniel Case, Windows has been trying to convince users to switch over to tiles for a long time now... ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:25, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
If you are referring to W8, I think the correct term would be Lego... ;) --cart-Talk 09:36, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
I always disabled that lego functionality of metro --The Photographer 12:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

File:James Russell Lowell - 1855.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2016 at 02:19:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

James Russell Lowell
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Angel James Wilcox, (1835-???) after Samuel Worcester Rowse (1822-1901) - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 02:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 03:18, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The original is on tinted paper, which among other things makes the artist's signature much easier to see (I didn't even notice it in your version before I saw it in the original TIF, and I looked at your version first). I'd be inclined to oppose a feature on that basis, but I'd like to hear you out on why you whitened the paper digitally. Is it your deduction that the paper had originally been white and got tinted solely due to a post-publication chemical reaction over the years? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
    • I think you're getting an optical illusion based on the black border on the TIFF. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:43, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
    • I don't see what you're referring to. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/90714686/ is my source. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:36, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
      • I was referring to File:James Russell Lowell - 1855 - Original.tif under "Other versions". And again, when I look at the TIFF on the Library of Congress website, it's tinted, a bit tan. Did you use the JPGs, which are white, as your source? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
          • No, I used the TIFF, and didn't adjust the colours. I think you're getting an optical illusion from the black border. That or GIMP is being reluctant to properly add a colour profile again. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
            • An optical illusion from the black border doesn't seem like a possible explanation, as the JPGs on the Library of Congress site also have black borders yet look white. Have you seen the print in the flesh? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
              • @Ikan Kekek: Well, I've just opened both a newly-downloaded copy of the TIFF and the restoration, and compared colours on representative areas. They appear identical. What's more, the TIFF is in greyscale, so cannot possibly have any colour. It even says so at the LoC site [Reproduction Number: LC-USZ62-100831 (b&w film copy neg.)] The metadata at File:James_Russell_Lowell_-_1855_-_Original.tif confirms this: "Pixel composition | Black and white (Black is 0)" So... I'm not sure what's giving you a tint: Have you found a different TIFF, or perhaps is the TIFF displaying incorrectly in your browser? This is all very perplexing. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:50, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
                • Odd indeed. But I'll just take your word for it and Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 08:57, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer 12:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:57, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:34, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another excellent Adam Cuerden restoration. Daniel Case (talk) 21:22, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:40, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile: Windows and Mac web browsers treat colors randomly. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:04, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
it's gray and maybe a random gray is ever gray because gray haven't colors? --The Photographer 20:15, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
You still need to know how to map the gray-scale numbers in the file into actual gray-scale colors - gray is also a color. That's what the embedded color profile does. Without it, the application has to guess, and that guess may be different for different applications and monitors and not give a consistent presentation. It is like telling the temperature is 32.5 but not stating if the unit is °C, °F or K. If you are in the states you could think it was °F if you were in Denmark you would perhaps think °C, but actually it could be in K. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

@The Photographer, Slaunger: There is no widely-recognised standard for greyscale colorspaces; it's somewhat odd, at the least, to call for something to be used that doesn't currently exist. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:34, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

I am not sure about this problem because is not my expert area, however, I know that @Colin: know about this issue and could be a good idea ask him about that. --The Photographer 12:53, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
I have striked my oppose. I feel very confident that it is very wrong not to have an embedded color profile for B&W images, as a browser is just guessing how to map grayscale numbers in a file into actual gray-scale colors. But I agree with you that it is not easy to find consistent advice on how to do this best, and moreover after checking 25 randomly picked B&W historical photographs from our FP archive I can see that about 60% of all images have no color-space metadata and no embedded color profile exactly as this nomination. And for the remaining 40%, a wide range of color profiles (EPSON Gray - Gamma 1.8, Generic RGB Profile, sRGB, AdobeRGB,and iMac etalonne) have been used with an approximate equal distribution. It all seems very random. Thus, it seems unfair to pick randomly at this nomination. I think we should try and figure out a guideline for color space information in B&W photographs in general on Commons, as it is not clear what is right to do. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:13, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden, I'm sure we discussed this before for a b&w image. Do you recall if it is one of yours, and can you find it. Otherwise I'll need to search because we did discover something at the time. There's more to colour profile than colour -- there's also the gamma, which is how the 0..255 scale maps onto brightness on your monitor. The scale from black to white is not linear. So I think there is still merit in embedding an sRGB profile. -- Colin (talk) 13:57, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
While that's doable, doesn't that massively increase the file size, while in theory decreasing its fidelity if there's more than 8 bits of greyscale (don't think that's true here, but could easily be)? Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 08:53, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Bodie September 2016 019.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2016 at 00:52:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

County Barn, Bodie
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♠ 00:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 00:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I've got some nice shots of Bodie from the late 90s. Really cool place to see. INeverCry 01:04, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:53, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - This is probably one of the better photos from the great series from Bodie that you've uploaded so far, but I feel some tension from what looks like a close crop on the right, and at full-page size, the cabin in the distance looks like an extension of the barn's railing (which is why it looks like a close crop). You can't make the cabin disappear from the background and I wouldn't support cloning it out, to produce a view no-one can ever see in real life, but maybe a somewhat more generous right crop would cause me to like the photo enough to vote for a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
    @Ikan Kekek: Fixed. Now the space on the left and right is perfectly symmetrical. I feel like this building has quite a bit of leeway on symmetry due to the two asymmetric protrusions on either side, so I initially gave the left more room due to the attachment there having slightly more visual weight, but its current symmetrical state looks balanced to me as well. Pinging INeverCry and ArionEstar if you have any objections. --King of ♠ 04:26, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I inwardly said "Ahh" when I saw the new crop. That makes a big difference to me. Thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 05:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A restful and superb composition. --cart-Talk 09:01, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 11:44, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer 12:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ...10... --Basotxerri (talk) 14:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:06, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Don't know if you're entering this in WLM or not, but as a onetime juror in the US contest I will say this is the sort of thing that makes being on that jury worth the effort. Daniel Case (talk) 18:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:40, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 02:32, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the whole series :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:46, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Vengolis (talk) 03:56, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 21:34, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 08:54, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Papilio dravidarum-Kadavoor-2016-07-30-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2016 at 05:49:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Papilio dravidarum
  • Here too, I didn't understand. The wings of this butterfly is not even in shades; dark in some area and light in other places. As I mentioned in file description "it (a rare and endemic butterfly) prefers shady patches. The males drink at wet patches especially in the hot dry pre-monsoon days." Here he is drinking from the water collected on leaves; a perfect behavioral documentation. Jee 06:17, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't think we can really see the drinking taking place, as the butterfly's head is facing away from us. If the butterfly is truly rare, that could be a strong encyclopedic argument for a feature, but I would have thought "endemic" and "rare" were contradictions in terms. Anyway, I don't want you to think I don't appreciate the great and really impressive work you do - it's in large part due to your outstanding work that the bar on featuring closeups of butterflies, moths and the like has been raised! Meanwhile, let's see what other people think. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • No worries. I'm just trying to explain things I learned as part of my hobby in chasing them as AWeith did on his polar bear nom. Thanks for your nice words. Jee 06:45, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: A contradiction in terms? Would you like him to say it in Malayalam? But maybe you'd be at a slight disadvantage... Face-surprise.svg INeverCry 06:54, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

[unindent] This isn't about someone having an advantage over another person; it's about having clear communication, which was ultimately achieved. Thanks for "helping". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

According to Threatened swallowtail butterflies of the world, it is "uncommon; but not known to be threatened". It will not come out of the shades; I saw it only once. Jee 07:02, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • If it's that rare, I Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks Ikan Kekek. We've two difficulties to find the exact status. 1. It loves shades and will not come out. 2. It mimics Euploea core. So we can't distinguish them without seeing those two white spots on upper-wings. Jee 07:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Understood. But even if there are a lot of them, if they're almost always in shade, that presents a major challenge in photographing them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:19, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Ikan the word "endemic" when referring to animals and plants, means "native to or confined to a certain region". So not contradictory with "rare". When referring to a disease, it does mean "common within a population", which is probably where the confusion comes. -- Colin (talk) 08:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Exactly. I never knew there was a difference between the usage of endemic in talking about endemic diseases vs. endemic animals. Thanks for explaining that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 06:54, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 08:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per understanding gained from long discussion above. Daniel Case (talk) 05:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh, unfortunate lighting. --Smial (talk) 09:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vengolis (talk) 04:07, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Junonia iphita-Kadavoor-2016-08-08-002.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 13:19:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Junonia iphita
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Junonia iphita. C/U/N: Jkadavoor -- Jee 13:19, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jee 13:19, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another one of your well trained little buddies sitting on leaves of matching color and shape, keeping its antennae in the same position as the "chop sticks" in the background. Beautiful and great detail. I could live with said sticks toned down a bit though, they are stealing some of the show. --cart-Talk 13:41, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:09, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Why names in file name !? There is line "author" for that. Some quick reader will name it as Junonia iphita-Kadavoor butterfly. --Mile (talk) 16:37, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Kadavoor is the place of record; not my name. :) Jee 16:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Mile, see all the fantastic pictures from this place at Category:Nature of Kadavoor, Kerala. cart-Talk 19:20, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Ouu, place. Not sure if dash is good option, i put into brackets filename etc (place).jpg --Mile (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm going to be a pain on this, because I feel strongly that you can do better: This butterfly is beautiful, but compared to the best work by you and people like Charles Sharp, I'm not overwhelmed with either the focus or resolution. The composition is good, but my preference would be for you to take another photo that's greater than this one and nominate it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • This is a widely distributed butterfly and I can try again though it is not very friendly to pose for me. I didn't understand the resolution part though. Here more than 17MP from my 24MP camera; I just cropped to make it center. I think I'm stretching out of my/my camera's limits. Jee 06:00, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I guess I really mean just the focus. If you could get that level of resolution a good deal clearer, I'd be really wowed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Now I got it. Yes; the left wing tip is not sharp compared to the right as I got here. Jee 06:21, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Along those lines, yes. What I really want is for pretty much the entire butterfly to have crisp sharpness, within this quality of composition. It's a tall order, but you've done it before with other insects. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice detail, nice earth tones, and the light isn't as harsh as might first be thought. Daniel Case (talk) 19:55, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:43, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 21:36, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Image:Polar bear (Ursus maritimus) with its prey.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 17:00:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Polar bear feeding on a bearded seal
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I just want to say, on a lot of photos, your standards are a lot more exacting than mine, and I'm glad you're here. This is FPC, so it's important for there to be some very tough critics to help serve as gatekeepers and maintain the focus on what's truly, strikingly outstanding. To use an American expression, stick to your guns! (In other words, keep on standing for your principles.) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:53, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I appreciate the valued comment of Kreuzschnabel. When comparing the FP bear with the black tongue with my happy feeding bear the differences become obvious: whilst the candidate bear shows a clearly natural behavior in his (indeed it is a "he" owing to his massive head) natural habitat, the FP bear (who obviously is a female) shows clear signs of fear (tongue stuck out) which she would normally not display if there were no aliens (i.e. the photographer in his/her boat). When approaching arctic wildlife we always stick to the AECO (Association of Arctic Cruise Operators) rules and stay at a respectful distance unless the animal is nosy enough to come close by itself. The FP bear with its tongue obviously was very close to the observing vessel (for whatever reason) and could thus be photographed at much higher resolution. However, you will never experience a polar bear over its meal at a closer distance as it will designate you a food competitor and thus will either disappear with its prey or attack. Both would not be natural in case the food competitor is a photographer (and the latter may become dangerous prohibiting you forever from showing your polar bear fotos). I think both fotos are valuable as FPs, that's why I proposed mine. I'll be happy to remove CAs if there are any; however I guess its more prismatic glare in the snow that can't be removed. If you could indicate the area on the photo with the CA I'll be glad to try my best. --AWeith (talk) 11:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • @AWeith: this isn't prismatic glare, this is typical CA. Please try to remove it (visible on the left), so I'd like to stike my oppose. Thanks, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel, very pity.--Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:08, 19 September 2016 (UTC) now Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 05:51, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Bloody hell! (to use another American colorful expression in regards to the pic) If we are looking for polar bears posing or doing special things, I'd say this is rather typical polar bear behavior and not something you are likely to get a picture of in a zoo. Pending the removal of the CA in the snow I'm inclined to support this despite its size. cart-Talk 08:02, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment "Bloody [whatever]" is really more a British than an American expression. We tend to be more apt to use the f-word as an emphatic adjective. :-) Anyway, I definitely agree with you that this is a good enough and valuable enough picture to feature (minus the chromatic aberration, except that I'm not expert in seeing non-glaring chromatic aberration); however, I'm still glad Kreuz is here to be a stickler for his high standards. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Apparently I watch the more polite American TV series. ;) --cart-Talk 08:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Try HBO or Showtime... Face-wink.svg INeverCry 09:09, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I feel like being beemed back to the era when I had a British boss who always blamed me for having a Portsmouth accent (I am German) despite still not being able to use english curses correctly... Well, this is just to tell you all that I removed the CA using LR5. I apologize for the slightly bigger size - I previously cropped another format using the RAW file; now the image ist approx. 80-100 pixels bigger either side. Hope you don't mind.--AWeith (talk) 12:51, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Looks ok to me and here we like things big. Still, for future references, try have your picture up to snuff and ready when you nominate it here. A good idea is to first nominate it for Quality Image, that way you'll get it checked by other editors in advance. - I hear you on the accent issue Face-wink.svg, when I (Swedish) open my mouth I have been taken for a Bostonian, Irish or even Singaporean... --cart-Talk 13:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
a British guy though I was American, French people assumed I was Spanish and Germans belived I came from Hungary, a German Swiss though I was a French Swiss, some Israelians asked if I were some second generation sepharditic immigrants living in Israel... so far only Flemish Belgian got right, when I speak French, that I am Italian. Damned Belgians, I almost fooled everyone!--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:59, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 13:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:46, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Rare shot here, i get small size, but panorama crop isnt so necessary here. Good anyway. --Mile (talk) 16:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ...I'm just getting hungry... :-) --Basotxerri (talk) 17:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not perfect (I think it could be cropped in a little tighter) but what needs to be in focus is in focus, and given the subject of the image you don't need to be too creative. Daniel Case (talk) 22:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Simply amazing, excellent and nice moment --The Photographer 23:58, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality comes from a balance of factors: the rarity of the shot compensates some minor imperfection, IMHO--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Kreta - Potamon-Stausee2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 18:30:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crete: Potamon barrier lake
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Greece
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw. The Potamon barrier lake is the biggest (artificial) fresh-water lake in Crete -- Wladyslaw (talk) 18:30, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 18:30, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm all for warm sunlight in pictures, but here the WB seems a little off, making the lake look pasty and strange. I did a test using the grey road as ref and it cleaned up rather nicely. cart-Talk 19:14, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, but I can't follow. The WB is correct IMO. It was warm weather (35°C) so we have warm sunlight, nearly without clouds on this day. And how can you know what type of grey the streets was? --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:20, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I can't know what kind of grey the road was only that to my eyes the colors looked better after an adjustment. But since many editors here are discouraging tweaks and alterations during a nomination, there is nothing that can be done about it unless more editors than me find the colors slightly off. Anyway, it was only a comment about how I saw the picture, not a vote of any kind. cart-Talk 20:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I'd like to see W.carter's version, but this is nice enough for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok Ikan, here it is. I had to crop and resize is slightly or the system would not accept it as a new file, but since it is only an example it doesn't matter. I took the WB not from the road itself but from the painted white lines on the road, right between the red an green CA on either side of the line. cart-Talk 21:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I really can't tell which one would be a better reflection of actual conditions, and tend to defer to Wladyslaw. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • W.carter: Your version looks good and nice but has definitely too cold colours for the conditions on this day. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with the review of W.carter. I get the same results when using the white/grey stripes of the road as a WB reference. It also appears the tint is a bit off. I have sent a screen shot from Lightroom showing how it works by mail to Wladyslaw. Such a WB correction is better made when developing from raw. I could also upload a derivative with a slightly colder color temperature and a tweaked tint for reference, but it is not optimal using a jpg as source. The color space is marked as "sRGB" in the EXIF (good), but there is no embedded color profile. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:55, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Agree with others, and, yes, still no colour profile. The temperature of the air (35°C) has absolutely nothing to do with the "colour temperature" which perversely is more blue (which we associate with cold) with the very hot sun and more yellow (which we think of as warm) with the significantly less hot tungsten light bulb. -- Colin (talk) 21:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Slaunger Sorry, but I disagree. To take the white of the road stripes is a nice idea but not very helpful. The new tarred road was very bleached by sun and the asphalt street had yet strongly broken parts. The version of W.carter is too cold. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:44, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
    • That's OK. Do fix the embedded color profile though; we have been through the issue of incomplete EXIF data regarding color profiles on numerous occasions. Until that is fixed I will Symbol oppose vote.svg oppose conditionally. -- Slaunger (talk) 17:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful landscape, rich colors. The WB is a bit warmer than typical, yes, but within the acceptable range of artistic license for me. --King of ♠ 23:59, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No color profile embedded (should be a requirement). And I find the light harsh, rendering the landscape flat - Benh (talk) 07:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Benh: shame on you: how could you support this candidate? --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Because I liked the light on that one. I don't always check the color profile issue, so some of your pics can slip through sometimes. Thank god we have careful people like Colin. I'm really puzzled that you're recognising your pictures has issues, and you don't care fixing them. - Benh (talk) 07:27, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Dear Benh: please keep polite and calm, even if this should be hard for you. I have tried several times to obey your's or other hints concerning this topic. The colour management information is in fact now part of the EXIF. I'm not an expert on EXIF-data and that here is missing s.th. else (even you didn't detected this at first) was outside my idea. I have tried to manage this "embadding problem" here. But Code has no idea how to handle this because I make exactly this what is written in the instruction. So, please have appreciation that my day has only 24 hours and my tasks in real life are fully enough so that I have no time any more to chase after this EXIF-stuff, in particular this is your own rule and not a official FPC rule. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:24, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Wladyslaw I don't see what's wrong with what I wrote (unlike someone else who think I should feel "ashamed"). If you have time to submit this many candidates, you have time to fix the issue. Otherwise, you can just Google, and many sources will explain this clearly. And even if you didn't have the time, I'm fairly certain I did provide you the fix myself. All you had to do is checking, and if you were OK, to overwrite the file (I didn't overwrite myself to be courteous. Edit : and also because the colours might have not been what you wanted to show). Maybe if you hadn't spent your valuable time to answer me, then you could have tried. You're welcome by the way. - Benh (talk) 21:36, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Dear Behn: starting two candidates means 5 minutes of time. My investigations and experiments over all for this EXIF-stuff took me 2-3 hours in the last week: without any result. I've had it. Set your oppose-voting on my images altough it is not a FPC rules but don't expect any further action for this topic. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 18:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm not bothered by the colors at all in the original version as they, IMO, reflect the reality of a landscape that, typical for that part of the world, is undeniably arid yet far from lifeless, even when it surrounds a lake. Daniel Case (talk) 19:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Schloss Werneck, 5.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 17:42:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • 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) 17:42, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --King of ♠ 17:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:20, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 18:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Too much sharpening applied IMHO (Da sind schon unschöne Säume an Kontrastkanten zu sehen) but still outstanding enough for me. --Kreuzschnabel 18:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 19:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And 7. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:21, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And 8. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:43, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose The building is highly symmetric from left to right and the vantage point is right in the middle from left to right - good, but there is also a reflection plane in the water and it bothers me that this is a little off-centered in the vertical direction such that more sky is seen than reflection. It is sufficiently close to be centered that as an observer you would expect it was the compositional choice, but it is quite far from being so, making the composition a bit unbalanced. Another compositional choice could be to crop significantly more off the reflection, such that in the vertical direction the composition followed better a rule of thirds (sky - building - reflection). Since the water has ripples, the reflection and symmetry is not perfect anyway. With a different crop in the vertical direction, I am happy to reconsider.-- Slaunger (talk) 21:09, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Rainer Can you please be more patient with your nominations. I had to FPD some recently and you still have two other active nominations. I won't FPD this one because one of them is waiting on the bot to speedy promote -- but it is technically still active and always possible that someone might vote oppose as the nomination would normally have four days more to go. Wait till the FPC page has removed previous nominations so you only have two active at most at any time. Also remember that you need at least seven reviewers to get an FP, so please do your bit by reviewing other images too -- we need both positive and negative reviews. -- Colin (talk) 21:10, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks Colin for clearing this up. I actually looked to see if one of the other nominations had been closed before I voted. I only assumed that since it had the automatic grey bot message, it was ok. Now I know that the result needs to be confirmed by someone (or voting period over). cart-Talk 21:22, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Hallo, das man hier nur zwei Bilder gleichzeitig Nominieren darf, wusste ich nicht. Ich habe jetzt gewartet, bis eine von den ersten beiden Bilder den Hinweis bekommen hat, dass die Kandidatur beendet ist. Aber das war wohl noch zu früh. Beim nächsten Bild warte ich etwas länger. Ich bin hier bei FPD noch unerfahren, sorry. Grüße -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 21:43, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Auf der Seite, auf der du deine Nominationen erstellt hast, steht oben „Please read the complete guidelines before nominating“ und weiter unten, unter „Featured picture candidate policy – General rules“, Punkt 11, steht das mit den maximal zwei Nominationen. In den FPD-Hinweisen, die deine überzähligen Kandidaten eingesackt haben, stand es auch. FPC ist mit manchmal 70 aktiven Kandidaten schon grenzwertig voll, deshalb ist das auch eine Rücksichtnahme auf die Voter, immerhin nimmt man sich hier mehr Zeit zum Beurteilen als auf QIC und formuliert Begründungen für Ablehnung (ich zumindest tue das) :-) --Kreuzschnabel 05:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Problem bei dem ganzen ist nur, dass das überall in Englisch steht und ich nur Deutsch kann. Und wie die von mir zu viel begonennen Kandidaturen abgebrochen worden sind, wusste ich das dann, durch Google-Translate. Aber wie dann eines von den ersten beiden als beendet markiert worden ist, dachte ich, dass diese Kandidatur auch tatsächlich zu Ende ist. Grüße -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 07:56, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok, vielen Dank. Ich habe immer ganz oben auf Deutsch geklickt, aber da tut sich nichts. Jetzt habe ich es gefunden. Grüße -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 08:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please add english description, not everybody here can read german language. --Ivar (talk) 17:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Iifar:: While I think an English description adds value and is helpful, I do not think it is a responsibility of the nominator to provide one. The nominator states clearly above in German regarding his confusion about the guidelines that Problem bei dem ganzen ist nur, dass ... ich nur Deutsch kann. indicating the nominator is not capable of providing an English description. I do not think that it should be a requirement to write well in English to nominate a picture for FPC, it would be an unreasonable requirement for our non-English speaking users. I would encourage though, that some of our many many German-speaking reviewers, who are also proficient in written English will help draft an English description. -- Slaunger (talk) 17:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is always a possibility to ask someone and I'm sure somebody is willing to help with the translation. --Ivar (talk) 18:16, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done with the usual help from Google. Daniel Case (talk) 19:05, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
So you did that With a Little Help from Your Friend. ;) cart-Talk 19:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 18:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is, however, about as sharpened as it can be without being oversharpened. Daniel Case (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:37, 20 September 2016 (UTC) 
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a quite typical FP :) --Laitche (talk) 18:03, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Anfiteatro, El Jem, Túnez, 2016-09-04, DD 41-43 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 03:40:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture  * Info Hypogeum of the Amphitheatre of El Jem, an archeological site in the city of El Djem, Tunisia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Hypogeum of the Amphitheatre of El Jem, an archeological site in the city of El Djem, Tunisia. This spot of the hypogeum is the place where the gladiators went up to the gate of the arena when the games started. The amphitheatre, a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 1979, was built around 238 AD, when the modern Tunisia belonged to the Roman province of Africa. It is the third biggest amphiteatre and one of the best preserved Roman ruins in the world with capacity for 35,000 spectators within 148 metres (486 ft) and 122 metres (400 ft) long axes and a unique in Africa. All by me, Poco2 03:40, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 03:40, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice but not FP-nice. In other words: No wow. Sorry. --Code (talk) 05:21, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - As Code says, it's pretty good, and I could go either way on this one, but I prefer this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Poco, reading your "Info" again, I think that for historical and educational/encyclopedic reasons plus quality, this photo should be featured. I will vote to feature it if you copy this information to the description on the file page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:21, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Ikan: ✓ Done Poco2 20:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Symbol support vote.svg Support, and anyone who translates that background into Spanish and French will be doing a good service. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Will take care of the Spanish version in a few weeks when I get settled Poco2 18:33, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 06:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- cart-Talk 08:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer 10:55, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 17:54, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:23, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice job taking this and keeping the contrast workable (yes, I know, it's the HDR). Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 18:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is sufficient for me but the image Ikan refers to is really awesome. Please nominate it or I'll do :-) . --Basotxerri (talk) 20:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
    Basotxerri, it would be a honor if you do that ;) Poco2 17:19, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:48, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Saxon Switzerland - view from Festung Königstein.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 09:53:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saxon Switzerland - view from Festung Königstein
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 09:53, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 09:53, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:43, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:08, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good work. --Kreuzschnabel 15:14, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I have to oppose here, because this image looks too unbalanced for me. All the interesting things are in the left part, which looks cut off to me, while the right part shows just the forest. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:37, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Uoaei1. Also buildings seem tilted. Rather small (7.6MP) for a panoramic photo compared to the typical standard. -- Colin (talk) 20:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 00:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I actually like the composition showing us all that space to the right; as someone who lives in a similarly river-dominated region, I know that the space off the river defines the river as much as the river shapes it. Yes, the buildings can be fixed, but they're not the whole image. Daniel Case (talk) 03:44, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not a bad view, but resolution is rather low. Also I think the WB is a bit too green. --King of ♠ 04:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful and well done. --Code (talk) 05:24, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - If the file were bigger, I would mildly support, but the size of the file is the tiebreaker for me. The scenery is pretty, but the twin outcroppings are much more interesting to me than anything in the foreground and the composition doesn't really speak to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would have support without the burned whites, disturbing at full resolution for me Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Duisburg, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord -- 2016 -- 1115 (bw).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 04:53:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blast furnace 2, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord in Duisburg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 08:56, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Wed 21 Sep → Mon 26 Sep
Thu 22 Sep → Tue 27 Sep
Fri 23 Sep → Wed 28 Sep
Sat 24 Sep → Thu 29 Sep
Sun 25 Sep → Fri 30 Sep
Mon 26 Sep → Sat 01 Oct

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

Sat 17 Sep → Mon 26 Sep
Sun 18 Sep → Tue 27 Sep
Mon 19 Sep → Wed 28 Sep
Tue 20 Sep → Thu 29 Sep
Wed 21 Sep → Fri 30 Sep
Thu 22 Sep → Sat 01 Oct
Fri 23 Sep → Sun 02 Oct
Sat 24 Sep → Mon 03 Oct
Sun 25 Sep → Tue 04 Oct
Mon 26 Sep → Wed 05 Oct

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below (except to add categories on the file page, because need a non-bot user to do it). However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Featured picture}} or {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
      • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
    • Add on the file page its respective categories for Featured pictures of... like Category:Featured pictures of objects, Category:Featured pictures of landscapes, of people, of Germany, of Paris, etc. This is the only part of the process that needs a user who is not a bot to complete it.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/September 2016), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/September 2016.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.