This is a Featured picture. Click here for more information.

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/December 2012

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

Contents

File:Apatani tribal women.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2012 at 11:35:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Apatani tribal women
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Doniv79 - uploaded by Doniv79 - nominated by Alborzagros -- Alborzagros (talk) 11:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alborzagros (talk) 11:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A good portrait. I like it a lot. I am not well versed in Commons:Photographs of identifiable people - in the country specific section it is mentioned that in India there are exceptions to the general rule of allowing to publish a portrait taken in public without explicitly asking for consent. But I do not know what these exceptions are. I am pointing this out because the {{consent}} template is not present on the file page. Probably everything is OK, but can someone more competent than me please confirm this? --Slaunger (talk) 19:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Found it: Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements#India. The exceptions are ...publishing a photo in a manner that might be "embarrassing, mentally traumatic" or causing "a sense of insecurity about [depicted persons] activities" is illegal ... and I do not think any of these exceptions apply in this case. --Slaunger (talk) 20:02, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
      • I would think the question whether this is taken in a private or public setting is more pressing. I know very little in regards to wedding celebrations in the Hija village at Ziro (or the rest of India for that matter), but I would expect such a thing to take place in a private place? If it is then {{consent}} is needed in any case. If it is in a public space, then I would think it is okay. According to a paper by the Centre for Internet & Society in India not much privacy can be expected on the streets of India and the photograph of the woman doesn't appear to "embarrassing, mentally traumatic" or causing "a sense of insecurity about [depicted persons] activities" (per Commons:Country specific consent requirements#India). In kind regards, Henrik/heb [T C E] 14:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
        • I don't know about this particular tribe, but weddings are often a public event in India. Yann (talk) 10:03, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very interesting, but the light is not ideal. The face is in the shadow, and the reflection on the forehead of the background woman is overexposed. Yann (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good EV (per EN:FP); but technically not enough for an FP here (eyes in shadows, blown background object between the faces,not sharp enough, bad crop). I like the other low res. picture in the article, more. JKadavoor Jee 05:03, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Penyulap 09:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a great photo, but I don't like the possible ambiguity as to whether this is taken in public or private space. In kind regards, Henrik/heb [T C E] 14:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Yann --Dey.sandip (talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above --Stas1995 (talk) 16:34, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Yann. Michael Barera (talk) 20:55, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 22:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Iguana in the Maracaibo wild.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2012 at 20:14:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iguana in the Maracaibo wild
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- The Photographer (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- The Photographer (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cj.samson (talk) 04:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is not optimal; only the head is in focus, not the entire animal in frame. I prefer a portrait with enough lead room in such a case; you can "cut" between the two legs on left (only my opinion). JKadavoor Jee 05:11, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:44, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice light and good composition. --Selbymay (talk) 08:24, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice capture! Michael Barera (talk) 20:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 16:12, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Morning (talk) 16:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 22:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Reptiles

File:Imperial Coat of Arms of the Empire of Austria.svg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2012 at 11:43:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and by uploaded by Sodacan - nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 11:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Imperial Coat of Arms of the Austrian Empire, between 1866 & 1915, Wonderful work, historically perfect and esthetically very nice, as usual, by User:Sodacan-- Jebulon (talk) 11:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A marvelous drawing! I feel like a pathetic amateur when comparing my poor illustrations with this... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding! Great work. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 15:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 16:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JKadavoor Jee 17:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 17:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JDP90 (talk) 03:46, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 14:20, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Morning (talk) 16:21, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Raghith 08:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice work, congratulations --The Photographer (talk) 15:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Simply stunning image. Fenn-O-maniC (talk) 15:45, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Kürbis () 20:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 01:05, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated

File:Ruhrtalbruecke-Sonnenuntergang.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2012 at 09:45:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset at "Ruhrtalbrücke" (Bridge of the Ruhr Valley)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 09:45, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. -- -donald- (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yesss --Llorenzi (talk) 12:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I have mixed feelings about HDR and I think this one is on the edge of appearing unrealistic or overprocessed. On the other hand it has very nice colours, detail level, mood, and a good composition, so I surrender. Could you indicate in the {{Panorama}} the software used for the HDR stitch? --Slaunger (talk) 20:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
    • I am by the way intrigued by the fact that I cannot see any stitching errors in the grass in the foreground. It is usually very hard to avoid parallax errors in the extreme foreground. Did you use a special pano-head? On the other hand, the stitching method used in some recent stitching software is so smart that it can zig-zag in between the individual straws and make a seam, which is very hard to see. --Slaunger (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
      Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've added the information regarding software and # of pics to {{Panorama}}. The shootig conditions were not optimal. I stopped spontaneously at the road (because of the great sky formation and sunset) and had only a simple tripid (no pano-head). I even had no remote-control with me and pressed the trigger by hand. The seven photos were prepared with Lightroom. (noise reduction, WB, CA). I auto-aligned the source photos with Photomatix 4 and used the Detail Enhancer method with medium light effect. In the end I postprocessed the jpg output from Photomatix again with LR (noise reduction, sharpening, shadow-highlight correction).
      To your other points: The use (and usefullness) of HDR is ambivalent and highly debated. I personally prefer the use of HDR in situations with extreme dynamic ranges. E.g. the direct sunlight here and the bottom side of the bridge (completely in shadow) blows the DR of every camera thus I used HDR. I always try to let my HDRs looking naturally and go beyond the limitations of the camera sensor. Thanks for your interest and (weak) support. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Forgotten: I also like the photo :) --Tuxyso (talk) 23:12, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Penyulap 09:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 14:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 14:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 16:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:43, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 18:01, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sunlight occulted by cirrus or other thin clouds is about the one place I could think of where HDR might actually help. It does here. Daniel Case (talk) 06:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The HDR effect here is obvious but still eye-pleasing. -- King of ♠ 06:24, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral a bit overprocessed HDR, but not enought to really oppose --PierreSelim (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JDP90 (talk) 14:47, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! Michael Barera (talk) 20:54, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great composition and lighting/shadows but partially thank to much digital processing Poco a poco
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info To the skeptics of HDR: On [1] you find a very similiar sunset photo of the same object. Impossible to carve out the interesting structure of the bottom side of the bridge. As you can see on this photo the worth seeing strucutre of bottom side is completely shadowed independently of the time of the day. In this case here I would even go so far that HDR is more natural than any other shooting technique because our eyes can master both: the beautiful sunset and the structure of the bridge by rapidly alternating between bright and dark areas. HDR (more precisly the final tonemaping) just merges this mechanism into one photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 02:44, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

(talk) 21:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Kürbis (A mode✔) 22:27, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Avenue (talk) 11:25, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like good HDR images, but this unnatural example hast just an end in itself. To show a nice view of this bridge the time was definitely chosen wrong. We have a dramatic sky with an average good bridge photography. Sorry, but the EV is too low in my opinion and the artistic mood too posed. --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:29, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Same as Wladyslaw.--Jebulon (talk) 12:50, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Rare coincidence. Clin JKadavoor Jee 16:54, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Not a coincidence. An agreement about a good and relevant review, IMO. I was to oppose too, but I did not have the good and precise words for that. Wladyslaw expressed here exactly my meaning.--Jebulon (talk) 23:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Have to agree with Wladyslaw, sorry. Basically, I like the winter sunset atmosphere here. But the bridge itself does not find much expression. The eye-catcher here are rather the sky and the sun, which actually should not have been so. A better exposure of the bridge is desirable. It's also the fact that the image resolution is rather on the poor side. - A.Savin 19:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
    • I am open minded to criticism and I know that HDR is controversal, but your statement "image resolution is rather on the poor side" is absurdity, sorry. The photo has a resolution of 5,6 megapixel! It was my decision the downsample in order to minimize noise here. I think LR can do it much better than the image rendering of Commons. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
      • Well, looking at some other FP's of comparable motives I don't think it's an absurd requirement. Even more, it's not that essential and in case of some exceptionally good images voters may overlook an even lower number of pixels. Here, however, we also have some other technical issues, given the fact that even compact cameras of today have far more than 10 MP it's also a point, albeit just one of several ones. - A.Savin 20:33, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
        • I just answered back to your statement regarding the resolution. Like or dislike of HDR and of the composition I've choosen here is a subjective matter and I accept the negative assesments to this aspect(s). If 5,6 Mpx are problematic I can upload the photo in full resolution. Compared to the other nominated photos, 5.6 Mpx is a good average and not "rather on the poor side". Please do not take resolution as justification for your reservations on HDR. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
          • Seems you've misunderstood something, I don't use arguments as "justification" for something... Whatever, if you prefer me not to utter *my* arguments on your FPC's, just throw me a line, and I will vote without any comment in the future (even when opposing). - A.Savin 23:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
          • I am happy with your in-detail comments (also in future). I think circumstantial comments are beneficial to everyone. Thus keep on commenting that way. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A pretty picture to look at, but unrealistic enough for me to oppose --Dey.sandip (talk) 13:34, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose: Very unrealistic editing, extreme halos on the piers. The latter is the biggest problem for me. --Julian H. (talk/files) 10:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info My initial plan was to shut up until the vote if finished, but some statements are hair-raising to me:
    • Julian H.: "Extreme halos" - what is extreme? Extrem enough that up to now no one despite of you has realiszed it? We are here at FP. As I initially wrote: The shootings conditions were not optimal, the formation of the sky and the sunset were very unique and led to this beautiful result (in my eyes). Slight halos should be correctable via image editing.
    • To the naturalists / realists (Wladyslaw, Jebulon, Dey.sandip, Julian H.): I cannot follow your argumentation. What is real? Are the NASA images shown here real? No! Are the beautiful FP-panoramas real? No, no one can look 360° around. Photography is always communication between photographer and viewer (and never) reality. The resulting photo was the way I've seen the bridge and the beautiful sunset, nothing more and nothing less.
    • Bridge photographer (Wladyslaw, Savin): I agree with you that there might be better perspectives for pure bridge photography. But as the german title "Bridge of valley of the Ruhr with sunset" indicated the motive here is the symbios between sunset and bridge architecture. From my view a selected the best shooting position, probably you can come to Germany and find a better one :)
    • Wladyslaw: With all respect, but your comment "I like good HDR images, but this unnatural example [...]" annoys me much. I've seen and processed a lot of HDRs and I am sure that mine is for sure not a bad one - in contrary. Be so kind and have a look at the English wikipedia entry [HDR] to see bad and overprocessed HDRs. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
      • I didn't say it's bad (technical the image isn't bad for sure), I have said it's unrealistic and dramatic and therefore it looks posed. That's a difference. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • These halos would indeed be easily correctable with the original material, if the editing software supports this. "Extreme" means that they result in a darkening of the edges of the pier compared to the center (they should be the same colour) by about 30% (at least it looks like that). Why others didn't notice that or had no problem with it is none of my business, the point of a democratic vote is that everybody can vote according to his impression and standards. And for me, these halos are too strong. It might also be that others noticed it but didn't mention it.
  • I completely agree if you say that photography is never 100% real and doesn't have to be. But if my immediate impression upon looking at the image is "this looks very wrong", then this is a problem for me. In other conditions, it might not be. And "the shooting conditions were not optimal" doesn't change the quality of the image or the editing. This isn't a vote about your abilities as a photographer, so please don't feel defensive about this. I'm trying to be objective, as far as that's possible when talking about photography, and my impression is that this shouldn't be a FP. Others think it should be, and that's perfectly fine. --Julian H. (talk/files) 16:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 5 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 22:12, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Wadden sea and a silhouette of the Maria church in Wierum.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2012 at 14:51:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wadden sea and a silhouette of the Maria church in Wierum. The most northern church of the mainland.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uberprutser - uploaded by Uberprutser - nominated by Uberprutser -- Uberprutser (talk) 14:51, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment interesting sky, but thereof cut could be better picture. A high horizon line creates depth and places more emphasis on the object main. imho --Rjcastillo (talk) 13:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 22:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Young Cossack Ivan Kudryavtsev.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2012 at 21:17:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ivan Kudryavtsev — four Transbaikal Cossack from village Bayan, Dzhidinsky district, Buryatia, Siberia.
I changed the vignetting and exposure. Is that better? Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 13:52, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, it is better, now. Unfortunately a bit unsharp/noisy but expression and overall message of this portrayal is great, thus FP for me. --Tuxyso (talk) 19:31, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Second version is pretty noisy. --Ivar (talk) 15:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Fixed --Ivar (talk) 17:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great portrait. Yann (talk) 18:07, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 04:47, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'd prefer it a bit brighter (sth. like the previous version, but not that overprocessed). - A.Savin 10:40, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 12:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy and unsharp. --Yikrazuul (talk) 19:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the subject's expression! Michael Barera (talk) 20:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Kürbis () 22:26, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dey.sandip (talk) 01:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 22:04, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

Set nomination: Apollo 11 flight, not featured[edit]

Visit nomination page.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2012 at 21:17:36 (UTC)

  • Created by NASA, 1969, uploaded by Soerfm, nominated by Soerfm. Soerfm (talk) 22:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An artist concept of how the first manned flight to the Moon was made by Apollo 11 in July, 1969. Date and time of day is UTC; time in dd-hh-mm format is mission time. CM = Command Module, SM = Service Module and LM = Lunar Module or Moon lander. CSM = combined CM and SM.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Soerfm (talk) 22:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 14:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A good example of a set, where the whole collection adds a lot of value to each image. Yann (talk) 09:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a nice set and the subject matter is notable enough. Sadly the quality of the individual illustrations isn't up to par. BNesides...Why is this one missing? Kleuske (talk) 12:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's an excellent, valuable set. But each image in it is smaller than the required 2 megapixels - indeed, they're less than half the size. As well, it's missing one, as Kleuske points out. May I suggest COM:VIC? Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:38, 23 November 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 22:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Set nomination: The Early Poems of Alfred, Lord Tennyson, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2012 at 07:23:35 (UTC)

This is a complete set of illustrations by W. E. F. Britten for the book, "The Early Poems of Alfred, Lord Tennyson". I realise set nominations likely haven't been used for a while, but they still have their own section in the rules, and I checked on the talk page, so I'm going to presume this is fine.

That said, there's no actual templates for a set nomination, so feel free to tweak this page.

Anyway, these are photogravures; the slight grey cast is entirely part of the artistic medium, and the contrast with the paper is what identifies them as such (so please don't cut the border; I know people always want to, but it's really never a good idea for historical works). This is also from a slightly unusual artistic movement, the Arts and Crafts movement, which emphasised relative simplicity. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by W.E.F. Britten - restored, uploaded and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! Yann (talk) 08:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent work. King of ♠ 17:41, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support After careful scrutiny of all drawings in full res (took some time to download and inspect) I must say I am impressed by the artistic and technical quality of the drawings. I have not found anything to complain about in any of the drawings. The image pages are excellent too with many relevant details and additional source material. Simply excellent! --Slaunger (talk) 20:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JKadavoor Jee 04:41, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 16:38, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice work! Michael Barera (talk) 20:53, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 22:09, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Bramantino - De aanbidding der herders.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2012 at 01:21:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 12:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Fuente (Plaza del Rosario de Nuestra Señora de La Chiquinquira).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2012 at 01:52:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fuente en la Plaza del Rosario de Nuestra Señora de La Chiquinquira
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Rjcastillo -- Rjcastillo (talk) 01:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as creator. -- Rjcastillo (talk) 01:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the composition seems disorganized, e.g. the half cut-off building on the right, the place where the fountain is cut off at the left, etc. -- King of ♠ 04:46, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for review --Rjcastillo (talk) 14:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Rjcastillo (talk) 14:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 12:22, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Mahab Pano1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2012 at 04:57:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Descent of the Ganges
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cj.samson - uploaded by Cj.samson - nominated by Cj.samson -- Cj.samson (talk) 04:57, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cj.samson (talk) 04:57, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 14:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sure why f/20 was required for an image of this nature. Lighting is pretty harsh, gives a washed out feel. --Dey.sandip (talk) 15:52, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting --Stas1995 (talk) 16:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lacks sharpness in certain areas. I checked a 3000px preview, and no, the high number of megapixels does not mitigate the problem. -- King of ♠ 22:41, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support I would have preferred a looser crop --Muhammad (talk) 11:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Per Muhammad. Michael Barera (talk) 21:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am not fond of the crop at all and unfortunately the missing sharpness forces me to decline Poco a poco (talk) 21:26, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above --Vamps (talk) 08:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 12:19, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Naqsh-e Jahan Square Panorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2012 at 08:44:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Naqsh-e Jahan Square Panorama.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Monfie, Colin - uploaded by Monfie - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 08:44, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kasir (talk) 08:44, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Penyulap 09:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 14:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A huge panorama for sure. But unfortunately don't find much in the composition -- Dey.sandip (talk) 15:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 16:26, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Agree as per above.Fotoriety (talk) 23:07, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I like it overall, but the lack of symmetry in the capture bothers me a bit. Michael Barera (talk) 21:05, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Taha (talk) 21:57, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
You don't have enough edits to vote. 50 edits are needed. --JDP90 (talk) 03:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
You don't have enough edits to vote. 50 edits are needed. --JDP90 (talk) 03:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Darafsh Kaviyani (Talk)‍ 15:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. BTW, I don't like the canvassing. Tomer T (talk) 16:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the lack of symmetry is off-putting. -- King of ♠ 18:30, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not centered. -- -donald- (talk) 10:57, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For such huge panorama, its hard to archive fine composition. Instead, lots of information is included.Monfie (talk) 06:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Dey.sandip --Vamps (talk) 08:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 12:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Tahrir Square, Cairo, in the early morning.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2012 at 04:33:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tahrir Square, Cairo, in the early morning. The street lights are glowing like lava, while dawn is painting a orange-reddish band on the horizon.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:33, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:33, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The foggy atmosphere contributes to a mysterious mood. -- King of ♠ 04:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting topic, but I miss a clear idea with the composition and the image quality is rather dissapointing in 2 Mpixel preview. --Slaunger (talk) 07:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JKadavoor Jee 08:53, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Warning icon.png perspective distortion --Ivar (talk) 13:57, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've replaced the file with an updated version. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It was better, but buildings on the left side were still leaning. I uploaded new version. --Ivar (talk) 15:07, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger --Dey.sandip (talk) 15:55, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I like it overall, but the buildings in the foreground are a bit distracting. Michael Barera (talk) 21:02, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the mood and the colors of the sky. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a hazy feel is sometimes nice, but this feels too hazy. Tomer T (talk) 07:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Sorry, but this doesn't make any sense. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:48, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Is this a comment on my vote? Tomer T (talk) 09:13, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
      • No. It's a comment on the process as a whole. Nothing wrong with your vote :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:47, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Less hazy edit, higher contrast, some noise reduction.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The image is criticized for its haziness and image quality, so I tried editing it a little bit to - in my opinion - improve it. However, the changes are too big to justify overwriting the original. Do you think this helps? --Julian H. (talk/files) 19:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Less space at right, a bit more at left, then perfect. But featurable as it is now. I don't know if this nomination is valid...--Jebulon (talk) 18:38, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Neither do I, really. I actually think it's featureable now, too (probably won't get enough votes though), but just in case: I Symbol support vote.svg Support too. --Julian H. (talk/files) 19:34, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Renominate the alt in a week, I'd say. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:57, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 12:18, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Vista desde la torre de observación, Parque Estatal Brown County, Indiana, Estados Unidos, 2012-10-14, DD 07.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2012 at 18:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape view thru the observation tower, Brown County State Park, Indiana, USA
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Landscape view thru the observation tower, Brown County State Park, Indiana, USA. All by me, Poco a poco (talk) 18:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP to me. The nice autumn colors and the unusual perspective together make it special. - A.Savin 11:03, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very unusual. Good colours. -- JDP90 (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a 3-panel abstract painting. --Selbymay (talk) 14:54, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool perspective and nice colors! Michael Barera (talk) 21:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a part of a contact sheet for film photography users ! --JLPC (talk) 22:39, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is a good idea, and it is well done. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 10:18, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info --New version uploaded: color balanced (less blue) and converted to sRGB. Feel free to revert if you don't like the edit. Sting (talk) 16:08, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
    Looks good, thank you, Poco a poco (talk) 19:19, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice idea but not that outstanding that I could overlook about the technical issues: pixels look very painted and unnatural --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:42, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose: As Wladyslaw stated: nice idea, but no "Wow" for me. I cannot see the real value for Wikimedia projects. Probably you can make some clarification on this issue. What is the main motive? The parque, the observation tower, the colors or your artistic idea? --Tuxyso (talk) 08:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
    Well, when I nominate a picture here is following the well-known official criteria of Commons. My hope is also that the evaluation is based on it, otherwise we'd need to update that criteria to avoid confusion. I spent one day in the Brown County State Park (Indinana, USA) middle of October and I tried to transmit the most representative of that place at that time, and it was, without doubt, the Indian summer, with its explosion of colors. The frame is of course an "artistic" touch with the target to have a more original result. I was hoping that this would please the reviewers here at FPC. I also think that this picture can be used in articles like Autumn, Brown County State Park or Indian summer enriching them, although I would expect this kind of question rather at VIC. All the best, Poco a poco (talk) 10:38, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
    Probably my comment results partially from a misinterpretation of the sentence "Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. " of the guidelines on Commons:Featured_picture_candidates. But for me the photo is still not representative for general topics like "autumn" or "Indian summer" because of the dominant artistic touch. Art is a subjective matter, and your undoubtlessly great work evokes no "Wow" with me in contrast to the most other voters. And no (personal) "Wow" is (as I've learned here) a concern of FP. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:28, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The idea and the framing are simple and probably nice. But beyond that, I fail to find anything particularly interesting. --Dey.sandip (talk) 13:19, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The black border and the projections of the sunshade beams (?) are very disturbing. The "landscape views" are not very attractive as other autumn pictures. JKadavoor Jee 16:16, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great "wow," very artistic take on it. But I feel it is lacking in value. Convince me of any Wikimedia project that might reasonably use this (no, I can't see this in the Wikipedia article on "autumn"), and you'll have my support. -- King of ♠ 07:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
    Ok, what about wikibooks:Basic Photography/Composition and the usage of physical elements to frame the pictures? Poco a poco (talk) 08:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC) PD: Anyhow, I think that I have understood the message. I will sort out my pictures before I upload them to avoid something that could be considered too creative.
    All right, that's a good one. Symbol support vote.svg Support King of ♠ 09:32, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lacking value and quality. --Vamps (talk) 08:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good value and quality, special effect to me (some say "wow"), very good idea and composition. Result is featurable, IMO. I remember that for years, some of old sacred cows here ( †, R.I.P.) took time in explaining me why useful or not in Wikimedia projects was actually not a valid criterium to oppose in FPC, because "Commons" is not only a repository for Wikimedia bla bla bla... Times are changing Clin --Jebulon (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Béria Lima msg 14:31, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 19:55, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:00026 40 mm quartz.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2012 at 12:07:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Double-terminated quartz crystals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Siim - uploaded by Siim - nominated by Athanasius Soter -- Athanasius Soter (talk) 12:07, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Athanasius Soter (talk) 12:07, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool stuff! Michael Barera (talk) 21:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DOF not enough. Caption very poor, no size or scale. No place of deposit. No wow effect. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:06, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose like Archaeodontosaurus -- Ra'ike T C 12:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose When I have a look at the series of FP in this category, I think this one is far below from the "FP Minerals bar" I'm afraid...--Jebulon (talk) 17:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow effect.--Biser Todorov (talk) 03:23, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 15:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Amanita muscaria vliegenzwam.02 JPG.JPG

File:Blonde d'Aquitaine Vallée Campan 2009.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2012 at 18:28:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JLPC - uploaded by JLPC - nominated by JDP90
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JDP90 (talk) 18:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info For reference, some other cow FPs. --Slaunger (talk) 20:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Beautiful view. --Stryn (talk) 20:43, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great view! Michael Barera (talk) 21:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Kürbis () 22:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this wide view as she in her natural kingdom; so I think the other FPs are not comparable to this except the one by Slaunger. But that 105mm is also much different than this. Too many flies on her face is a bit distracting to me even though it is quite usual. JKadavoor Jee 05:29, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:58, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral An excellent shot. The unfamiliar focal length for this portrayal make it very special. I would prefer a different crop, because the head at the left has too less space compared to the area at the right sight. If you would crop tighter in the vertical direction (see my notes) you still keep the beautiful wide view of your photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:48, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Good suggestion; but I don't like to miss the beauty of the landscape to any extend here. So I would like to compromise on this composition even though it is against lead room. JKadavoor Jee 10:18, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 10:15, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The cow's backside and the flies on its head are too distracting for me. The image also seems to lack any fine detail as though heavy NR applied. Colin (talk) 17:52, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
    • To me, this makes the image more interesting. It seems to say Why are you looking on my back? ;o) Yann (talk) 08:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 14:40, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. Tomer T (talk) 16:12, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 12:16, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lack of fine detail. --Vamps (talk) 08:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Grass is badly smeared. -- King of ♠ 14:20, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin...--Biser Todorov (talk) 03:22, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author. Thanks a lot to JDP90 for having nominated the picture. It's now time to count the votes : unfortunately there were only eight afficionados for 6 toreros... and it was only a cow ! -- Anyway, I also thank all reviewers who took their time to vote on this page. --JLPC (talk) 14:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dey.sandip (talk) 17:06, 2 December 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 19:58, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Catopsilia pomona 3 by kadavoor.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2012 at 06:54:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Catopsilia pomona male in back-lit
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Catopsilia pomona male enjoying the warm lights and Marigold. See how the back-lit helps to show his inner costumes! All by me -- JKadavoor Jee 06:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I’m relocating to Uppala, Kasaragod related to the job of my wife; so into a wiki-break for the time being. Hope to come back with the pictures of the fauna and flora of that place, soon. -- JKadavoor Jee 06:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The bud in the bottom, is drawing the eye :) --Dey.sandip (talk) 07:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I can easily remove it; but I love that little bud. :) (Feel free to remove it, if you prefer; I will be on a long vacation.) JKadavoor Jee 08:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support i like as it is --Cj.samson (talk) 08:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 09:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 09:50, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice contrast and colors. --Selbymay (talk) 16:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good focus, composition and colour. The bud is not very distracting. -- JDP90 (talk) 17:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Congratulations! --Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:17, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Some orange/red CA's at the petals should be removed. - A.Savin 19:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If you like the bud, include more of it; otherwise, remove it; but you can't leave it like this. Gidip (talk) 07:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tamba52 (talk) 14:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Kürbis () 20:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Morning (talk) 17:25, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The lower part of the flower is completely blurry, noisy and unsharp. As for the bud, I fully agree with Gidip.--Jebulon (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! Michael Barera (talk) 21:11, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 15:16, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods#Lepidoptera

File:Crassula arborescens, Jardín Botánico, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-21, DD 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2012 at 07:41:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crassula arborescens, Botanic Garden, Munich, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Crassula arborescens, Botanic Garden, Munich, Germany. All by me, Poco a poco (talk) 07:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 07:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 08:25, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful, but why so tight crop? Gidip (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
    Ok, agree, it was a bit tight, new version uploaded with more generous crop Poco a poco (talk) 19:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dey.sandip (talk) 20:27, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tamba52 (talk) 06:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JKadavoor Jee 07:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gidip (talk) 09:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cj.samson (talk) 19:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:31, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, this crop is much better. Michael Barera (talk) 21:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JDP90 (talk) 05:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 15:15, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants

File:Harilik kivikärsakas.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2012 at 12:11:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Barynotus obscurus


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 15:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Long Pier, Pondicherry.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2012 at 18:45:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Long pier in Pondicherry and early morning activities of fishermen
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 18:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 18:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info --New version uploaded: color balance, noise reduction on the sky, leveled horizon. Feel free to revert if you don't like the edit. Sting (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the edit. Its good. --Dey.sandip (talk) 07:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose In many respects a very good photo. The scenary is very interesting, and the composition is very good. But the light is "dead" and flat for me. It gives the photo an overall dark look and makes it hard to appreciate the many small details and elements in the photo. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 21:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 21:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Agreed, that the light quality is not good enough to illustrate the scene. --Dey.sandip (talk) 09:19, 1 December 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 20:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Reindeer Torkilstöten 2012.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2012 at 20:36:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Female reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) at Mount Torkilstöten, in Ljungdalen, Berg Municipality, Jämtland County, Sweden. In summer, reindeer prefer to move upwards to higher altitudes to escape insects. Created, uploaded and nominated by Arild Vågen (talk) 20:36, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 20:36, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support A nice capture, but for me a bit low on "wow" factor. Michael Barera (talk) 21:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Awkward pose (urinating?); one leg is almost "missing". Composition would be better if rule of third is followed. JKadavoor Jee 04:56, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Rule of third is used (download the photo and see where you find the reindeer and the head).--ArildV (talk) 09:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
      • Yes; but here the subject is going out of the frame. Coming into the frame is more preferred; sorry, I should be more specific in commenting (earlier). JKadavoor Jee 10:11, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
        • Actually, no. The reindeer is looking to the right, so it is better if there is more room on the right. Yann (talk) 08:18, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
          • Yes; I noticed it. But all other body parts in left direction. Just turned to give an angry look (I think a big no as I usually get while peeping into the privacy of people on street) to the photographer for disturbing its daily routines. Face-smile.svg -- JKadavoor Jee 16:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
            • I dont think we should confuse animals and humans. Reindeer are vigilant (bear, wolverine, wolf and lynx occur in the area, and is the major threat to the reindeer). From a encyclopaedic point of view its very good to show both the body and head of the reindeer.--ArildV (talk) 18:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Different crop.--ArildV (talk) 15:04, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Better composition; but the falling droplets and the widespread back legs are still an issue for me. Do you have another photo after it is urinating? JKadavoor Jee 16:40, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose See above. Yann (talk) 12:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • No. The reindeer ran away. It is extremely difficult to get close to the reindeer, without frightening them. It was the best opportunity I got in five hours.--ArildV (talk) 15:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
    I appreciate your efforts; but we've to ignore some photos due to the inferior body language of the subject that may happen to be captured by accident. JKadavoor Jee 16:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
    I just answered your question if there were other photos. What do you mean "we've to ignore"?--ArildV (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
    Hi Andriv, it seems a language problem between us. I appreciate your efforts and wish you to successfully capture a better photo later. I love animals. But I'm not happy to support this moment, unfortunately. JKadavoor Jee 05:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 19:58, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Azulejo - Igreja de São Bento - Ribeira Brava.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2012 at 06:32:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Our Lady of Fátima". Ceramic tiles (Azulejo) at Ribeira Brava, Madeira
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 06:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 15:53, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JKadavoor Jee 17:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Llorenzi (talk) 08:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Raghith 08:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JDP90 (talk) 17:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Morning (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Kürbis () 20:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! Michael Barera (talk) 21:08, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Béria Lima msg 20:40, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 11:06, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Berliner Dom Interior.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2012 at 22:52:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Berlin Cathedral Interior
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rob2Kx - uploaded by Rob2Kx - nominated by Rob2Kx -- Rob2Kx (talk) 22:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but some of the whites are clearly overexposed. -- King of ♠ 05:04, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment --A few little stitching errors (see notes), some CAs, lens barrel distortion visible in particular at the right. Sting (talk) 12:52, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose It looks good, but there isn't enough "wow" factor for me. Michael Barera (talk) 21:19, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 11:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

File:EmissionNebula NGC6357.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Dec 2012 at 03:51:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The star cluster Pismis 24 lies in the core of the large emission nebula NGC 6357 that extends one degree on the sky in the direction of the Scorpius constellation.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA - uploaded by Tryphon - nominated by Beria -- Béria Lima msg 03:51, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Béria Lima msg 03:51, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 09:04, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow! Tomer T (talk) 11:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportKelvinsong (talk) 15:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! Michael Barera (talk) 23:15, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:40, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing different from other NASA/ESA pictures. We have three current candidates like this one for the moment, it is enough. No wow.--Jebulon (talk) 12:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Hmmm; Astronomy is too tough for me too. But I don't want to oppose; because it reveals my ignorance. :) JKadavoor Jee 05:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, this is not 'just another NASA picture'. It's almost an abstract art work... -- MJJR (talk) 20:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
    • "Created by NASA", so, it is a NASA picture. If it is an artwork, then I was mystified, and it is a better reason for me to oppose ! Face-smile.svg --Jebulon (talk) 18:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Raghith 08:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW -- Ra'ike T C 12:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Morning (talk) 16:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful photo with definite WOW factor russavia (talk) 20:13, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 11:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Astronomy#Nebula

File:Leonardo da Vinci - Self-Portrait - WGA12798.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2012 at 08:21:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Self Portrait
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 minimum resolution is 2 MP. 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.

King of ♠ 09:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Is that not relaxable for sufficient mitigating circumstances? The picture's main concern is its notablity {in being probably the most recognised images/pictures/portraits of a very famous scientist [to say the least]} than its total technical perfection. Considering that, should this picture not be allowed a bit more cushion than, say, a picture of a similar quality but of a completely non-notable topic? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:53, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Noone disputes the notability. The endevour should be focussed on finding a source image in much better technical quality. FP is about value and high technical quality. --Slaunger (talk) 09:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think this picture should be tried as a valued image candidate. The minimum resolution of 2 MP is a reasonable expectation of FP. --Dey.sandip (talk) 08:09, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Salle de lecture Bibliotheque Sainte-Genevieve n06.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Dec 2012 at 10:37:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Jastrow - nominated by Paris 16 (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 10:37, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 10:59, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:37, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the light and shadow! Michael Barera (talk) 23:16, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 23:51, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:40, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is it just me or do we have more FP's on this subject? It looks very familiar. Kleuske (talk) 12:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
    • See also here and here Kleuske (talk)
      • The two links you provided are of a single picture; much different from this composition. But I think one FP is enough, and this feels much dark to me. So Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. JKadavoor Jee 16:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
        • Oops... Sorry. It should have been this one instead. Kleuske (talk) 12:27, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
          • Thanks; that also better than this. JKadavoor Jee 16:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Primarily because of the significantly dark, underexposed area at the upper right corner --Dey.sandip (talk) 17:54, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Existing FP-s of this subject are better. --Ivar (talk) 07:18, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Raghith 08:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bottom crop is weird and other photos of this subject are better at showing the room. --Julian H. (talk/files) 18:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMZaplotnik my contributions 16:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jkadavoor. Béria Lima msg 20:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Claus (talk) 02:35, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 17:48, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Coimbra November 2012-11.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2012 at 17:34:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Botanical Garden of Coimbra, Portugal. The tree in the foreground is a Ginkgo biloba
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Alvesgaspar - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 17:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great autumn mood and interesting tree species. --Slaunger (talk) 21:16, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good composition and colors, but the photo does not attract me, nothing special - a tree in autumn. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 20:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 20:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Cat March 2010-1a.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Dec 2012 at 23:13:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Portrait of a friend. The white background is on purpose as well as the relatively shallow dof. Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:13, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:13, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But I expect a self portrait of you in his eyes!!! JKadavoor Jee 05:34, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the unnatural background. Tomer T (talk) 16:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Tomer T. --Stryn (talk) 09:34, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the white bg :) --Muhammad (talk) 19:19, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Muhammad -- MJJR (talk) 20:57, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tomer. --Vamps (talk) 08:26, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very expressive. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 08:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't underestand why, but I like this cat --The Photographer (talk) 17:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Good portrait of a cat, but yeah that background ! --Dey.sandip (talk) 12:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Per the others opposing, the background has an adverse impact on this photo. Michael Barera (talk) 21:06, 1 December 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 04:17, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Street sign in cyrillic Skopje Samoilova.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Dec 2012 at 22:56:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Street sign in Skopje
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info uploaded by Raso mk - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:56, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:56, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The colors and the weathering on the building are great, but it doesn't have as much "wow" factor as many FPs I've seen. Still, it is quite good. Michael Barera (talk) 23:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no "wow". Ю. Данилевский (talk) 06:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the chopped window, declared subject is only a small part of the composition, which isn't very balanced nor striking on the whole. Kleuske (talk) 12:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. --Vamps (talk) 08:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ю. Данилевский, sorry --Stas1995 (talk) 09:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMZaplotnik my contributions 16:45, 2 December 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 22:59, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Red-backed Shrike (Lanius collurio).jpg

File:Iguana de Venezuela.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2012 at 00:03:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iguana iguana from Venezuela country
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- The Photographer (talk) 00:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- The Photographer (talk) 00:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You already have an existing nomination on the same subject. Agreed, this one is more of a close-up, but I prefer the other one where it shows a bit of an environment --Dey.sandip (talk) 12:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
It is not in the same place and not the same animal. Please refer to comment for this nomination and not compare it to another. Thanks :) --The Photographer (talk) 12:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If that's the case, it should be fine --Dey.sandip (talk) 11:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I like it, but it is a little low on "wow" factor. Michael Barera (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
White Iguana is rare --The Photographer (talk) 23:42, 1 December 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 16:44, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Reptiles

File:B-2 Spirit original.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2012 at 09:25:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A B-2 Spirit soars after a refueling mission over the Pacific Ocean on Tuesday, May 30, 2006. The B-2, from the 509th Bomb Wing at Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., is part of a continuous bomber presence in the Asia-Pacific region.


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 17:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Vehicles

File:Curiosity - Robot Geologist and Chemist in One!.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2012 at 15:53:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Curiosity - Robot Geologist and Chemist in One!


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 17:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Space exploration

File:Haute Couture Autumn-Winter 2010-2011 N01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 14:46:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by beyrouth (Flickr) - uploaded & nominated by Paris 16 (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 14:46, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too unsharp and noisy. Tomer T (talk) 17:06, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose by Tomer T, overprocessed in dark parts (see note for an example) --Tuxyso (talk) 18:30, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. + the clothes are probably copyrighted...--Jebulon (talk) 20:13, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Paris 16 (talk) 19:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 21:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

File:2012-11-23 16-05-52-grande-cascade-tendon.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2012 at 20:47:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grande cascade de Tendon. Photo réalisée avec un filtre ND16.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 20:47, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 20:47, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! Michael Barera (talk) 21:51, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Алый Король (talk) 05:27, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I dont like this water, it seems to be manipulated by photoshop. Ashkan P. (talk) 08:00, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    • It isn't a photoshop manipulation -- this is what water looks like if you take a 20s exposure. Colin (talk) 17:12, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
You don't have enough edits to vote. 50 edits are needed. -- JDP90 (talk) 08:31, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral No doubt a pretty picture and good use of slow shutter speed, But I am not able to see much value in it, at this point. Appologies. --Dey.sandip (talk) 08:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:55, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Cj.samson (talk) 16:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition and classic example of the use of a ND 16 filter to achieve a long exposure (20s) to blur water. Colin (talk) 17:12, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 23:46, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 14:29, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 01:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 23:10, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Burg-Anholt-Westfassade-2012.jpg

File:Cathedral of Mount Mary, Old Goa.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2012 at 07:52:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral of Mount Mary, Old Goa
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dey.sandip - uploaded by Dey.sandip - nominated by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The choice of B/W as the medium is intentional, as it provides more contrast and is suitable for the lonely/deserted mood of the place --Dey.sandip (talk) 07:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dey.sandip (talk) 15:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 21:43, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

File:GC Dunas de Maspalomas R04.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2012 at 21:11:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maspalomas Dunes, Gran Canaria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by MJJR - uploaded by MJJR - nominated by MJJR -- MJJR (talk) 21:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 21:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Extremely average composition.Fotoriety (talk) 22:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Composition, I have to agree, is rather simplistic. But the colors give this picture great "wow." -- King of ♠ 07:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 07:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Raghith 08:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 09:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JDP90 (talk) 17:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Fotoriety. There are also some technical issues (lack of crispness; on some of the clouds you can see overblown areas and red CA). Pretty, but not excellent, sorry. - A.Savin 19:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The horizon is wavy. Is it a stitch? If so, some more/better horizontal control points should probably be added? --Slaunger (talk) 22:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
    • This is not a stitch; only some lens distortion was corrected -- MJJR (talk) 15:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
      • OK, but the lens distortion correction has resulted in a distorted horizon. Maybe the correction is improvable? --Slaunger (talk) 11:22, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Long live minimalism! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:31, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 21:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the composition, the contrasts and the colors. However, I agree with A.Savin, overall sharpness is "so-so". There is a thin white sharpening line (halo) all along the horizon (+some magenta CA in the sky, and a strange spot at the horizon). But I'm sorry of this opposition.--Jebulon (talk) 18:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Stunning! Michael Barera (talk) 21:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMZaplotnik my contributions 16:44, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition--Claus (talk) 02:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 21:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Iglesia de San Ildefonso, Oporto, Portugal, 2012-05-09, DD 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2012 at 20:39:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

San Ildefonso church, Porto, Portugal
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info San Ildefonso church, Porto, Portugal. All by me, Poco a poco (talk) 20:39, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:39, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 21:01, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! Michael Barera (talk) 21:51, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice! just a question, the cross in the image has two horizontal cross, any idea what it means?--Cj.samson (talk) 14:12, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    Well, the two-barred cross is not unusual in christian buildings, but -after some quick search- I cannot tell you why the stained glass of this church has one, sorry, Poco a poco (talk) 15:25, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    In the Roman Catholic Church, three (and only three) archbishops are called "Patriarchs". They hold not a crozier, but a patriarcal cross. They are the archbishops of Jerusalem, of Venice, and... of Lisbon. It is a church in Porto and not Lisbon, but in Portugal. Maybe it is a beginning of an answer ? I don't know...--Jebulon (talk) 23:59, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    ...But the diocese of Porto is suffragan of the archdiocese of Braga, not of Lisbon...mmmhh... Needs further researches...--Jebulon (talk) 00:10, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 17:03, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 23:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dey.sandip (talk) 09:06, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 10:58, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 11:28, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:35, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good details of shadows. Slight HDR look, like it that way. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:55, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 17:22, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 23:14, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Lehise käbi.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2012 at 08:17:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Female cone of Japanese Larch
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Heiti Paves - uploaded by Heiti Paves - nominated by -- WikedKentaur (talk) 08:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- WikedKentaur (talk) 08:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support - Really nice in terms of composition and color, but the DOF is a little too shallow (the back of the cone at the top is not in focus). -- King of ♠ 09:27, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lucasbosch (talk) 09:37, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the DoF is fine but not too keen on the composition. I've uploaded an alternative. Colin (talk) 18:03, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (and I don't like the alternative crop.) Kruusamägi (talk) 21:28, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are gradation lines and dust spots in the background which should be fixed. Otherwise great, including the composition. Gidip (talk) 22:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:35, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 17:48, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:48, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vamps (talk) 07:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --H. Krisp (talk) 19:22, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support The colours are a little overdone in my opinion, but an overall excellent image. Besides, I think the composition is just right, and I like the well executed shallow depth of field. -- Nicolas Perrault III (talk) 23:53, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Please avoid using templates other than {{support}} and {{oppose}} because FPCBot dont recognize it other templates. Thanks! Béria Lima msg 21:49, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Alternative crop[edit]

Female cone of Japanese Larch

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better crop and vertical cone. -- Colin (talk) 18:03, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't agree with this crop. The cone is too far left. --King of ♠ 22:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:35, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The original one is better. --Lucasbosch (talk) 17:14, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ----Tamba52 (talk) 07:06, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 10:48, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants
The chosen alternative is: File:Lehise käbi.jpg

File:Opel Olympia Rekord P1 Kombi 2012-09-01 14-29-57.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2012 at 09:12:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

1960 Opel Olympia Rekord


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 21:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Vehicles

File:St James's Park Lake – East from the Blue Bridge - 2012-10-06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2012 at 15:03:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St James's Park Lake – East from the Blue Bridge - 2012-10-06
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Colin - uploaded by Colin - nominated by Colin -- Colin (talk) 15:03, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A popular tourist spot, the Blue Bridge on the lake at St James's Park offers a view of many London landmarks. See the image description page for details of the view, which is in 74MP of detail. -- Colin (talk) 15:03, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail, nice sky. -- King of ♠ 22:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 11:26, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice serene view, like it. --Dey.sandip (talk) 14:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:18, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:35, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Béria Lima msg 18:13, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--JDP90 (talk) 13:49, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Despite some noise in the dark parts (see water), and maybe a little bit oversharpening, but very good picture for the FP gallery, for sure !--Jebulon (talk) 15:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 17:16, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 16:05, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Tombs inside Jama Masjid complex.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2012 at 20:16:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tombs inside Jama Masjid complex, Fatehpur Sikri
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u/n by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 20:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 20:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The window is overexposed --The Photographer (talk) 12:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Yes, agree that the window is slightly overexposed, but had no choice. My goal was to expose the interior properly and the only light source was the light coming from the window. HDR was not a possibility, because usage of tripod is not allowed in ASI protected monuments. The brightness around the window can possibly be selectively reduced, but since the over-exposure is not too intrusive, I would like to leave it as it is, in order to maintain the realistic feel of the photograph (i.e. the captured image tries to represent the reality of the then conditions as close as possible) --Dey.sandip (talk) 13:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I've had similar problems in places where it is not allowed tripod. In these cases, I perform two photographs from the same place, one taking the brightness of the window and the other with the ambient brightness. Later, I created two layers in gimp overlap the window, erasing the overexposed layer, only the section of the window. e.g. Interior de la Basilica de la Chinita.jpg. There are always options, the only limitation is your imagination ;) --The Photographer (talk) 13:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
    • I don't deny that multiple exposures is not an option :) But then, it involves extensive post-processing and the whole thing gets into the domain of Digital Retouching. Okay, now there can be a lot of debate about the usage of softwares and to what extent it is acceptable. I'm not getting into that kind of discussion. Everyone has their own views on the subject, and its really upto the photographer. But my personal preference is only to do minimal post processing and minor corrections and use as less softwares as possible. This is the best that I could achieve in this photo, but I appreciate your views on the photograph :) --Dey.sandip (talk) 14:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting. I like it despite the overexposed window part, and the suboptimal shooting conditions. Surprised there is not more noise considering the ISO. Surprised the DOF is so good considering the aperture.... --Slaunger (talk) 21:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment f8 at 18mm will give you a hyperfocal distance probable from 2-3 meters to infinity, so if focused appropriately, as here, there should be n DOF issues... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overexposed window and right side tomb is cutoff --Cj.samson (talk) 15:36, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Week support The lighting isn't ideal, but overall I really like this photo. Michael Barera (talk) 21:25, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination As it fails to excite the community :). Thanks to those who took their time to review. Appreciated --Dey.sandip (talk) 07:49, 4 December 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 21:45, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Lord's Cricket Stadium Panoramic.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2012 at 01:02:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lord's Cricket Ground



Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 21:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Exterior of Sultan Ahmed I Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 002.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2012 at 16:39:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bleu Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey.


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 17:14, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Georg Schütte (2012).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2012 at 17:09:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Georg Schütte at the panel discussion of the Lindau Nobel Laureatte Meeeting
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Morray - uploaded by Morray - nominated by Morray -- Morray (talk) 17:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- Morray (talk) 17:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose The subject's body language is great, but overall there isn't enough "wow" factor here for me to see this as an FP. Michael Barera (talk) 21:48, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The low angle of view emphasizes the legs instead of the head. Gidip (talk) 07:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What has he got growing out of his face. Distracting. Colin (talk) 17:00, 2 December 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 13:52, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Harris's Hawk Parabuteo unicinctus (Temminck 1824).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 00:12:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 07:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Birds

File:Jack Goldstone.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2012 at 06:45:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jack A. Goldstone, an American sociologist and political scientist
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Marit Hommedal - uploaded by Алый Король - nominated by Алый Король -- Алый Король (talk) 06:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Алый Король (talk) 06:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg clear oppose: I see nothing interesting with this photo neither from a technical nor from portraiture perspective. Technical the photo in unsharp and/or a lot of NR was performed. Interesting details (e.g. the arm watch) are very unsharp (and I think not due to DoF but due to NR). For me the motive (man in suit in front of a microphone) evokes no "Wow", nothing really charaterizes him as a professor of sociology, could also be any business man. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:51, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
    • I am really wandering, WHAT can charaterizes him as a professor of sociology? have you ever seen these FP: this, this and this?--Алый Король (talk) 12:59, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
      • For example a speech in front of a blackboard or with students in the background of an auditorium. The way the professor is photographed here is (just my personal impression) boring business appearance. E.g. in this way: [2] or [3]. For your example [4] I had written the same as for your photo (for me there are several other reasons why it is definitely not FP. Sometimes it is curious for me how strict the assesments with nature photography are, whereas a portrayal is FP just if it is sharp and has a smooth bokeh). With Carla Bruni [5] and Solana [6] is is very different: The person her or himself is prominient and not prominent for what they've done. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:12, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose: Per Tuxyso, mainly because his tie is in focus but his face isn't. --Julian H. (talk/files) 11:11, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The subject's expression isn't bad, but there isn't any real "wow" factor for me here. Michael Barera (talk) 21:44, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Expression & overall composition are OK to me, but technically the image misses COM:Image guidelines. - A.Savin 20:21, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 13:50, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Senor de villaseca facade.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2012 at 21:51:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:51, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:51, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Perspective problem, I'm sorry --The Photographer (talk) 01:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perspective problem? Of course there will be a convergence of lines, the degree of them depends on the distance camera-subject, focal length, etc., which will give you an angle, thus perspective. Even the use of a crane to center "something" would yield a perspective towards the outside of the center, which would in turn be an unnatural view of the buiding. This is the top of the church door, so the perspective rendered is somewhat normal... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:57, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
If you stand far enough away from the structure you can take the picture so that the columns are displayed right and thus give a sense of uniformity. Mr. Tomas, I'm not sure, I would have liked to see more of the columns and not that feeling like they were cut, also a little over the top. --The Photographer (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Of course, but the problem is that there is no space in front to back off... I took the picture as far back as possible, beyond me there were stairs, a gate and a tree that obstructed the view. As far as the cropping, one has to determine the sections in such a manner that one has a "complete" "partial" story. Details in architecture are common and they demand thoughtful cropping. I think I achieved this. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:06, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your clarification, I've run into similar problems, what I do is an panoramic, and then modify the perspective. Use a wide-angle lens is an option. Nice shoot --The Photographer (talk) 13:33, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Software can "fix" perspective "distortion" by stretching but no software can change the angle-of-view from below-the-subject to perpedicular-to-the-subject. This is clearly shot from below and that can't be fixed with any software. Some of our building shots, with perfect verticals, look weird because they are still shot from close up and below. The only solution is to get further away and/or higher up, to approach the perpendicular angle-of-view. But if the ground slopes down or there are obstacles in the way, there is no solution. One may consider that the artist deliberately wanted us to "look up" at this facade, in worship. Colin (talk) 13:59, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Agree with Colin. Angle of view in itself gives us a perspective. The recent tendency to "correct" perspective in my opinion is an abuse of technological resources, the fact that the option is there does not meann one has to use it all the time. Perspective, up and down and side to side occurs naturally and it is affected by several factors: distance camera-subject, focal length and angle of view, etc. To try to "fix" up and down perspective, which gives us a visual sense of distance, height etc., is just as ridiculous to try to "fix" lateral perspective that gives us a sense of depth. In some cases correcting a little converging vertical lines that result from wide angle lenses, and thus a distorted view, works in order to render a more natural look, when a natural look is desired. In this particular case, the converging lines are in tune with the natural way one would see the subject (see the focal length) in person. In some architectural shots parallel lines may be desire in order to give a more dramatic view. The best way anyhow to correct perspective distortion is through the use of perspective correction lenses or view cameras with tilt/shift/rise/fall. Sofware correction, in my opinion, most of the time works as a gimmick. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:34, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm no expert but my understanding is that perspective control lenses can't perform the magic trick of fixing the angle-of-view either. If you are only able to see the bottom of a gargoyle then there's no lens in the world will let you look it straight in the eye. A periscope perhaps? The perspective control lens has two advantages over software. Firstly, the software stretching will result in resolution loss. Which is why some stitched building images benefit from a little downsizing. Secondly, since the camera is pointed upwards, and a standard (rectilinear) lens has a flat plane of focus that is parallel to the sensor, one can't get the whole building in focus when tilting other than relying on a large depth-of-field. I dare say, however, that such lenses have their own distortions, limitations, and they are expective. The perspective fixing feature in Photoshop/Lightroom isn't very clever compared to Hugin. "Ye cannae break the laws o' physics!" -- Colin (talk) 15:55, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
The angle of view remains the same, but what is important is how the image is recorded and the optical process. Basically perspective control lennses and view cameras allow for the film plane to be parallel to the subject plane, and the image travels in a diagonal manner. The center of the lens is not centered to the film plane but offset, and the subject plane and the film place are parallel, thus maintaining the verticals pretty much the way the brain sees them. There is a good article here #[[7]] and here #[[8]]. In any case, perspective control with a rise movement either with perspective control lenses or view cameras is entirely different than perspective control with software. Software will stretch pixels and the affected areas will not have the same resolution across the film plane. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Interesting, thanks for your links and analysis. I'm just starting out in photography seriously. I can not vote because I'm not sure, sorry. When I vote for something is when there is no doubt that it is an excellent job, obviously I am wrong, I will carefully review your links and learn a little --The Photographer (talk) 00:38, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- VolodymyrF 08:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting facade captured in detail. I agree with Tomascastelazo that the view from below is natural. Looking online (e.g., this) shows the whole front is interesting and hard to decide where to crop without cutting something. A single shot of the whole facade would not be as detailed as this one (a stitched image would be necessary) so one has to choose between capturing detail vs the whole. -- Colin (talk) 13:23, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice detailed shot, the perspective is natural IMHO, so I'm okay with it. --Dey.sandip (talk) 14:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Béria Lima msg 18:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 19:16, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with Colin. Maybe could you denoise a little bit ?--Jebulon (talk) 14:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting --Stas1995 (talk) 16:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 16:57, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:37, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Spb 06-2012 Chesme Church.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 11:17:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chesme Church in Saint Petersburg, Russia


Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 18:28, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Święto Niepodległości Warszawa 2012 30.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2012 at 19:13:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Plogi - uploaded by Plogi - nominated by Plogi -- Plogi (talk) 19:13, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Plogi (talk) 19:13, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I don't like how the people in the lower portion of the photo have their faces cut off by the crop. Michael Barera (talk) 21:50, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sharpness issues, english description. --Dey.sandip (talk) 10:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)



Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 13:52, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Image:Exploding E Match.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2012 at 16:24:17 (UTC)
This image shows an exploding e match that is widely used in pyrotechnics for a controlled ignition.

Exploding e match, that is used in pyrotechnics.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lucasbosch - uploaded by Lucasbosch - nominated by Lucasbosch -- Lucasbosch (talk) 16:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice image! Michael Barera (talk) 21:46, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I can't see how a grey-scale version makes this feature-worthy?!Fotoriety (talk) 23:12, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I made it grey-scale because the colored version doesn't add much to the overall image. The sparks itself would stay white and the background would have a slightly brown color. --Lucasbosch (talk) 09:40, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background. And no reason for black and white. If it was a colourful background, we could tell the sparks were white, but this just shows they are bright. Composition is messy. Colin (talk) 16:58, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I can't help with the composition, but I've uploaded the colored version of this. I hope this is better. --Lucasbosch (talk) 19:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    • It doesn't help as beige isn't colourful. And I think your colour temp is wrong. Colin (talk) 20:29, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done The color temperature has been corrected. --Lucasbosch (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 23:23, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Khaled el Masri, Haute couture Spring-Summer 2010.jpg, withdrawn[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2012 at 21:41:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Beyrouth (Flickr) - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 21:41, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too much noise Béria Lima msg 21:46, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
What noise? I see no noise. Colin (talk) 21:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
The dark background areas do have a lot of colour noise. Since the rest of the picture is relatively noise-free, it might be an editing problem. --Julian H. (talk/files) 08:39, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Copyright problem ?--Jebulon (talk) 00:09, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Personally I do not like this picture. --Llorenzi (talk) 10:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Paris 16 (talk) 11:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Fibroblastid (BPAE).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2012 at 18:53:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fibroblasts
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Heiti Paves - nominated by Ivo Kruusamägi -- Kruusamägi (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 19:55, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Refreshing topic. I believe an FP should be able to tell its own story, but for the layman it is very hard to understand what is going on here. The two blobs of green color are also esthetically pretty terrible IMO. The English translation on the image page could use some elaborations, such a description of the meaning of the colors and an identification of where we see what. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 21:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient description, can't understand what the photo is about. The green blobs look over-saturated though this is a scientific photo, so not quite sure. --Dey.sandip (talk) 12:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Good, but not enough "wow" factor in my opinion. Michael Barera (talk) 21:15, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --H. Krisp (talk) 19:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cyrfaw (Talk) 07:57, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 23:13, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Kosmoloog Arved Sapar..jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2012 at 18:53:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cosmologist Arved Sapar
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Lauri Kulpsoo - nominated by Ivo Kruusamägi -- Kruusamägi (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Frankly, I'm confused about the choice of the setting. Perhaps it's a pretty shot for a photo album or a framed portrait, but I miss a real encyclopedic value. The quality is good nevertheless. - A.Savin 20:04, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
    • As far as I understand a machine-translated version of the Estonian Wikipedia article regarding this atrophysicist, the photo is taken in a field close to an observatory, which might be the context, although this is not apparent from the photo. A COM:FPC does not need to have encyclopedic value, but educational/informational value is a broader sense, and I think it has. --Slaunger (talk) 22:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The photo lacked categories, and I have created Category:Arved Sapar. I do not understand much of the Esstonian article about this person, so other parent categories to that new category may be needed. --Slaunger (talk) 22:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An eye-catcing and interesting portrait. Interesting birds perpective, the yellow rape-seed field surroundings, the scientist in suit. The light, composition and expression is good. I like it. --Slaunger (talk) 22:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Slaunger. It makes me smile. Kleuske (talk) 23:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hmm. A breath of fresh air. I like it! -- King of ♠ 04:50, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I like its boldness. —Bruce1eetalk 05:34, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nice picture, but confusing - because from looking at it I thought he is a botanist. Tomer T (talk) 09:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
    • I have been thinking about this photo during the day and the setting makes sense to me now. I see the rape-seed field as an analog to the universe. One of the most important things you learn if you are into cosmology is that the universe on a large scale is isotropic and homogeneous. That is, all galaxies and clusters of galaxies are evenly spread on a large cosmological length scale. Just like a flowering rape-seed field seen from a distance. Everything is yellow (isotropic) and nomatter which direction you look at, the field looks the same (homogeneous). Yet, on a smaller scale, there is structure (galaxies and clusters of galaxies). I think of each plant as a cluster of galaxies, and each leaf and flower as a galaxy. Each plant share the same overall structure, yet has individual differences. A rape-seed field is just like the universe. Quite an adequate scene for a cosmologist. --Slaunger (talk) 19:50, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
            • wow !Clin--Jebulon (talk) 17:55, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
              • Or maybe he just fancies yellow! Clin --Slaunger (talk) 21:40, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Still, to get to this conclusion, you need to know he's a cosmologist. Without knowing it, you'd probably think he's a botanist or something. I decided to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Tomer T (talk) 04:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
        • I can see that "rape-seed field is just like the universe" analogy being used in a TV doc or science magazine and would work in the context where that argument is being made explictly in the voiceover or text. It would then be a great visual aid to help folk remember the point being made. A good image. But without that context, the "Comsmologist in rape-seed field" image just becomes an illustation for the dictionary definition of "incongruous". Colin (talk) 10:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 10:25, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- per Tomar T. I am confused whether its a portrait, a portrait with the subject in its environment or what exactly? At this point, not able to see anything beyond a framed picture or something. --Dey.sandip (talk) 11:33, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose <rant>Not bold. Just daft. An image for folk with no attention span or interest in the subject. Reminds me of the popular science programs on TV where they can't just film some fascinating scientist's head and shoulders and leave us to listen to what he has to say. They have to add vignetting and fake tilt-shift effects and zoom in on a close-up of his hands or fly him at great expense to Patagonia so he can stand silhouetted on some desert mountain...</rant> Colin (talk) 13:17, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak Oppose: Per Colin, or at least in that direction. --Julian H. (talk/files) 17:28, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
    • To be more precise: I think the setting makes sense. But I find it difficult to even look at the subject due to the very high saturation of what's not really only a background. --Julian H. (talk/files) 20:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 19:55, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tomar T. --Алый Король (talk) 05:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC)--Алый Король (talk) 05:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Good photo, though I am a bit confused by the subject and the setting. Michael Barera (talk) 21:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Athanasius Soter (talk) 09:19, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tomer T--Claus (talk) 02:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cyrfaw (Talk) 07:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 23:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Historisch park Heremastate. Achterste vijver 2.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2012 at 16:11:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nederlands: Achterste vijver in historisch park Heremastate in de herfst.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info English: Loosely translated: rear Heremastate pond in historical park in autumn.

famberhorst - uploaded by famberhorst - nominated by famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:11, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:11, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice reflections and intersting colors. But: The burn out sky is too disturbing for me. HDR technique had possibly helped here. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Tuxyso and looks overprocessed in high resolution. --Slaunger (talk) 19:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice colors, but over-exposed sky and a bit of over-processing --Dey.sandip (talk) 06:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination famberhorst

File:Paddenstoel op els.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 17:11:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nederlands: Paddenstoel als een vogel op de stam van een afgezaagde els.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info English: Loosely translated: Mushroom like a bird on the trunk of a cut alder.

famberhorst - uploaded by famberhorst - nominated by famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:11, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:11, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:57, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose An interesting find, but the mushroom isn't that sharp and the composition and lighting not at feature-pic levels. Colin (talk) 20:51, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lots of noise, imperfect colours. -- Nicolas Perrault III (talk) 23:48, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background. --Lucasbosch (talk) 11:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mist soortnaam en geen adequate categorisatie.  B.p. 12:55, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination famberhorst

File:Metronom ME-146-18 Zug der Ideen.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2012 at 01:17:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Metronom ME-146-18 Zug der Ideen
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak Oppose: Contrast too high (a lot is lost in the black areas, some slightly clipped whites), WB slightly off towards blueness (not a big problem), but mainly I don't really find the composition very special or appealing, which is of course very subjective. --Julian H. (talk/files) 11:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian H. --Dey.sandip (talk)
    • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral for the new uploaded version --Dey.sandip (talk) 16:43, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support There is a bit of a contrast issue, but overall I still like it. Michael Barera (talk) 21:42, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for the informations by Julian_Herzog, Dey.sandip and Michael Barera. I made a better update with color balance, less contrast, less blue and correct white. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:31, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 08:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition doesn't inspire me. -- Colin (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:22, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

File:CoA of later Ferdinand I Holy Roman Emperor as King of the Romans 1536 Hofburg Wien Austria.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2012 at 16:18:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 16:18, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The CoA of the later Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, brother of Emperor Charles V as king of the Romans, of Hungary, of Bohemia, and Archduke of Austria, in 1536. Please notice the Golden Fleece order collar. Schweizertrakt, Amalienburg Courtyard, Hofburg palace, Vienna, Austria.This is a re-nomination of a better version of a previously withdrawn candidacy -- Jebulon (talk) 16:18, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High quality shot in a very plain and straightforward style. Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Peter Weis. Michael Barera (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Athanasius Soter (talk) 09:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 22:38, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality and seems valuable too --Dey.sandip (talk) 13:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:48, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cyrfaw (Talk) 07:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 18:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Gentau Pic du Midi Ossau.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2012 at 11:49:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Gentau reflecting the Pic du Midi d'Ossau (Pyrénées-Atlantiques, France).
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Myrabella - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 11:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 11:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Some noise, dark or very light areas (high contrast), slightly blurred areas, however, prominent enough and very nice composition imho --The Photographer (talk) 12:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Not very sharp, but excellent "wow" factor. -- King of ♠ 14:06, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A good composition, a lucky cloud and a nice reflection makes a "wow" factor happy. --Selbymay (talk) 20:40, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Absolutely lovely composition. But exposure-wise it looks weird washed out, especially in the area around the white cows. As if they were originally overexposed and blown, then brightness reduced and postprocessed. The histogram also has an unexpected discontinuity in the high end. --Slaunger (talk) 21:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 21:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - A.Savin 21:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - sharpness issues at certain areas, although no denial, its a lovely composition --Dey.sandip (talk) 22:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful landscape and composition, especially the reflection of the small cloud and and cows in the foreground makes it very special. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per Slaunger, per supporters and per opposer.--Jebulon (talk) 17:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice composition --Cj.samson (talk) 19:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you, Tomer T, for this unexpected nomination :) --Myrabella (talk) 21:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:41, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful location, beautiful colors! Michael Barera (talk) 21:25, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot. --Moonik (talk) 00:36, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:47, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cyrfaw (Talk) 08:00, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 18:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Jaani kirik Talvel.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2012 at 18:10:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. John's Church and War of Independence Victory Column
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rene Suurkaev - uploaded by Rene Suurkaev - nominated by -- WikedKentaur (talk) 18:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- WikedKentaur (talk) 18:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice Winter atmosphere, but I think there are a few things, which are not spot on for FP. I think the crop is too tight, expecially at the top, the composition is quite good, but not excellent, especially the right hand side is a little weak with some image clutter of distracting elements and the mix between centered and third-of-rulish elements does not work well for me. Perhaps a little to much fog obscuring the elements, on the other hand it adds to the winter atmosphere. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • strong Symbol support vote.svg Support It is a work of art. A little surreal, but exciting and interesting. Nice with a picture that is not taken on a beautiful summer with saturated blue sky.--ArildV (talk) 21:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Would have liked a bit of space around the subject. Crop is too tight. --Dey.sandip (talk) 12:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think exactly the same as Slaunger. IMO, it is leaning a bit ccw too.--Jebulon (talk) 17:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The crop is too tight, but other than that it is a great photo. Michael Barera (talk) 21:27, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Athanasius Soter (talk) 09:11, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wonderful scene, yet unfortunately dull colors. A night shot of this would be much better. --Aktron (talk) 10:51, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support To Aktron: there are plenty of night shots but they don't show thisarea that well and with this frosty weather these are rather good colors (and they help to show that it was cold). Kruusamägi (talk) 21:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Tomer T (talk) 11:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 18:42, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Theatre of Ostia Antica.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2012 at 16:43:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Theatre in Ostia Antica.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Kleuske -- Kleuske (talk) 16:43, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Kleuske (talk) 16:43, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment At this point, I fail to see much beyond some steps and a pigeon. Is there anything specific, that I'm missing ? --Dey.sandip (talk) 18:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Quite a lot, actually. See Ostia Antica. Kleuske (talk) 11:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
      • I think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ostia._Theatrum.JPG shows the environment better --Dey.sandip (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
        • I think you're joking. This isn't about the environment or the tourists. This is about the theatre. Kleuske (talk) 23:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
          • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral May be I am more enlightened now about the subject. But I would have liked if the photo itself had some feature or characteristic to highlight the importance. Simply looking at it, does not really tell much about the significance of the place to a casual viewer. --Dey.sandip (talk) 11:46, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe because I'm European, I understand Kleuske's purpose very well (and I like this minimalism very much).--Jebulon (talk) 17:58, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support It looks good, but I have to agree with Dey.sandip: the focus is too close. A broader perspective would have been better. Michael Barera (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like abstract forms but this fails to reach FP imo. The pigeon is a big flaw. The lighting is shadowless and not particularly flattering. The 4:3 crop doesn't seem to suit. Colin (talk) 15:58, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Strange. The pidgeon is what made this picture interesting in my mind. The image isn't cropped. Kleuske (talk) 00:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Crop/frame same difference. The sensor crops reality. Colin (talk) 08:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow" effect for me, sorry --Stas1995 (talk) 17:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 18:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Barcelona - Farola Avenida Gaudi.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 20:40:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Barcelona - Farola Avenida Gaudi


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 23:17, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Berg December 2012.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 17:45:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama of Berg, a village at Möja island, Stockholm archipelago
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panorama of Berg, a village at Möja island, Stockholm archipelago. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 17:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 17:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very typical nordic landscape in winter, implemented in a well stitched, high-resolution pano. Good work! --A.Savin 20:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 22:02, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 23:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Аркадий Зарубин (talk) 01:51, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Moonik (talk) 08:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:36, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--JDP90 (talk) 13:45, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- VolodymyrF 14:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 16:45, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:57, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 19:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 20:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Kürbis () 19:55, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cyrfaw (Talk) 07:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It looks to be a beautiful place, and photographer does it justice for sure :) - Benh (talk) 19:51, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tamba52 (talk) 07:08, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--impressive clarity across the image Almonroth (talk) 23:43, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 23:16, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Panoramas

File:Gusseinserne Kolonnade Marianske Lazne.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 18:52:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Colonnade in Mariánské Lázně
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Harke - uploaded by Harke - nominated by Harke -- Harke (talk) 18:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Harke (talk) 18:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak Oppose Don't find much in the composition, not much "wow" --Dey.sandip (talk) 06:28, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow" effect --Stas1995 (talk) 12:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 23:17, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Mesa Arch, Canyonlands.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2012 at 20:49:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by snowpeak - uploaded by snowpeak - nominated by Till (talk) 20:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Till (talk) 20:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --King of ♠ 20:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Obviously huge wow and it looks really great in preview. But already at 2Mpixels it begins to look overprocessed with posterized cliffs and chroma noise in the sky. At full res, the problems are very apparent. I had a look at the creators own comment regarding the shot on flickr, where he says "...I worked a lot on it because I forgot to use the tripod and also didn't set the exposure right. Paying for my sins, so to speak. All those other tourists that were there blocking the shot got me all flustered!". It explains why it looks so processed. --Slaunger (talk) 21:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request A geocode would be helpful and add value to the image page. --Slaunger (talk) 21:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 21:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Slaunger, at full resolution certainly looks a lot over-processed. --Dey.sandip (talk) 22:01, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great composition, great moment to choose. Sadly the holes near the top of the arch look dreadful in full resolution. Kleuske (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger. –Makele-90 (talk) 06:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just too many flaws. Shame. Colin (talk) 12:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for the obvious reasons. --Julian H. (talk/files) 15:11, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose The colors and the idea are great, but there are just too many flaws, as already pointed out. Unfortunate. Michael Barera (talk) 21:29, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger. --El Grafo (talk) 12:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Béria Lima msg 23:15, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Torre del Oro flag Seville Spain.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 17:20:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Did you see the young lady with the flag ?
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me-- Jebulon (talk) 17:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Torre del Oro, famous landmark of Seville, Spain.-- Jebulon (talk) 17:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice and hight quality--Miguel Bugallo 20:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tell me, how did you arrange the lady to hold the Spanish flag to improve your shot? :) Poco a poco (talk) 08:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
    • "Keep your secret, secret", but it was very expansive...Clin. In real: she was there, and I was here. With my camera.--Jebulon (talk) 14:41, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 16:47, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:57, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 19:29, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Simple but nice. - A.Savin 19:48, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 20:49, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That flag really improves the image. Kudos ! --Dey.sandip (talk) 06:51, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Kürbis () 19:56, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 09:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:47, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Moonik (talk) 08:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima msg 23:15, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Cell Cycle—Animal Cell.svg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2012 at 21:17:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Diagram I drew of the Cell Cycle
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by KelvinsongKelvinsong (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportKelvinsong (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice diagram. Info looks correct, at least by what I remember from high school biology. -- King of ♠ 22:45, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done, however, the colors are very loose, I suggest darkening in some areas it is difficult to read the text. I'm sorry. Look better now --The Photographer (talk) 22:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Agree on the text-color. Kleuske (talk) 00:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Not sure what you mean. Can you be more specific?—Kelvinsong (talk) 01:01, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Light colored texts on a white background makes for difficult reading, especially if you are vision-impaired. I would much prefer somewhat darker colors. Kleuske (talk) 12:33, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Info Alright, I've darkened some of the text now. —Kelvinsong (talk) 01:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 11:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated

File:Durga Puja Preparations.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2012 at 16:46:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Durga Puja and Preparations
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 16:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 16:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cyrfaw (Talk) 07:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Personally I do not like this picture. --Llorenzi (talk) 10:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks, but will you be kind enough to explain the reasons for not liking ? Objective feedback will be more useful to me --Dey.sandip (talk) 10:41, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
      • May if only the "statue" in the backgroud was highlighted... I ll vote for the picture, but in this case it seems very distracting what happens in the foregroud.--Llorenzi (talk) 17:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
        • The background statue is the idol of Goddess Durga. The activities in the foreground show the preparations of a "Puja" and is an essential element of the photo. The people are priests. The intention was to include the activities to give a sense of the puja preparations. The idol is still highlighted with directional yellow light. --Dey.sandip (talk) 17:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This image could use a bit of perspective correction. Kleuske (talk) 12:59, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
    • I don't have a tool for Perspective correction, neither I have any experience in fixing perspective. If you or anyone else wants to do this, you are welcome to post a new version :) --Dey.sandip (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As it's an interesting picture, I did try to correct the perspective but the crop is too tight, we lose a lot of elements doing it. --Selbymay (talk) 22:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks for trying the Perspective correction. This photo was shot using a ultra-wide lens from a very tight spot to accomodate all of the foreground elements. Hence the presence perspective which I personally don't find much of a problem --Dey.sandip (talk) 06:57, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Not enough "wow" factor for me. Michael Barera (talk) 03:08, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the assessment --Dey.sandip (talk) 09:36, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 11:59, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Katya Gordon.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2012 at 10:59:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Taya Nevskaya - uploaded by Александр Сигачёв - nominated by A.Savin 10:59, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Professional studio shot of a notable Russian TV host. - A.Savin 10:59, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose: Commons definitely profits from professional studio photographs of celebrities. But for a "professional shot" there are two notably problems with hightlights on the skin (see notes). It is normal in portraiture that one side of the face is brighter than the other one, but espcially the hightlight on the forehead is too disturbing for me, probably a result of the slightly too low position of the main light. After dodging (if possible), pro from me. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
    • It comes apparently from the studio flashlight. Sadly, I cannot follow your expectations. - A.Savin 18:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
      • Why not, do you diagress with my editing suggestion or my observation? Or are you not allowed to edit? --Tuxyso (talk) 20:29, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Photography aside, I fail to see the value of featuring a portrait of a "notable" local celebrity. I think that the celebrity status should be reserved to those who make advances in science, the arts, politics, etc, that have a universal reach and who generate a universal agreement. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:17, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Here is not Wikipedia and here we have no discussions on notability. Besides, this image is curently being used in a Wikipedia article. Are all of your FPC's being used somewhere? - A.Savin 19:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
      • What is the featurable characteristic of this photograph then? Why then characterize this shot as as a professional shot of a notable Russian TV host, if notability is not an issue. The proposal then should be a professional shot of a Russian TV host. As a portrait of a person, not considering her notabiility, it is of marginal quality from the photographc point of view, that is, there is no extraordinary craftsmanship, and the portrait tells me absolutely nothing of who this person is, what she does, nor the field where she is "notable.". This photograph is undistinguishable from zillions of pictures of ordinary people. A portrait of a person? Try this #[[10]] --Tomascastelazo (talk) 07:40, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An attractive subject photographed well. The hightlights identified by Tuxyso don't bother me and fashion photography often has the face evenly light. The notability of the subject is a matter for their Wikipedia article, not Commons FP. Colin (talk) 22:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose First of all, nothing interesting and intriguing: neither subject, nor composition, just girl and white background. I don't like unnatural studio background, especially white background, it's real shame. Beside, per Tomascastelazo, it does not reveal much to me about the person, who is she, what is inside, and thus it does not give a huge reading on my wow-o-meter. --Алый Король (talk) 09:12, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose The subject's expression is great, but there just isn't enough "wow" factor here, in my opinion. Michael Barera (talk) 21:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 11:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Стрельба из лука.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2012 at 23:20:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Shooting from the Buryat bow. Balzhinima Tsyrempilov.


Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 11:57, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Cathedral & Capilla Real Granada Spain.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2012 at 19:00:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me (with the kind help of Alonzo Cano, Diego de Siloë etc...)--Jebulon (talk) 19:00, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination The Cathedral of Granada (1505-1703) and the Capilla Real, (where are buried the Catholic Monarchs), as seen from "Torre de la Vela" of Alhambra, Spain.--Jebulon (talk) 19:00, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technical quality is good. But, almost monotonic color tone throughout the image, the capilla real is somewhat indistinguishable from the rest of the buildings and overall nothing much is holding my attention, composition wise. The presence of one or two strong focus points may have had worked. --Dey.sandip (talk) 19:36, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. Tomer T (talk) 20:35, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like as well ;) Béria Lima msg 23:26, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Per Dey.sandip: not enough contrast or "wow" factor. Michael Barera (talk) 03:28, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too chaotic, can barely even tell what it is at thumbnail size.—Kelvinsong (talk) 03:34, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Picture taken at wrong time of day. Earlier or later, depending on sun´s direction, you could get a lot of texture and volume, making the picture more interesting. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 04:45, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I was thinking the same thing as Tomascastelazo when I saw this. INeverCry 07:41, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination No chance this time... Thank you all for feedbacks !--Jebulon (talk) 11:18, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Grüttpark - Winter2.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2012 at 14:59:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lörrach: Park "Grütt" in wintertime
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Taxiarchos228 - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 14:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 14:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose All I see are couple of benches covered in snow, otherwise the image doesn't say much to me. The snow of the benches are back-lit, would have liked it light was falling on them. Nothing special composition wise as well. Sorry. --Dey.sandip (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- As per Dey.sandip.Fotoriety (talk) 22:37, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not enough "wow" factor for me. Michael Barera (talk) 03:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, photographhing white is difficult, but this is pretty decent. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 04:47, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Dey.sandip and Michael Barera. INeverCry 07:42, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 14:18, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Peacock Pansy, Burdwan, West Bengal, India 05 12 2012 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2012 at 08:09:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Peacock Pansy (Junonia almana) is a species of nymphalid butterfly found in South Asia. Taken at Burdwan, West Bengal, India. Created / uploaded / nominated by JDP90 (talk) 08:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stas1995 (talk) 10:05, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose The last pinch of sharpness is missing for me. We have a lot of butterfly photos in FP, I think the use of a dedicated macro lens had made this photo FP. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 12:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose I find this photo of this species to have more vivid blues and reds than most (if not all) others on Wiki. However, composition, sharpness and overall saturation seem slightly lacking. Sorry.Fotoriety (talk) 23:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unsharp. --Lucasbosch (talk) 12:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the picture, I just wish there was a bit more contrast—it's too washed out. —Kelvinsong (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Per Fotoriety and Kelvinsong. Michael Barera (talk) 03:05, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the reviews.


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /JDP90 (talk) 18:07, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Entrance Hall of Mr Chas. Green's house, Savannah Ga, now occupied as Head Quarters by Gen Sherman.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2012 at 17:08:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Entrance Hall of Mr Chas. Green's house, Savannah Ga, now occupied as Head Quarters by Gen Sherman


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 20:10, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Manastir Dobrun, Republika Srpska.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2012 at 15:47:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dobrun monastery, Republika Srpska, BiH
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 15:47, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 15:47, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice colors, but the crop is too tight at the bottom, a little bit more of the road could have been shown. Right now, it gives a sense of discontinuity. Also the buildings probably needed a bit more breathing