Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/July 2014

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

Contents

File:Coenonympha arcania LC0349.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2014 at 17:22:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Coenonympha arcania
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Pearly Heath (Coenonympha arcania); created, uploaded and nominated by Jörg Hempel
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LC-de (talk) 17:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 06:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 06:33, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --07:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)Merops (talk) 07:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 1. f/5 for shooting butterfly??? 2. Tornal area of hindwing is blur. Unacceptable for an FP. Entire butterfly should be in focus, except for blur antennae which is normal. 3. Not parallel/level = No wow. --Graphium 01:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Sometimes, situation demands bigger aperture to get enough sharpness in natural light. The choice of aperture depends on many factors, including backdrops. The blurred hind wing is "alignment" problem. I agree with you on "must be parallel". (As far as I know a 150mm (300mm eqv.) on E5 is an excellent combination for macros.) Jee 03:17, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:00, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods

File:New York Midtown Skyline at night - Jan 2006 edit1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2014 at 17:55:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Manhattan skyline at night
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Mfield - nominated by Mono -- —Mono (how to reply) 17:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Featured on Wikipedia.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono (how to reply) 17:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 06:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 13:15, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 14:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 4 megapixel pano, no wow.--Claus (talk) 03:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. I understand Claus's concerns, but apparently we don't have a similar picture of better resolution. (I'm actually quite surprised given how popular it is as a tourist destination.) We have File:NYC Top of the Rock Pano.jpg but it's a different location and time of day. --King of ♠ 01:03, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 21:28, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 4 megapixels is more than enough for my screen. --Uberprutser (talk) 16:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid I don't like Mfield's alteration of File:New York Midtown Skyline at night - Jan 2006.jpg, which seems fairly crude. The 4MP image wasn't considered large enough by some in 2008 at en:fp never mind 2014 (It was downsampled for technical reasons rather than in order to make a miserly donation). While I'd have no problem retaining this as an FP today (esp if no better has been taken) I don't think this represents the state of the art today. -- Colin (talk) 18:37, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Just to comment on the technicals of the image, it's not easy to shoot this scene hand-held (tripods are not allowed to be used), perhaps that's why we don't have a better image. A 1/40th second exposure at f/1/8 and ISO 800 is actually significantly darker than this image. It was brightened in post and downsampled as the noise was objectionable (as Colin mentioned, for technical reasons). Diliff (talk) 21:03, 28 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:10 Upper Bank Street in London, spring 2013.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2014 at 22:02:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

10 Upper Bank Street, London
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Chmee2 - uploaded by Chmee2 - nominated by Chase me ladies -- Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 22:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 22:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Due to composition, but this will get hammered for CA as well. Saffron Blaze (talk) 03:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition doesn't bother me, but Saffron is right about the CA. Also, I'd add that the polarizer left a too-dark and noisy sky up top, along with clipping in the cloud. At the very least it could be retaken at a lower exposure. Daniel Case (talk) 04:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. The standard for architecture is high and this doesn't stand out. -- Colin (talk) 19:48, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 08:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Motociclista en la Vereda del Lago.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2014 at 23:32:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Motociclista en la Vereda del Lago
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- The Photographer (talk) 23:32, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well-done but I wish it were just the biker and the girl without the cluttered background. No wow. Daniel Case (talk) 04:39, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Uninteresting composition. --AmaryllisGardener talk 13:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too busy background. I actually appreciate the mood the people in the background adds to the photo, but the timing of the shot just gives a too arbitrary view IMO. The file page could benefit from a geocode - adds value. Did you ask for consent for publication for commercial re-use from the identifiable people? I had a look at Commons:Country specific consent requirements, but Venezuela is not listed there. Do you (or anyone else seeing this) happen to know what the rules of consent for taking pictures of identifiable people are in Venezuela? That girl on the motorbike should tie her shoes - her shoe laces could easily get stuck in the rotating wheels. --Slaunger (talk) 22:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your review. This image is a banner of the inability to care for the children in Venezuela. This motorcycle was going full speed in a playground, only to stop a moment and start again. After taking photos of this type always ask their permission to parents, however, this is only informally. --The Photographer (talk) 23:04, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
@The Photographer: Ah, OK. It was not clear to me, when I saw the photo first what the message was. Nor had I realised it was at a playground. But I understand now better what the purpose of the photo is. Perhaps its categorization should also reflect this inability to take care of children, such that re-users who look for such kinds of media files can find them by browsing thorugh the main category structure? Out of curiosity: Is it allowed in Venezuela to drive on a motorcycle without wearing a full helmet? --Slaunger (talk) 11:29, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
@Slaunger: Excellent review. I just created a new category Child neglect. In Venezuela anything is possible and everything is allowed simultaneously. It is a country without laws. Take a picture at enormous risk and danger to life. Those things should also be taken into commons. This is not a personal perception --The Photographer (talk) 14:59, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
@The Photographer: Yes, I am aware of the crime level in Venezuela. And do not get me wrong, when I oppose this image as FP. I appreciate you bring such subjects in as the material is valuable. We need that much more than pretty 'hoverfly on flower' pics on Commons. --Slaunger (talk) 16:27, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
@Slaunger: I very much appreciate the helpful comments on cons. I'm not a collector FP, I'm a beginner photographer with a thirst to improve, wanting to be criticized because it helps me improve. I understand that many comments against are subjective, I also understand that most of the FP are beautiful and heavenly images. However, in some areas there is not much artistic ability to photograph beautiful buildings, flowers and rivers. The tragic, the violent and neglected despite showing no great wow factor, are those things that make us think as a society to look at us within ourselves and improve our sins. Thus, voting against help me improve my level and I value it more and also prefer this type of photographs sometimes tragic. thanks --The Photographer (talk) 19:42, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very low wow for me, sorry. Centered composition makes it even less fascinating. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 08:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Lilienstein Saxon Switzerland.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2014 at 07:51:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Autum-Sunrise at the Lilienstein, Saxon Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Merops - uploaded by Merops - nominated by Merops -- Merops (talk) 07:51, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Merops (talk) 07:51, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support maybe a bit tilted on left but wonderfully oversatured -- Christian Ferrer Talk 08:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 09:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 13:15, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Tilt should be corrected. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Done, --Merops (talk) 15:15, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose CA on left side (bush). --Kikos (talk) 06:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Done, --Merops (talk) 15:15, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 20:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Scabiosa atropurpurea, flower, Sète 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2014 at 06:19:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sweet scabious flower.


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 20:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants/Flowers

File:Brasil camaroes 3.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2014 at 07:25:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created by Danilo Borges/Portal da Copa uploaded by Nоvа - nominated by Claus -- Claus (talk) 07:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Claus (talk) 07:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition is too tight. The photo needs to be zoomed out to include more of the field, and more of the fans. It's very disturbing that Neymar's boots and that of his child mascot almost got cut off. If the boots problem had been addressed I would have supported. --Graphium 16:06, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Claus (talk) 07:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Plaza Mayor de Madrid - 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2014 at 15:57:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Plaza Mayor, Madrid, Spain.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Plaza Mayor, Madrid, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 15:57, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 15:57, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I appreciate the strict symmetry, and the pleasant February morning light. --Slaunger (talk) 12:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you specially for this comment, those were the main points of this picture :D --Kadellar (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, if you look around on the FPC nomination page it will hardly surprise you, that I have a sweet spot for symmetric buildings in Madrid in February 2014 Face-smile.svg. I am just perhaps not as good at it as you. Clin --Slaunger (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • @Slaunger: Haha I see. It seems Commons users are coming to Madrid this year, that's nice! The España building is hard to take good pictures. If you look at the category, I think no one is really outstanding (and I have 17 there), yours is one of the best imo. I have remembered I took one at 13mm, but weather was bad: just uploaded. I'll be back one sunny day. --Kadellar (talk) 16:07, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • @Kadellar: Well, Madrid is a nice city with nice people! It is quite a good one you have uploaded (disregarding the dull light). I agree: You should go back and do it in good weather. Personally, I regret I did not take four photos for a panorama, while I was there. It would have given better DOF and detail level - and made alignment easier. The Edificio España certainly deserves an FP. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:33, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLove, Kelvinsong talk 21:52, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice but is it possible to bright a bit the shadows please? the shadowed areas are a bit dark IMO -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:45, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • We had this discussion on QIC, Pezi gently uploaded a new version, but I preferred this one. Shadows were actually hard that morning. --Kadellar (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Sony A77 II.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2014 at 18:59:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sony α77 II camera
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Low-key lit photograph of the Sony α77 II camera with DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM kit lens. We have many "isolated on white" images of products and although they have undoubted utility, the result can be about as visually interesting as an eBay listing. I've gone for a different approach here with low-key lighting (softbox above, white reflector in front, black background). The result is a deliberately artistic effect rather than documenting every detail, though it captures (and indeed emphasises) aspects of the subject in a form that remains educationally useful. Hope you like it. Created, uploaded, nominated by Colin -- Colin (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry but it's too dark. I can't see the bottom part of the camera and the rear is not very sharp --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:50, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Please check your monitor is calibrated and your viewing conditions optimal. For example, the texture of the camera is visible to the bottom and the focus-control knob at the base is a very dark shade of grey. But I think you may be missing the point... -- Colin (talk) 22:24, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I also think that it is bit dark. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Ok. I'll adjust it tonight. -- Colin (talk) 06:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like the black background, the composition and I also appreciate how the lightning manages to capture the texture of the surface of the camera quite delicately on the upper side of the lens and around the controls on top of the house. However, I agree with Moroder and Yann that it could use a little light from yet another lightsource to lighten up the lower part a bit. --Slaunger (talk) 12:13, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Moroder, Yann, Slaunger: I've uploaded a new version with increased exposure and shadows. I'm reluctant to increase any further as the camera is black, not grey. The lighting style is supposed to have a considerable lighting ratio with typically one key light plus reflector, and sometimes even a substantial part of the subject in darkness (especially a black subject). The intention is not to simply produce this picture but with a black background. Btw, resources for diy monitor calibration can be found here and here. For examples of similar low-key images, see this Nikon advert, this, this, this Sony advert, this Sony leaflet and the latest Nikon 810. -- Colin (talk) 19:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose—Good quality but I'm having a very hard time discerning which parts of the picture are camera and which parts are background.Love, Kelvinsong talk 21:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I usually don't challenge people's opposes, but in this case I am trying to understand why seeing all the camera is important when the intent of the image is to incite a mood in the viewer not provide a stock photo. Saffron Blaze (talk) 04:31, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Kelvinsong, if too much of the camera is black then either your monitor is not calibrated correctly or is poor quality (see links provided above). However, it is very much the intention that the camera should fade to black. So your oppose, frankly (sorry), seems to indicate you don't understand this very standard lighting technique. See Category:Low-key lighting (NSFW) for examples. -- Colin (talk) 05:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
finee Symbol support vote.svg Support—though the picture you showed me you can still clearly see the camera edge.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 14:47, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- The minor issue of lighting people were discussing appears to have been addressed. I appreciate the attempt to bring something other than a standard product photo. After all... this is SPARTA Commons, not WP. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kelvinsong.--Claus (talk) 03:31, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
See comment to Kelvinsong. -- Colin (talk) 05:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. It looks professional and cool this way, and very eyecatching. I do not mind that much that not all details are shown, or dissapear into the black background. If people get interested they will soon find also the more usual pics, where all the encyclopedic details are shows. The other versions from the same setup are also helpful here. And: Congratz with the new camera!!(?) --Slaunger (talk) 05:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I feel the parts that are critical are visible. Nikhil (talk) 05:45, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Now it looks perfect but sincerely imo it is not FP --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 06:46, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per above, because : 1. I think product photography needs longer focal length ; 2. There's too much light IMO for the intended result. Maybe it should have come more from behind. That said it's a very nice attempt, and the result is still quite good (hence neutral ;-)). - Benh (talk) 07:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks well done -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 00:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 00:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good quality, and nice as a promo shot, but for the educational value, I'd rather like more light. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Yann, this prejudice that our finest educational images must be fully lit with a blank white canvas is flawed and harmful to the project. To begin with, all notable features of this camera are clearly visible (such that they can be seen from this angle) so more light would not actually make the image more educationally useful. The three-dimensional form of this camera is actually more apparent in the nomination than a conventional Commons photograph. But even assuming some aspects of the camera were hidden by this lighting, does that make this form of lighting unsuitable or suboptimal for Commons? A project who's educational mission extends far beyond providing a thumbnail for a Wikipedia article. Leaf through a professional modern educational publication or website and you will not find endless brightly-lit-on-white product shots. For professional photo editors know that the reader deserves interesting pictures that engage the eye. If "fully lit" were a justification on Commons FP, then we wouldn't accept the countless nighttime shots of city scapes. We wouldn't celebrate silhouette (File:The Photographer.jpg or File:SMP May 2008-9a.jpg). Nor sunbeams (File:Chicago Union Station 1943.jpg or File:Locomotives-Roundhouse2.jpg). And don't get me started on those who reject black-and-white as a medium, for if that was valid we'd miss out on File:Bicycle reflections.jpg and the wonderful File:Falling rain in mexico.jpg. At times, Commons FP has a very small mindset regarding what is excellent educational imagery. Look to see what the professionals use in their publications, not what amateurs have already produced on Wikipedia. -- Colin (talk) 11:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
      • @Colin: I think you take my comments too personally. As I said, your picture is good, and would certainly be appreciated by marketing people. But it doesn't change anything in my view. Try it as FP on the English Wikipedia if you think I am wrong. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:19, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
        • Commons is not Wikipedia. But even so, I see no reason why it should fail on en:wp other than for the same misconceptions over what is educational. The reason I raise the issue isn't for my one picture, which I don't care if it passes or not, but to reject the principle you and others have claimed. That somehow a boring stock photo (which is photographed on white traditionally because that makes it easy extract with Photoshop and paste onto other backgrounds), is the only valid lighting for Commons objects. -- Colin (talk) 13:06, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but a black item on a black background is a no go for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:25, 28 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 3 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Exakta Varex Balgengeraet Diakopierer DSC 2568w.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2014 at 18:53:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exakta Varex with bellows and slide copier
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Exakta Varex with bellows and slide copier, one of the very early 135mm SLR cameras. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- P e z i (talk) 18:53, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- P e z i (talk) 18:53, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image is extremely soft. Even at 50% reduction (6MP) it isn't sharp. The culprit seems to be the aperture of f/22 for a superzoom lens on a crop-sensor camera. Compare the resolution charts for the 18-200 with a cheap 50mm prime. The prime is not only much sharper at its best aperture but also holds up much better to being stopped down for increased DoF. Wrt exposure/lighting, too much of the lens barrel is blown out (though I accept lighting shiny curved metal is hard). -- Colin (talk) 11:57, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for your review. You are right - this lens was not the best choice here. I'll try it again later with my 50mm f/1.8. --P e z i (talk) 13:00, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
P e z i, see Benh's comments on my own FP nom wrt focal length. I don't personally think the subject looks bad with a 50mm crop lens (75mm full-frame equivalent) but Ben's right that product photography tends to use a slightly longer length (90mm or 100mm on full-frame seems to be common, which would require a 60mm crop lens). I don't know how important that small difference is, though, and suspect the availability of sharp 90/100mm macro or TS lenses is more of an influence on what gets used by pros than the difference between 75 and 90mm. Whether the wide-angle vs compressed-perspective effects are problematic also likely depends on the subject and how you orient it. -- Colin (talk) 13:57, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to add that I think you shouldn't stop down this much. I don't think any lens performs well at f/22. I understand you try to maximize DOF, but try to open at sweet spot for your lens, and stack focusing instead. And yes 50mm should give better result than 35mm for product photography because often in such case, you want to minimize perspective converging lines, which means getting farther from your subject, and using longer focal length will force you to do so. If you prefer converging lines, you needn't stuck to rules, forget what we say... - Benh (talk) 15:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Benh, P e z i, I agree wrt f/22, but one can still go a bit past the sweet spot and have a very sharp image with a prime. On my 50mm prime, it is still very sharp at f/13. It's probably sharper at f/22 than the superzoom at any stop. The charts show f/8 is sharpest but if the consequence is lower DoF and a need to stack, I'm not convinced it is always worth it. I wouldn't go to f/22. However focus stacking large objects like this is a bit of a perfection fetish imo and introduces a significant risk of stacking artefacts. If one is feeling flush, a Canon 90mm TS lens is an option for maximum DoF! See also this blog post about diffraction. -- Colin (talk) 15:52, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
@Colin: I couldn't agree more. I'd suggest to try again with the 50mm, starting out with a series of test shots at different apertures to see at which point diffraction starts to become an issue with that lens. --El Grafo (talk) 16:32, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks a lot for all your hints! Think I'll try out a series of different f-stops and also different lenses; the 50mm f/1.8 already mentioned and also the AF-S NIKKOR 85 mm 1:1,8G portrait lens will be given a chance. --P e z i (talk) 17:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Nycticorax nycticorax at Las Gallinas Wildlife Ponds, looking down.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2014 at 23:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Black-crowned night-heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) at Las Gallinas Wildlife Ponds, Marin County, California.


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 05:23, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Birds

File:Front de Seine as seen from Pont Mirabeau, 22 April 2014.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2014 at 08:44:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by DXR - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 08:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 08:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Reference to prevous FP. (I think it is always good to mention them for comparison.) Jee 08:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:58, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 17:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Even better than the other one, not in the least because it includes the Eiffel Tower. Daniel Case (talk) 22:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 05:38, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:33, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 09:34, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 14:51, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you Paris 16 and all supporters. To be honest, this is my favorite of all my Front de Seine images! --DXR (talk) 19:23, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition and a stupid amount of detail -- almost an invasion of privacy. -- Colin (talk) 22:03, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Claus (talk) 02:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technically well done. I like the composition and colors. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Merops (talk) 06:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:20, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 14:06, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 12:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Architecture photography at its best. This photo is a pleasure! --Tuxyso (talk) 09:47, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 15:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Panoramas

File:HMS Sabre in Gibraltar MOD 45151546.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2014 at 11:48:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

HMS Sabre (P285)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by LA(Phot) Jennifer Lodge - uploaded by - nominated by Chase me ladies -- Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 11:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 11:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose The composition and especially the light is very good. But the CA is bad and needs to be fixed/addressed for me to support the image. I am also confused regarding the time of day ( 23:47:41) of the photo given on the file page. It does not seem right. --Slaunger (talk) 12:05, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
What is the CA? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 13:52, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
@Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry: Sorry for not being clear. It means Chromatic aberration visible as color fringes (small rainbows) on sharp transitions between, e.g., white and black. --Slaunger (talk) 14:24, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral—Chromatic abberation isn't noticiable until you zoom in a bit, and by then sharpening artifacts are worse than the CA—Love, Kelvinsong talk 21:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Based on image info, I think it is worth forgiving a few minor tech flaws. AtsmeConsult 16:35, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing outstanding -- Christian Ferrer Talk 06:12, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mainly, but not only, because of the crop at left.--Jebulon (talk) 11:52, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 15:38, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Reassembly of the Tivoli Bridge, Sète.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2014 at 11:12:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reassembly of the Tivoli Bridge, Sète, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me both a technically good and interesting image, but compositionally it is not FP level in my opinion. --Slaunger (talk) 21:14, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger. Daniel Case (talk) 22:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 15:42, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Another Neptune diagram.svg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2014 at 16:50:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Diagram of the planet Neptune
Well I was trying to separate the magnetic & rotational information from the physical features… either way I made it all white—better?—Love, Kelvinsong talk 16:50, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Fixed—Love, Kelvinsong talk 14:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
thx! --El Grafo (talk) 15:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Here's a bit of irony. I am a space junkie, but even I am bored of these now. They should have been done as a set. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
@Saffron Blaze: Kden. 😒 I wasn't even planning on drawing Uranus & Neptune when I made Jupiter, but given the reception on that one I decided to do the ice giants as well. So I guess the lesson here is to quit while you're ahead. & I'm not going to be doing any more planet cutaways anymore anyway. && Btw the real irony here is you're saying I should have made a set nomination when set nominations are currently suspended.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:50, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
That was my point :-) Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry like what was your point?? That I should stop making space pictures?—Love, Kelvinsong talk 23:33, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
That I should be recommending a set when we just placed a moratorium on such noms. Saffron Blaze (talk) 01:07, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
@Saffron Blaze: Ok I get what you mean but please don't call my pictures something that you are "getting bored of now". It takes a lot of effort to make them and I put a lot of polish on them & I go out of my way to make them efficient and easy to navigate & edit && the least you could do is offer {{support}} or at least an {{oppose}} for a better reason than "you already did the other three planets & this one is nothing special".
PS I nominated my cell organelle diagrams as a set but people were opposing just because they didn't like set nominations, so hb no—Love, Kelvinsong talk 01:55, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I'd probably get bored of pizza if I had to eat it everyday. Regardless, I am not dismissing the effort or the result, but they are repetitive and intensely related. At least as a set we could have conferred a standard across them. I get the dilemma of Commons though... you will always find people that will damn you if you do and damn you if you don't. Saffron Blaze (talk) 02:15, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you. But I don't really get your logic—if Jupiter hadn't gotten the support it did, Saturn would never have been made, & so forth. && Since it looks like Neptune & Uranus aren't going to pass ( :/ ) I don't see how offering them as a set would make any difference. A major argument against sets was that they were letting in images that wouldn't have gotten FP on their own, so in an ideal set system, nominating all four giant planets as a set should cause all four to fail FP. && Some of the arguments for abolishing sets were voter fatigue from having to review several of the same image, but it looks like that's happening anyway.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 02:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • You seem to be looking at this as a creator not a reviewer. Call it subject fatigue. If the four gas giants had been presented as a coherent standardised set they would have passed easily. Think of it like this. Someone offers you a small box of fine truffles sprinkled in dark coco. Wonderful and you walk away happy to eat them at your leisure! Now in another scenario, they offer you one. You eat it. Then they offer you another, you eat it. By the time the third one comes around it is getting a bit rich and your are satisfied, so you decline the offer. Saffron Blaze (talk) 03:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Tbh I would still eat them all 😋. But anyway each week FPC sees no less than two city skylines, four rustic European town panoramas, five orthogonal stone buildings, three overprocessed landscapes, one marble statue in front of the standard azure sky, two OMG-3-POINT-PERSPECTIVE glass skyscrapers, two church interiors (always from the same angle!!??), half a random sattelite image, two engravings, one small bird (with a great deal of bokeh), and three early-dawn wildflower photos. But nobody is telling the orthogonal building photographers to save all their building photos and nominate them all together as a set (and presumably then never contribute another building pic since "they shoulda nominated it in the set" (nvm it didn't even exist back then). Seriously do you think I draw all the planet diagrams I'll ever make all at once and then spread out the nominations over several months just to tire you guys out? Omg on the next backlit wildflower I see I am so literally going to comment "nice flower but you should really have nominated all your flower pictures as a set!".—Love, Kelvinsong talk 04:37, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • LOL. Featured comment of this week. :) (BTW, we need more inputs for the new set noms. See talk.) Jee 17:28, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Kelvin, the problem you have is you think I should care about how much time it takes you or how many you are willing to do. I seriously don't, nor should I. The fact you can't see the difference that "the planets" or "the gas giants" make for a logical set whereas every fucking building on the planet doesn't is your problem. This aside, my original comment was people will get bored of these as they have with other subject matter. If you want to run into that wall instead of availing yourself of a set nomination fill yer boots. Saffron Blaze (talk) 20:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Ok fine I'll make a set nomination next time, & when people ask me why I'm violating the no-set-nomination ban I'll direct them to you!—Love, Kelvinsong talk 23:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • As the ban is only temporary, you should not be too concerned with ever being confronted with that problem. Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bored?? No. @Kelvinsong: It would be great if you could continue making these very useful and informative planet diagrams. :) --Graphium 05:16, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done. AtsmeConsult 16:22, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 06:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good stuff. Thanks for creating this diagram! --Slaunger (talk) 21:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Extra support for the comment. ;oD Yann (talk) 08:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
lol thanks!!—Love, Kelvinsong talk 13:08, 1 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:13, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated

File:HDR Picture of WWII Spitfire Fighter Engine Testing MOD 45154465.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2014 at 13:54:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spitfire Fighter Engine Testing
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SAC Graham Taylor - uploaded by - nominated by Chase me ladies -- Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 13:54, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 13:54, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLove, Kelvinsong talk 21:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Merops (talk) 08:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:08, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry photographers are humans and have the right to play and having a good time. But the result is (imo) maybe fun, eccentric and different but has no wow for me.--ArildV (talk) 19:38, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think it carries the necessary uniqueness. AtsmeConsult 16:27, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It' a very good picture but I don't like to see these pop-art HDR colors on a WW2 plane. It's not the way these planes should be featured on a site like wikipedia. --Uberprutser (talk) 16:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Except this isn't Wikipedia. I wish people would learn and draw the distinction when voting here. This is an art gallery not a museum archive. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:21, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per the first part of the comment of Ubersprutzer. I agree with the two first sentences of Saffron Blaze, but I strongly disagree with the third. 'Commons' is not an art gallery.--Jebulon (talk) 11:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I've had a long discussion with myself about this. I'll spare you the details, but it turns out I'm unable to come to a "reasonable" conclusion. So I switched off my brain and made this a gut decision: it's an awesome picture after all. --El Grafo (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:07, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Hong Kong City, view from Kowloon.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2014 at 11:07:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hong Kong City, view from Kowloon
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info In Wikimania 2013. All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • the buildings are not straight, they seem to lean to the right side --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ DoneSymbol support vote.svg Support I unfortunately trusted the intelligent adjustment lightroom. Now I fixed this, please, if you can give it a second look. thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:04, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice detail. AtsmeConsult 16:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 14:52, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Graphium 15:59, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 16:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Zandmotor juni 2014 05.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2014 at 11:13:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Smiley.toerist - uploaded by Smiley.toerist - nominated by Smiley.toerist -- Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:13, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This "river" is part of the nl:Zandmotor project. Most of the time water flows from the lagune to the sea. Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:13, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Tilt needs correction. --Slaunger (talk) 11:38, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is nothing in the composition that makes this the least bit interesting to me. Foreground is needlessly unsharp. The lighting is rather harsh. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:11, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can see why the S shape appealed but this isn't at FP standard in composition, lighting or technical quality. -- Colin (talk) 16:49, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No whow at all. Would probably be interesting if taken from a point 10 m higher, to emphasize the S bend. Tilted horizon. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:33, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Points 10 m higher are in very short supply over there. This is probably one of the flattest parts of a very flat country. Kleuske (talk) 18:48, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
      • I supposed so :-) still lacks whow to me. Consider purchasing a multicopter ;-) --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 16:56, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Sveti Stefan, Montenegro, 2014-04-18, DD 04.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2014 at 18:35:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 18:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 18:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Crazy place, isn't it? :) Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks, Tomer! Poco2 19:19, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but the image has no wow imo. Half the image consists of a relatively uninteresting ramp/brigde, the category are full with more intresting compositions and viewpoints. The weather and the light are a bit boring, right and left slightly out of focus (or in any cases less sharp).--ArildV (talk) 19:51, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting for me. --King of ♠ 00:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The place is interesting, but the sharpness on the sides is not good at all. --Ivar (talk) 15:48, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others -- Christian Ferrer Talk 06:17, 28 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 21:10, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Pont du Gard BLS.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2014 at 02:23:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Benh - uploaded by Benh - nominated by Claus -- Claus (talk) 02:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Claus (talk) 02:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. Some DOF issues with the foremost vegetation, but we can't do everything. What's that metal thing in the middle of the bridge? Daniel Case (talk) 02:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. I’d just suggest to take out the small unidentifiable flying object in the sky, see note. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:31, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Will do. Thank you for the review. Waiting for some other inputs, just in case. - Benh (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Merops (talk) 06:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Welcome in Languedoc! grey and white are maybe a bit blue, however it's acceptable IMO -- Christian Ferrer Talk 09:57, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Shame there was no french caption, dear Benh ! No problem with the blurry bird, but there is a small red "thing" (see note) on the ground...--Jebulon (talk) 10:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes sorry for the missing french caption... Thankfully someone fixed it! - Benh (talk) 18:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. --DXR (talk) 10:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! Great light and composition. --Kadellar (talk) 10:55, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 16:45, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but the sky looks heavily darkened and I don't see any reason for doing that. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:05, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Reviewers have sharp eyes (FPC is in good hands!). I darkened the sky to compensate for that cloud which casted a very light shadow at the very moment I was ready to shoot. I have a shot taken when no cloud was in the way, and it looks roughly the same (but it's far lower resolution of course). For the same reason, I had to boost contrast and saturation. This probably emphasized the blue in the dark areas. Generally speaking, I heavily process pictures, but try to keep a natural look (when it becomes non natural being a rather subjective issue, and there's also my own tastes to take in account). I hear any constructive review on that matter and will try to fix everything in a single upload. Thanks for feedback. - Benh (talk) 18:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice! It appears a little oversharpened for me. Will vote when I see the final upload. --Slaunger (talk) 21:17, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:36, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 18:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 19:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 23:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support IMHO, the best picture in this moment in FPC, Well done Benh --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:04, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLove, Kelvinsong talk 16:08, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 16:39, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Bridges

File:01 Antequera, Andalusia, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 13:16:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Royal Collegiate Church of Santa María la Mayor in Antequera, Andalusia, Spain with view of Antequera town on the right.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Royal Collegiate Church of Santa María la Mayor in Antequera, Andalusia, Spain with view of Antequera town on the right, created by Tupungato - uploaded by Tupungato - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 13:16, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tupungato (talk) 13:16, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Out of date clock icon.svg
Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. --Jebulon (talk) 19:29, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Corocoro frito con Arepas.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 17:16:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Corocoro frito con Arepas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:16, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:16, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Fork and knife seem at an awkward angle. Red splotch on knife blade is puzzling. I could accept the fish is blue but also the cucumber? Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:10, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done I think so, please, could you check it again?, thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 19:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colours are much better now, but the cut-out of the fish' tail looks very coarse, and the viewing angle of the fork puzzles me as well. Seems a bit bright, too (white cucumber). Fine overall quality but too many shortcomings to support. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:08, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The viewing angle was precisely from above (see original picture in the description). I not altered this dish to create a dish that looks beautiful, with this photograph I conducted respecting best tradition who made this dish, my mom. You speak of many flaws, however, all that your dating is a knife with a wrong angle and a bad cut fish. The angle is exactly as seen from above and the fish was cut because this is traditionally done the preparation, I can not change that.--Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 20:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't really understand the arrangement of Caribbean food on a gaudy Chinese plate cut out "on white" with cutlery floating on the left. I see it is taken from an original with a distracting place mat. I would like to see more food photography on Commons FP but the presentation is everything. -- Colin (⧼Talkagelinktext⧽) 21:15, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination @Colin: You are right. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:20, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Baia da Guanabara desde o Mirante Dona Marta.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 21:20:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Carlos Perez Couto - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good image of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil -- ArionEstar (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Excellent and Amazing composition but terrible focus problem and noise in sky, I can't understand what happend with sharpening. Maybe uploading RAW file I could help with this, I do not promise anything. Muito obrigado por esta imagem, realmente impresionante --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 21:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Olá Wilfredo. Eu também penso que o arquivo RAW ajudaria, pois o ruído na imagem não está gravíssimo. O foco e a nitidez, eu penso, são facilmente solucionáveis (para alguém que saiba solucionar). Infelizmente, eu não possuo o arquivo RAW, porém eu penso que alguém por aqui tem. Saudações :) ArionEstar (talk) 22:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
@ArionEstar: Oi Arion, obrigado por sua rapida resposta. Não acredito sim existe alguma forma de contactar com Carlos, e muito importante fazer isso agora enquanto esta candidatura está activa. Um abraço de São Paulo --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:51, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose How nice in thumbnail, but how disappointing at full size, per Wilfredo... Sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 15:31, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Maybe another nomination in the future. ArionEstar (talk) 20:14, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Liausson, Hérault 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 11:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dawn on the village of Liausson.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, yes I know, the village is in shadow (I'm face to the sun), the image is also maybe a little bit noisy, maybe also a bit oversatured... But it's more an image for the mood rather than for the village itself. The image is not so bad and I like this mood, and in more I had pain at my legs to climb the hill quickly to arrive in time for this mood. :) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I really like this kind of picture, with side light, and nice mood... but this picture misses a subject or a pattern to keep my attention on it, and earn my support. But I wanted to comment on it, and say that I think there's not much missing for it to become FP material. If the legs are still in shape, why not going when the light comes from the other side ;) ? Wouldn't it lit the village or is some hill casting shadow at that time?- Benh (talk) 19:04, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Ok, thanks very much for the comment. No matter my legs, at the end it is a pleasure. And as soon as my job and the weather will be favorable at the same time, I will return there during the latest hours of the sun to see what it can give. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice comments over and over again.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:47, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Ta Phrom, Angkor, Camboya, 2013-08-16, DD 32.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2014 at 16:45:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tetrameles nudiflora emerging over the ruins of the Khmer temple of Ta Phrom, Angkor temple complex, located today in Cambodia. The temple Ta Phrom, of Bayon-style, was erected in the 12th century as a Buddhist monastery and university.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Tetrameles nudiflora emerging over the ruins of the Khmer temple of Ta Phrom, Angkor temple complex, located today in Cambodia. The temple Ta Phrom, of Bayon-style, was erected in the 12th century as a Buddhist monastery and university. All by me, Poco2 16:45, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 16:45, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is interesting and has wow, but the crop, especially at the top is unfortunate. --Slaunger (talk) 19:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose header and footer cut --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Poco2 08:42, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Otto-Wagner-Pavillon Wien.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2014 at 04:50:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Otto-Wagner-pavilion in Vienna, Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald 04:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 04:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice and sharp. But I feel that the shadows cast are slightly harsh on the top. Nikhil (talk) 05:52, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Really impressive detail level, good, but also a bit harsh light. The fence to the right is really ugly and spoils the symmetry. I admit it is hard to do something about, except trying to change the composition. Speaking of the composition, it only gives a quite low reading on my wow-o-meter. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 21:33, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mö1997 (talk) 14:47, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Thaddeus M. Fowler - New Kensington, Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania 1896.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2014 at 00:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

New Kensington, Pennsylvania
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Thaddeus Mortimer Fowler - uploaded, restored, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A high quality historical map. It is very interesting to explore for me. I got curious into seeing how the city had evolved and a quick search gave this 'six years later' view from another location, but made in the exact same style by the same creator (Fowler). It is very interesting to see how many more houses have been erected during the period 1896-1902. --Slaunger (talk) 21:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:37, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:26, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLove, Kelvinsong talk 19:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:51, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:S.M. Linienschiff Baden - restoration, borderless.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2014 at 00:25:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SMS Baden
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Hugo Graf - scanned by Mr.Nostalgic - restored and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:25, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:25, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Slaunger (talk) 21:51, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Is a correction suitable for the left lower border ?--Jebulon (talk) 10:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
    • I think that's in the image itself - a slight over-inking, which isn't uncommon. I'm not sure one could fix it "honestly", as it were, since it's really just a little too big of blobs of ink, not a levels thing. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:43, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
      • Sorry for misunderstanding. My concern is about the crop, paper is visible.--Jebulon (talk) 11:48, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
        • So it is. I'll upload a fix tomorrow from the PNG. Very minor fix, luckily. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 19:54, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:26, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 12:51, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Trupial on a cactus.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2014 at 19:58:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Venezuelan_troupial on the island of Bonaire, 50 mi (80 km) northwest of Venezuela in the Dutch Caribbean.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Atsme - uploaded by Atsme - nominated by Atsme -- AtsmeConsult 19:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- AtsmeConsult 19:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I suggest you convert it to JPEG (lossless compression non necessary here) and try to provide a 2mpix version of it if you can. I remember about a 2mpix size minima over here - Benh (talk) 22:31, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Peer Benh. Downsize to hide noise and jpg artifacts is a bad practice. Please, revert and I will support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:29, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Ok, thank you. AtsmeConsult 03:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The original upload was a 38.8 mp MB .png file which was unacceptable. I tried to upload a smaller version as a jpeg at 2.2 mp MB, but the uploader insisted on same name/format as the original which is why it's still a .png file, only smaller. AtsmeConsult 00:10, 26 June 2014 (UTC) AtsmeConsult 03:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
    • I did not speak to reverse version, I was talking to reverse downsizing --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
      • It's a 6mpix file and you can convert it to jpeg and keep it < 2mb without downscaling and without apparent loss (blurry area tend to compress well in Jpeg). I did it but don't want to overwrite your contrast and color tweaks. On a more review side, it's a quite striking image, but maybe not on par with the very finest FP birds Commons has (competition is hard on that category!) because of the quality. And the background might be too distracting.- Benh (talk) 04:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 04:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per BenH. It seems that the uploader does not know the difference between MPix and MB. Png for pictures is not a good solution. -- -donald- (talk) 08:21, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Actually I do know the difference. My fingers on the keyboard refused to cooperate with my brain. Apologies for the mistake. I just did a strikethrough, and corrected it. AtsmeConsult 03:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
      • Ok, but there is still the rule of 2 MPix. -- -donald- (talk) 06:29, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
        • Fixing that issue now. TY. AtsmeConsult 15:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
          • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pic now larger. -- -donald- (talk) 08:03, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What are the yellow and white borders around its feathers? See File:Curacao-Icterus-Icterus-2013.JPG and File:Venezuelan Troupial - Icterus icterus.jpg for comparison. Jee 12:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Maybe inner camera software filter added a litle oversharpening, I think so. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 15:11, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not sure about the differences .png and .jpg. My oppose is with regards to the sharpening halos. --Graphium 15:57, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's backlight transparency caused by fringed ends of the white and yellow feathers. Look at the white fringing around the wing feathers against the bird's body, and the tail feathers contrasting with the darker silhouette of the bird. It is most noticeable on the white edge of the tail feathers. The image wasn't sharpened - it was shot RAW, and tweaked for contrast and color only. Sharpening would make it grainy, not create a halo. The images referenced above don't show any white around the tail feathers - could be the birds aren't marked exactly the same. The lighting was certainly different. This bird had quite a bit of white fringe around its feathers, even through its neck. I guess if the reviewers don't like trupials with white fringed feathers, the image won't be selected. Not much more I can add. AtsmeConsult 21:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Parlament Wien abends.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2014 at 20:49:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Austrian Parliament Building in Vienna, Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald 20:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 20:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice! Nikhil (talk) 03:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although the electric cables of the tram are disturbing, but there is no way to avoid them. --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
    • No, there is no way to avoid them, but a cloning out is possible.--Jebulon (talk) 15:11, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think it's overall a good night shot, but I'm per Uoaei1 on the cable issue. Can't this be cloned out ? I'd also selectively brighten the lower part of the image to make up for the cast shadow; and try to fix what I believe to be barrel distorsion. - Benh (talk) 19:34, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
    • I've tried to correct this three issues.--Jebulon (talk) 15:11, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 05:40, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I agree with Uoaei1 and Benh, if the cables were removed from the image that would be great. --Kadellar (talk) 09:29, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per others --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and the seventh. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:20, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good as it is, but I've made a try, see below please.--Jebulon (talk) 15:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


Alternative[edit]

Parlament Wien abends edit.jpg







  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cables ? where do you see cables ? Face-smile.svg--Jebulon (talk) 15:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 12:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
The chosen alternative is: File:Parlament Wien abends.jpg

File:Kievitsbloem (Fritillaria meleagris) 01.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2014 at 17:43:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kievitsbloem (Fritillaria meleagris)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fritillaria meleagris. Very rare and legally protected in the Netherlands bulb. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:43, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:43, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Would be even better if you remove the spiders web. -- -donald- (talk) 06:23, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you for promotion and Suggestion. I could try, but it does not seem easy. The flour should not be damaged.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:18, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For me the cobweb is not a problem, adds a little reality. --Slaunger (talk) 21:28, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I appreciate the rarity, technical quality and suitability of the photo for an infobox. But the setup and composition is very unimaginative relative to FP IMO, and the cropped leaf bothers me. --Slaunger (talk) 21:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Kievitsbloem (Fritillaria meleagris) In Nederland zeldzaam bolgewasje.JPG
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral For me, definately an improvement. Thanks for your consideration. --Slaunger (talk) 10:18, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I’d suggest a 3:2 crop of this one, not convinced of the square framing --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:39, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done 3:2 Dank u.
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a perfectly balanced composition now to me. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:19, 1 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:08, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:PARAWCS lesce ge team.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2014 at 20:09:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

PARAWCS 2014 - Parachute World Cup Series (Bled Cup 2014)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info PARAWCS 2014 - Parachute World Cup Series (Bled Cup 2014) in Airport Lesce, Slovenia - one of the Germany teams
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pinky sl - uploaded by Pinky sl - nominated by Pinky sl -- Pinky sl (talk) 20:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pinky sl (talk) 20:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Main person is in shadow and cannot be seen properly. Technical image quality also not convincing. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:27, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Uoaei1. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:05, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose—pre above && could use some color correction—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Amanhecer no Hercules --.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2014 at 16:55:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by and uploaded by

Carlos Perez Couto - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Difficult. Geo position and english description missing, leafs in front a little bit blurry, sky looks overexposed, but naturaly. Good wow factor. IMO FP, if geo position and english description exists. --XRay talk 18:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Scene and composition are great, with lots of "wow". However, nothing in the image is really sharp and there are rather strong red and green fringes along the mountains (see image notes for examples). --El Grafo (talk) 18:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can there be a fix for this all? Really, this is a beautiful photo taken in Brazil. High "wow" factor. Greetings. ArionEstar (talk) 19:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Winner in Wiki Love Earth Brazil, and Yes FP if chromatic aberration is fixed I will change my vote --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:53, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral—I really really like this picture but the chromatic abberation makes me feel like I need 3D glasses for this—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:52, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:11, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Layout of CBS, Trichy.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2014 at 18:07:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Layout of CBS
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Gauri Wur Sem - uploaded by Gauri Wur Sem - nominated by Gauri Wur Sem -- Gauri Wur Sem (talk) 18:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gauri Wur Sem (talk) 18:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • strong Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I don't want do be harsh, but you won't stand a chance with that here for several reasons. 1) JPG is pretty much the worst possible file format for diagrams. For things like this, SVG would be the preferred format. 2) Serif fonts are not a good choice for diagrams, use Sans Serif instead. 3) No source is given for the little bus icons you used → Copyright infringement? --El Grafo (talk) 18:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Besides the lack of wow and originality, it’s not even nicely done – some of the letters collide, and the bus icons have been put into their boxes at rather random angles and positions. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 22:19, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose—no just sorry—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Münster, St.-Paulus-Dom -- 2014 -- 0323.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2014 at 13:35:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Paul's Cathedral (Münster) at blue hour
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 13:35, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 13:35, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This photo appears for me to be Symbol wtf vote.svg Overprocessed and does not appear to be a faithful representation of the subject. --Slaunger (talk) 21:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just an information: The light of the illumination was yellow (-> Sodium-vapor lamp) during the blue hour. There are no special improvements of the lights.--XRay talk 05:56, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • @XRay: Thanks for the information. To clarify my oppose, it is not the color balance I am having an issue with. It is the color saturation, which I find excessive. Sure you have not given it a big nudge up on the color saturation knob? --Slaunger (talk) 10:03, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • @Slaunger: Thanks for your advice. I just checked it. I'm using LR and both dynamic and saturation is "0". So there is no additional saturation.--XRay talk 10:08, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • @XRay: Given that statement, I redact my oppose. Thanks for checking. --Slaunger (talk) 10:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pretty typical of what night architecture photos look like. --King of ♠ 05:38, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ok for me: a typical local night view. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:38, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The saturation might not be increased but this long exposure has resulted in an image different to what the eye sees. That's not necessary a bad thing, but I don't much like the orange/blue mix. The left tower has what I can only describe as smudged bits all over it. I have no idea how they occur but it isn't appealing. The right hand side is hidden by a tree (take chainsaw next time you visit :-). I appreciate the effort involved, but I don't think the result is FP. -- Colin (talk) 21:56, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • @Colin: IMO the colours are OK. Just for your information: It's the special light that looks orange. The left tower shows the shadows of some of the trees of the square. (There are a lot of trees on the square.)--XRay talk 06:46, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate that you have no control over the orange colour or the consistency of lights or trees. But a great picture is a combination of what's there and what the photographer has done with it. -- Colin (talk) 08:06, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Spinnekop molen "De Wicher" in de Weerribben 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2014 at 16:32:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spiderhead windmill in Dutch Nationall park "De Weerribben"
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uberprutser - uploaded by Uberprutser - nominated by Uberprutser -- Uberprutser (talk) 16:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uberprutser (talk) 16:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I like the light and the rain clouds in the bg. Technical quality is good as well, but I find the almost centered placement of the main subject unfortunate. --Slaunger (talk) 21:08, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent lighting. The composition doesn't bother me that much. --King of ♠ 05:37, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject, but I agree with the comments about composition. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:26, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Remove my oppose, not so bad image -- Christian Ferrer Talk 10:45, 30 June 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Industry

File:St Peter-Ording Strand.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2014 at 15:02:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset at the beach of St. Peter-Ording after a stormy day
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Merops - uploaded by Merops - nominated by Merops -- Merops (talk) 15:02, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Merops (talk) 15:02, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice mood, but DOF is too shallow. F/2.8 and 70 mm was not the best choice. Only some mud in the middle is sharp while the most important part (background) is out of focus. --Ivar (talk) 12:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Excessive beautification (vigneting and overprocessed) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose—I don't really like the composition as the interesting part is crammed into the upper quarter of the picture (& out of focus). Navy–orange is a fairly cliché color scheme && please don't vignette just don'tt—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:56, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kelvinsong. -- -donald- (talk) 08:49, 4 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:12, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Double Decker Bus Angamaly BUS STAND.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 11:59:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A double decker bus at angamaly KSRTC Bus Stand


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 20:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Psammodromus algirus - 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2014 at 09:26:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Large Psammodromus (Psammodromus algirus) in the Community of Madrid, Spain.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Large Psammodromus (Psammodromus algirus) in the Community of Madrid, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 09:26, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 09:26, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is a good illustration of the species, and the technical quality and composition is good too. For me, the wow is low though. --Slaunger (talk) 11:52, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I found the wow here was that it did not run away so quickly and I could get very close to the animal (half a second later it wasn't there). Thanks for your comment anyway. --Kadellar (talk) 10:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Slaunger except I like the pose (it makes the whole thing fits in the frame). Enough wow in the end - Benh (talk) 20:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Benh --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:24, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:39, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Graphium 15:48, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good capture South19 (talk) 06:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote, too few edits --A.Savin 20:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I know it is very difficult to catch these animals! --Schnobby (talk) 09:55, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLove, Kelvinsong talk 19:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 20:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Reptiles

File:Sharplanina od Vodno.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 09:23:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Šar Mountains seen from the Vodno Mountain


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 20:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File:L'assassinat de l'Archiduc héritier d'Autriche et de la Duchesse sa femme à Sarajevo supplément illustré du Petit Journal du 12 juillet 1914.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2014 at 16:10:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sarajevo assassination
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Le Petit Journal - uploaded, stitched, restored and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 16:10, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 1914/2014, june 28. One hundred years ago, almost at noon, the assassination of Archduke Francis-Ferdinand, heir of the thrones of Austria, Hungary and Bohemia, and of his wife Sophie Chotek, Duchess of Hohenberg, by a Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip, in Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, was the event that triggered the beginning of the World War One, with the consequences we know. After a first unsuccessful bombing attempt in the morning, only two bullets were shot, one in the abdomen of the Duchess, one in the neck of the Prince, both died a few minutes later. This is a press view, and the design is wrong by many points (the Archduke did not wear such an uniform, but a blue-grey one, with no sash, and his trousers was black with red strips, for instance (see here), and Princip stayed at the other side of the car...), but it is an interesting report picture nevertheless, slightly restored by me. It has artistical, educational and historical very high values, IMO. Especially today, the day I chose for this nomination. -- Jebulon (talk) 16:10, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I would edit the background color if possible. Good timing. ;oDYann (talk) 18:05, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Thank you. What do you mean exactly by "edit the background" ?--Jebulon (talk) 20:52, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
      • Make it more white, like it was originally. Yann (talk) 06:06, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
        • Thanks for feedback. I've corrected the color balance but look: Papers of newspapers are (and were) of very bad quality, they were not white. The proof is that we have in this picture white parts: the uniform, and the smoke of the gun. Nonetheless, according to your request, I've reduced the saturation of the background, but I wish to keep the "vintage" aspect of this naive picture...--Jebulon (talk) 10:32, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
          • Thanks, it looks better IMO. Yann (talk) 20:15, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 18:13, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kleuske (talk) 19:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit sad about the apparent "folding" at the bottom, but a nice timing. - Benh (talk) 22:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:31, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLove, Kelvinsong talk 18:59, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:17, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Historical

File:Clock tower clock in night.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 07:00:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Clock tower clock in night, veegaland amusement park, Cochin, Kerala, India
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ranjithsiji - uploaded by Ranjithsiji - nominated by Ranjithsiji -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 07:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 07:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but too much of nothing (black). --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • strong Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Object tilted, motion blur (double contours), mostly black, no wow at all. Sorry to ask frankly but what made you think this could possibly become an FP? FP ist about the very best images Commons has in stock, the cream of the crop. This is not even a fairly good one, IMHO. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 14:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Campus WU EA DSC 1571w.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 17:51:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Campus of the Vienna University of Economics and Business, building EA (Executive Academy), planned by NO.MAD Arquitectos (Madrid), Welthandelsplatz 1, 2nd district of Vienna
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Campus of the Vienna University of Economics and Business, building EA (Executive Academy), planned by NO.MAD Arquitectos (Madrid); created, uploaded and nominated by -- P e z i (talk) 17:51, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- P e z i (talk) 17:51, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm slightly confused by the lack of contrast on the left side. Am I just too used to photos with increased contrast? Or do you use a filter of some kind that makes this worse? The light situation should be ideal. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:14, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Thanks for rreview. I didn't use any filter, but you are right, it looks quite strange in this corner. Tried to improve and uploaded a new version. --P e z i (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The architecture is very interesting and eye-catching. I am having a little problem though with the arbitrarily placed tress in the foreground partially obstructing the view and the white-and red mast. I get the impression from looking at the Campus WU category, that there are other and better vantage points for taking more unobstructed picture of this interesting building with less distracting elements. --Slaunger (talk) 19:42, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for review; do you really think a view like this is better? --P e z i (talk) 20:39, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • @P e z i: Yes, I find that is better, and it is a candidate I would not oppose. I would probably go neutral on that alternative due to its a bit too tight crop for my taste. --Slaunger (talk) 20:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment per Slaunger, too many distracting elements, a bit too contrasted and shadow in foreground distracting, this image is better but the sky is a bit dark IMO -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:42, 6 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 21:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Pai Inacio.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 20:19:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 21:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Madrid May 2014-3a.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2014 at 12:21:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is just one in a series of photos I took of the ceiling of the Basílica de San Francisco el Grande, Madrid (here). It was painted in the last decade of the 19th centurt by José Marcelo Contreras. It is a gorgeous subject and I suggest the reviewers to first appreciate its geometry and detail before focusing on the obvious photographic shortcomings. Most will notice that all these photos were taken near the limit of what is possible with the present technology, considering the obligation of handling the camera and the poor light conditions inside the cathedral. Without a top quality camera it wouldn't have been possible to use such high ISO settings and still obtain so much detail. After the failure of this nomination, which I consider better than the present one, I hesitated a lot before coming here and face this forum again. Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:21, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:21, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Très joli, je vais m'abstenir de faire l'inventaire des petits défauts insignifiants que j'ai pu voir :) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 13:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Pas insignifiants mais presque inévitables! Merci, c'est bon d'avoir l'appui d'un critique difficile! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's true that the details are great. Unfortunately, the sides are cut and the upper part is spoiled by the reflections. This make it hard to really appreciate the subject itself (which looks really worth it). - Benh (talk) 18:46, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 16:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment chromatic aberration See notes :) --The Photographer (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info -- Thank you The Photographer, the Ca was corrected by cloning and the reflections partially minimized. Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are chromatic aberration filter fix in Lightroom and Darktable (if you like free software) and you cant repare almost any CA in image only with a click, work better with RAW file --The Photographer (talk) 13:30, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination -- OK guys, I got the message (please let me know when I may come back). Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

This is to certify that
Alvesgaspar
is licensed for life to come back to FPC whenever he wants to.

--Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:04, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
We all had or still have to learn that others don’t always have the same opinion about our work than we have ourselves :-)

Thanks for your permission, Kreuzschnabel :). But I don't think you understood my point correctly. Not only have I always been humble about the merits of my own work but also have respected equally the reviews of both newbies and vets. That is easy to check on many of my nominations from 2006 on. The most valuable thing we can get from FPC is the feedback from our peers, not the stars. Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

  • So what message did you take away from this nom? It isn't seem obvious to me. Saffron Blaze (talk) 14:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I also never understand those withdrawals just few hours before the regular voting deadline. Ignorable POINTy timewasting, I would say. --A.Savin 19:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 19:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Neak Pean, Angkor, Camboya, 2013-08-17, DD 04.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 08:44:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wooden path over a pond to reach the Khmer temple of Neak Pean, an artificial island that belongs to the Angkor temple complex, located today in Cambodia. The Buddhist temple Neak Pean, part of the temple Preah Khan was erected by order of Jayavarman VII in the 12th century.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Wooden path over a pond to reach the Khmer temple of Neak Pean, an artificial island that belongs to the Angkor temple complex, located today in Cambodia. The Buddhist temple Neak Pean, part of the temple Preah Khan was erected by order of Jayavarman VII in the 12th century. All by me, Poco2 08:44, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 08:44, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support It look a little bit soft. --XRay talk 12:19, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Poco2 11:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Pity. It's a fine and interesting image I think. Haven't looked at your input but Angkor a photographer's dream. Others? Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Alstroemeria aurea ‘Orange King’ 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 17:13:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Alstroemeria aurea ‘Orange King’ (Peruvian Lily). created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:05, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor, distracting background - needs more uniform colour.Fotoriety (talk) 00:45, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting bg, not the best colours due to the (midday?) lighting, and seems to be a little oversaturated. --Graphium 03:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Famberhorst (talk) 16:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Nationaal Park Drents-Friese Wold. Locatie Fochteloërveen. Ronde zonnedauw (Drosera rotundifolia).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 05:09:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sundew (Drosera rotundifolia) in a fragile habitat. Drosera is a genus of carnivorous plants. is on the Dutch Red List of plants. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I see nothing featurable here at all. Composition, perspective and lighting do not show anything special for me. (Browsing the category, I find images like File:Росянка_в_НПП_"Слобожанский".jpg, which is way more impressive.) Considering its size below 4 MPix, it’s not even really sharp! --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:47, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Information: The special for me is the photo that I had during the trip of a few hours in the nature, but have found a plant. That was a unique experience for me. The photo of Drosera is taken in its natural environment and not vulnerable to plant in a pot.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:37, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I do believe this was a special moment for you. I just don’t think you took a special enough picture of it ;-) --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:38, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Famberhorst (talk) 05:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Full Pumkin.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 02:35:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Full Pumkin cut from the plant.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ranjithsiji - uploaded by Ranjithsiji - nominated by Ranjithsiji -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 02:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 02:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A square framing could have been more accurate IMO. The crop is too tight above and below, a white "thing" above is disturbing. The shadow at right above is too strong. The subject itself has no wow enough for me. Sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 15:40, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 05:30, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:012 Lechtaler Alpen in Austria - Hintere and Vordere Platteinspitze.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 11:38:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hintere and Vordere Platteinspitze, mountains in Lechtal Alps in Austria.


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 13:43, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Beach Feeling at the Wank.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 12:00:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beach feeling in Bavaria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 12:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 12:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Technically OK but rather straightforward, nothing special, no wow. Wire fence in background disturbing. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. --Graphium 03:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sitting in a roofed wicker beach chair in southern Bavaria in about 1.800 m above sea level and having a panoramic view on the beach of the baltic sea - no WOW? ;-) --Llez (talk) 10:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is featured pics, not featured situations-while-walking-up-a-hill :-) --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 12:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Should have a category for featured titles. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:37, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 13:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Monasterio de Ostrog, Montenegro, 2014-04-14, DD 11.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2014 at 16:56:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Serbian Orthodox Church Monastery of Ostrog is placed against an almost vertical background, high up in the large rock of Ostroška Greda, in Montenegro. The monastery, dedicated to Saint Basil of Ostrog, was founded by Vasilije, the Metropolitan Bishop of Herzegovina in the 17th century. He died there in 1671 and some years later he was glorified. The present-day look was given to the Monastery in 1923-1926, after a fire which had destroyed the major part of the complex. Fortunately, the two little cave-churches were spared and they are the key areas of the monument.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Serbian Orthodox Church Monastery of Ostrog is placed against an almost vertical background, high up in the large rock of Ostroška Greda, in Montenegro. The monastery, dedicated to Saint Basil of Ostrog, was founded by Vasilije, the Metropolitan Bishop of Herzegovina in the 17th century. He died there in 1671 and some years later he was glorified. The present-day look was given to the Monastery in 1923-1926, after a fire which had destroyed the major part of the complex. Fortunately, the two little cave-churches were spared and they are the key areas of the monument. All by me, Poco2 16:56, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 16:56, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unfortunately lonely tourists face ruins this excellent image. SO sorry :( --Kikos (talk) 19:32, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 07:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:24, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don’t consider the Lonely Tourist worse than the plastic covering just below. Suggest to take that shot again as soon as that is removed. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 08:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support per Kreuzschnabel. The plastic cover slightly ruins the composition, but quality is very good. Nikhil (talk) 10:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK, but please add the geo location. --XRay talk 18:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Geodata added, sorry for the late response, I am on the road... Poco2 17:22, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The bushes are a bit annoying, the angle may not be the best because the object can not be fully observed. However, I believe that the main object has a factor of considerable importance --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:58, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLove, Kelvinsong talk 16:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:32, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --G Furtado (talk) 01:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 02:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Czech-2013-Prague-Street performers.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2014 at 09:53:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Godot13 - nominated by Nikhil
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 09:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The crop should be tighter (see annotation), then I would support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:32, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I am not sure of how much to crop. If you find time, can you please go ahead and crop it. Nikhil (talk) 14:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Please see my annotation with the proposed crop --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A lame trick and not really outstanding as a photo, sorry. --DXR (talk) 19:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Second choice. --King of ♠ 16:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per DXR. --Yikrazuul (talk) 16:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Alt[edit]

ALT1

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Moderate crop. If it starts cutting into the window it changes the vibe of the image, IMO...-Godot13 (talk) 16:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support any version. Nikhil (talk) 02:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support First choice. --King of ♠ 16:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 13:09, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This version is it. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:00, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per DXR above. --Yikrazuul (talk) 16:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 14:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People
The chosen alternative is: File:Czech-2013-Prague-Street performers (crop).jpg

File:Meeting d'Athlétisme Paralympique de Paris - Iris Pruysen 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 08:48:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Iris Prysen, long jump, Athletics Paralympic Meeting, June 4th, 2014, Charlety stadium"


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 21:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Sports

File:Stars 01 (MK).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2014 at 18:35:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Starry sky near Brandenburg an der Havel (Germany), close to midnight. The picture shows ~280° of the sky.Selimabner was so kind to add some constelations, stars and planets as annotations which I linked to the german and english article. The orange light in the middle of the image is the visible light polution from Brandenburg which is ~7km away. The bluish light on the left side is the rest light from the sunset. Regards mathias K 18:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- mathias K 18:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I haven't seen a lot of starry skies over here. It definitely has wow factor. I would have loved to know which setting you used to properly review, so I'm wondering if you couldn't have shortened exposition. ISO bumping perhaps? (I'm aware you probably went very high already). Contrary to many pictures on the web, you didn't seem to downscale a lot (if at all), but there might be some little more room for improving noise issue with careful NR. I think stars are good subjects for non too destructive NR. I'll end with composition, which I don't find very sophisticated, but this is just my opinion of course. - Benh (talk) 19:00, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi Benh, thank you. The single pictures were taken at ISO3200 with f3.5 and 30sec exposure. So yes, there is allready ISO bumping and not much room for shorten the exposition. The high ISO and the open aperture are necessary to catch as much stars as possible at an "acceptable" exposure time. And, I think I have to disappoint you about the downsampling thing. ;-) Cause of the choosen settings I had to downsample a lot to get the actual quality. But with the now given resolution I have made a 120x40cm print were I´m pretty happy with the result, so I think it is a good compromise between size and quality. Regards mathias K 19:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've added the camera settings in the image description. --mathias K 10:17, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gefällt mir gut! -- Wolf im Wald 23:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could be nice another version with constellations drawn SVG --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLove, Kelvinsong talk 18:49, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and for once light pollution looks nice... It really does add some beauty and colours to the already beautiful photo. --Graphium 03:01, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 08:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice but there’s a stitching / editing flaw between sagitta and aquila, showing doubled patterns of stars. Tried to squeeze a note in. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 11:47, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • @Kreuzschnabel: Thanks for the review. As Benh says in another nom: "...reviewers have sharp eyes." ;-) But yes, you're right, there are some double patterns in this area. I don't think it spoils the image that much, but I will try to fix this problem as soon as possible! Thanks again, --mathias K 03:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 21:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Astronomy

File:Vendedor de Plátano frito, cotufas y maní.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2014 at 16:30:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vendedor de Plátano frito, cotufas y maní
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:30, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special but personality rights warning. --Yikrazuul (talk) 17:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition, nice real live portrait. Yann (talk) 08:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:53, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lacks the last bit of sharpness but overall a very impressive image. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:12, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 13:10, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:07, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like the scene and especially the portrait of the vendor, but I think it could have been much better with all the legs (of the man and vehicles) included. Gidip (talk) 18:58, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
It is a square there is no vehicles in the vicinity of the Basilica of Our Lady of Chiquinquirá --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:13, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I mean this table, whatever, he puts his stuff on. Gidip (talk) 09:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 21:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Pen-y-ghent from East.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 13:10:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pen-y-ghent
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Pen-y-ghent, North Yorkshire, as seen from the east. c/u/n by Kreuzschnabel -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is pretty and I would love to see it myself. The quality is good too. But it does not quite have FP level IMO. --Slaunger (talk) 07:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose distracting shadows of the clouds IMO -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination since nobody else seems to like it --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 14:23, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Oh, but I do like it very much. However liking a photo is not equivalent to FPFace-smile.svg --Slaunger (talk) 14:44, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Girl in Sukhumi quay.JPG[edit]

Girl in Sukhumi quay.JPG
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Alex Alex Lep --Karel (talk) 15:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hazed, tilted and could have used some fill flash. --Uberprutser (talk) 17:42, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see nothing special in this image. Just an overprocessed, tilted straightforward photograph showing massive CA. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:36, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While the little girl is indeed very special she is not featured in a way that respects that special-ness. ... and per above. Saffron Blaze (talk) 01:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because as per above comments. Yann (talk) 03:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - Dante And Virgil In Hell (1850).jpg (delist), delisted and replaced[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 08:49:55
SHORT DESCRIPTION SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info 1,608 × 2,001 pixels, file size: 322 KB, unknown source, low-quality (Original nomination)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace --Paris 16 (talk) 08:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace --— Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:52, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace --Ivar (talk) 05:21, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Yann (talk) 12:07, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace --Cayambe (talk) 07:15, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace --Claus (talk) 07:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Jee 03:18, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Result: 7 delist and replace, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted and replaced. 
Category = Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media Jee 16:52, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Walking the water buffalo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 07:30:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Walking the water buffalo
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Quoc-Phong NGUYEN (talk) 07:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks good. Quite a change from the usual nom. Yann (talk) 08:10, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Crop at the left & top way too tight --A.Savin 10:35, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice. Tomer T (talk) 17:31, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per Yann. Exotic enough for a "western eye" as mine, and very charming. But I think some parts are too noisy (the face, the hair of the girl), the motion blur is a pity (hand), and the hat is overexposed in clear parts. Unauthorized portrait of a child. Not far from the star, but I remain neutral here. IMHO.--Jebulon (talk) 15:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 13:10, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Really a nice picture and heartwarming smile on her face, but the technical drawbacks keep me from supporting, considering the image size of just 6 Mpix. Motion blur in the girl’s right arm/hand, denoising/sharpening artifacts in her face. (Motion blur of the animal’s foot does not distract me since that is supposed to move.) Crop is a bit too tight. 1/125 s is quite a long exposuring time for moving objects. At a fully open aperture of f/5.3, you obviously got to the limit of what this lens is capable of ;-) Imagine what kind of pic a prime 150 mm lens at f/2.8 would have made of this situation. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 16:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Црква „Св. Никола“ - Маврово.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 09:34:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunken Church of St. Nicholas in Lake Mavrovo
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Daniela Stefanoska - uploaded by Daniela Stefanoska - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilted; too weak light --A.Savin 10:33, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'ved cloned out the cars and tourists in background, otherwise a nice, beautiful, interesting, unusual and rare picture. Technical matters are OK for me.--Jebulon (talk) 15:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment—too dark and also very slight chromattic abberation on the cross. && Is there a reason why the whole left side of the image seems dimmed (white level & all)?—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:44, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 16:03, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Eucera cinnamomea male 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 17:07:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eucera cinnamomea, male


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods

File:Big Sur Shoreline.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 00:20:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Big Sur Shoreline
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Vadim Kurland - uploaded by Mono - nominated by Mono -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ranjithsiji (talk) 07:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. --Graphium 15:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose what is the main: the coast or the plants??? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose—per Alchemist—the bright blue patch of sea is distracting—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. And we need a proper identification (even if the plants are not the main subject...)--Jebulon (talk) 15:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Me, I like it (colors, composition, not bad quality) and I can support with an identification of the plants in focus. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, poor composition. Gidip (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 05:50, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2014 at 21:53:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Benh (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Little attempt while I'm still wandering around... I'm aware it's heavily processed, but I really wanted to enhance the dramatic mood. I also know my venerable 10-22 lens is soft on the corners, and that the three exposures don't overlap very nicely on moving objects (leafs, people). -- Benh (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perspective can be corrected without losing too much of the dramatic effect:
    Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS k201.jpg
    --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:39, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it but I do prefer the original. Shot from a low angle with a u.w. lens I like to see some perspective distortion. Over correcting, like the second picture, looks unnatural to me. --Uberprutser (talk) 10:58, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As always, it is a pleasure to see your photography, which has the wow, but the technical flaws you point out yourself plus a quite noisy sky is too much of an issue for me. I would also appreciate a more faithful representation wrt processing (but I respect that you prefer it heavily processed). For me more a photo targeted at a 500px audience. --Slaunger (talk) 15:58, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please don't correct the verticals, it really spoils it... my composition is on purpose : worm's view is dramatic, and the perspective lines lead your eye to the dramatic sky which enhances the effect even more. I was just trying to check how audience would react, as I'm on a "processing pictures" momentum. I'd like to point out that although it's heavily processed, the original picture already looked like that. HDR only help to brighten up the church (and again, I try to keep a natural look). I'll upload a pic for comparison if I think about it tonight (and I still have to fix the pont du gard picture as I promised). This is a recurring issue, but the noise (which is very small, but can be fixed) and overlapping issues won't be visible until scrutinized at 100%. Even large print would look nice. Similar FP candidates which were promoted before were all downsampled to 2mpix. - Benh (talk) 10:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • "Please don’t"? If you do not want your work to be edited and re-published by others, why do you publish it under a free license which explicitly allows to do so? I did not overwrite any of your work, I just issued an alternative. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 14:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
      • You're right. My comment was more in an FPC context and "please don't alter the nomination" would be a better statement. This is not en:FPC where you can apply this kind of fix, because it's for the sake of encyclopeadic value. If this photo is to be promoted, I would like it to be because people like it the way I meant it. I think commons FPC is more a ground for that. Sorry for any misunderstanding (I do realise my english doesn't help). - Benh (talk) 15:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
        • \\// and no hard feelings :-) --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Kreuzschnabel, the free licence requires that you "must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation." :-) -- Colin (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
            • OK, if the Original Author’s honor or reputation is affected by my humble suggestion, I withdraw it of course. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
            • Relieved that my reputation is safe now ;-) At least I'd have learnt something about the license. - Benh (talk) 20:56, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Are you going for something that might grace the cover of a gothic novel? If so, it isn't nearly dramatic enough. Possibly a strong crop on just the church would help. The trees, wall, path and colour all have a taming effect. The sky isn't particularly foreboding. I agree completely with Benh on the vertical "correction". This isn't an architectural shot and one simply can't correct verticals on a picture taken this close without introducing a ridiculous stretching effect. In terms of sharpness/megapixels, I have recently discovered the wiki software lets you create links to images at any size. So one could suggest that the image be "reviewed for sharpness" at a given size, while still uploading/nominating a larger image if desired. For example, it looks sharp at 50% reduction (2.5MP). At 66% reduction (4.4MP) it looks ok. While those sizes would be underwhelming for an architectural nomination, they might be sufficient for an image with enough wow. -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Agree with everything. Review size should be something automated, but this was discussed a lot already. You may be right for the framing affecting the effect. I've played a little with recroping and the results are interesting. Will think about it (but the picture doesn't seem to attract much interest anyways, so will be for myself :) ). - Benh (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment To show how much the HDR processing differs from the single exposure shot : File:Chapelle Notre-Dame aux Raisins BLS single exposure.jpg. It's already quite underexposed on purpose. - Benh (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment After to have see the single exposure shot, I think the HDR kill the dramatic effect in part because it's maybe a bit overdone -- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment One support other than from the nominator. But not seeing any chance to get featured. Close? Jee 09:03, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 08:58, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Times Square Time-Lapse Style.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 00:24:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Times Square time lapse
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dan DeChiaro - uploaded by Mono - nominated by Mono -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono (how to reply) 00:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ordinarily I dislike these artsier-type effects pictures for their tendency to sacrifice encyclopedic value regardless of their quality. But this is an exception that sort of proves the rule: how else do you capture the very Blade Runner-esque qualities of contemporary Times Square, its bustle and color, without them? It conveys the reality of the place more effectively, I think, than even a video would. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 08:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Isn't this a DW of the Inception poster? Is this covered by FOP? Regards, Yann (talk) 12:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
    No, it is considered DM in the same way that it's fine to take a picture of a bunch of skycrapers in France. --King of ♠ 17:22, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not my taste, and not perfect technically. In this case, I don't know where is the border between "artistic choice" and "strong technical flaws". + we have some FoP issues here, IMO (but I'm not a specialist of US copyright laws).--Jebulon (talk) 15:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow and bad time lapse resulting in all the motion blur. --Graphium 15:29, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposes.- -Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dislike the processing and not convinced by the framing either. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:11, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is not that great IMO and the colours are a bit oversaturated. I don't mind the ghost. --PierreSelim (talk) 06:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 05:51, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

File:01 United States Air Force, Dornier Do-328-110, Larnaca, Cyprus.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 10:50:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dornier C-146A Wolfhound (version of Do-328), registration 10-3077. Operating for 524th Special Operations Squadron with 27th Special Operations Wing of United States Air Force.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tupungato - uploaded by Tupungato - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tupungato (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Technically well done but lacks wow to me. Wing aligning with elevator looks a bit puzzling. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:23, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --.AVIA Airplane silhouette.svg Flag of Bavaria (lozengy).svg Bavaria 12:41, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 14:34, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Pic de Vissou, Cabrières, Hérault 06.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 12:38:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pic de Vissou, Cabrières, Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Pic de Vissou (480m), (Cabrières, Hérault, France), and two paragliders. This hill is known in the all region (and more) for the practice of paragliding and of ridge lift. All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 12:38, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 12:38, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The paragliders helps in making it a bit interesting, but besides that, the light is dull and the composition uninteresting. A minor technical aside: There appears to be a little color fringing on the paragliders and the vegetation in the transition to the blue sky. A little CA perhaps? --Slaunger (talk) 07:48, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    Maybe not perfect but I don't see any CAs and/or the purple fringing -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 14:35, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Paris Canal St-Martin écluses Récollets 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 18:52:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Canal St-Martin, Paris.

File:Mary, Queen of Scots after Nicholas Hilliard.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2014 at 22:48:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Photo, painting of Mary, Queen of Scots

talk) 22:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I uploaded Hilliards's miniature of Queen Elizabeth I to Commons myself earlier this year. There seems to me to be a couple of issues here: 1 this is a Coetzee bequest image. I'm not sure it's best diplomatic we nominate these images as "Featured" right now 2 are we really going to list every high resolution image of a work of art as "Featured"? They must now run into their tens of thousands if we take account of Google Art Project and galleries such as NGA Washington, Rijksmuseum, and the Prado, to name but just three that come to mind that make available high resolution images, and then both the major auctioneers and others, as well as a host of smaller institutions who take no special steps against stitching their high resolution tiles. I'm inclined to think we should up the bar for art works to "ultra high resolution", such as this one, a van Gogh Sunflowers I recently nominated at Wikipedia Featured Pictures. One interesting thing about Google Art Project images is that fine as they are, they rarely approach the best available from their source museums. This is so for the van Gogh I nominated. That one comes from the Van Gogh Museum as you can readily check by going to the appropriate museum page. It's much superior to the Google Art project version. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 23:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Nettipattam of elephant.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:46:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Head Mask of Elephant used in Kerala.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ranjithsiji - uploaded by Ranjithsiji - nominated by Ranjithsiji -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ranjithsiji (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Object tilted, top side unsharp, tight crop, white parts blown. Sorry, wouldn’t even be a QI for me. Besides, the pic lacks wow because I can’t make anything of it. What kind of thing is this, and how is it used? Do elephants wear it? Would be nice to see it in use then. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. --Slaunger (talk) 07:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Object tilted and top a bit blurred -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:17, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above.--ArildV (talk) 12:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:27, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Presqu'île du Rouens, Clermont-l'Hérault 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:14:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Presqu'île du Rouens, Clermont-l'Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Presqu'île du Rouens, Lac du Salagou, Hérault, France. All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Benh, thanks to you for this image. After your comment in this page you motivated me to return on the hill. What I made on saturday and I took this photo while waiting for the last hour of the sun to take a picture of the village (it is taken from the same point of view). Unfortunately, as you can see in this image there is some clouds and just after this shoot the sun was hidden, I am quits to go back up again....:) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but unfavorable light, washed out colors, distracting foreground. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:04, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done (for colors) New version with a bit more saturation and contrast. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info I was totaly wrong with the saturation, new version much less satured. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Malheureusement, il manque encore qq chose à mes yeux. La composition est assez simpliste, et le premier plan est en fait malvenu et n'apporte rien (contrairement à la nomination du canal ci-dessus, qui guide le regard). Ça pourrait être compensé par une jolie lumière, comme sur ta nomination précédente, mais ici, ça semble pris à 18h. À cette heure là, en été, la lumière n'est pas assez rasante et ne crée pas assez d'ombre pour donner une ambiance magique. Juste mon avis ! Quelques examples de photo pour illustrer mon propos : [1] ou [2]. Dommage qu'on ne voit pas plus de photos comme ça par ici... - Benh (talk) 21:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Benh. -- Colin (talk) 12:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice landscape but the composition has low wow.--ArildV (talk) 12:26, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Natural History Museum, London (long exposure).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 20:02:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Main Hall of the Natural History Museum in London, United Kingdom
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dmitry A. Mottl - uploaded by Dmottl - nominated by Dmottl -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 20:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 20:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Striking, overall good quality, and UW angle provides a good feeling of how big it is. But the ghosts are really an issue here. There's just too many of them. - Benh (talk) 21:33, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral As with Benh. Personally I'm not scared of ghosts. If someone can persuade me that the rest of the world really shouldn't be afraid of them either, I'd be happy to support. Such an excellent image. High, high praise. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is a composition of 12 individual photos :) --Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because of perspective issues --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ghosts, perspective, blur at the sides --A.Savin 11:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Way to many issues with ghosts. --Slaunger (talk) 07:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Did you (or camera) combine multiple exposures?
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the top crop. Daniel Case (talk) 05:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:25, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Monday James Hammarby April 2013.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 13:29:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monday James
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nigerian professional football defender and 2008 Beijing Olympic Silver medalist Monday James during game in Sweden. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I think the background is too distracting. I would have recommended a larger aperture to get better separation between subject and background, but you are already at f/2.8, so not much to do there. Otherwise nice. --Slaunger (talk) 07:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:25, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Borgo a Mozzano Ponte della Maddalena.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2014 at 10:44:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ponte della Maddalena, also called Ponte del Diavolo, Borgo a Mozzano, Tuscany, Italy.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Myrabella -- Myrabella (talk) 10:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
    As this image of a medieval bridge in Tuscany (the Ponte della Maddalena in Borgo a Mozzano) had some success at the May Photo challenge, I give it a try here.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Myrabella (talk) 10:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My humble opinion: very good composition, very nice light, excellent subject with a lot of value(s). (Maybe) I've removed the electric wires in the sky by cloning out, and (maybe) a little over exposition on the white parts of the second arch (loss of details). Anyway, a FP for me.--Jebulon (talk) 15:32, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp, and Not enough wow because the entire bridge from end to end should have been included in the photo. Sorry. --Graphium 03:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Following Jebulon's advice, I have removed the electrical wires in the sky and treated the brightest areas; I have also sharpened the image a bit. --Myrabella (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tight crop IMO.--Claus (talk) 07:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Claus. That was my first impression on seeing this picture. Can we see a different crop? --Baykedevries (talk) 17:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info From this bank of the river, the view on the right side is obstructed by a parapet and alas, I did not have an ultra wide angle lens yet (you can see the situation in that former FPC). So I did my best to get a composition that emphasizes the harmony of the water reflections in spite of this difficulty. However, from that bank, other compositions are possible, without an UW lens (example). I am so sorry that my photo doesn't manage to charm you, thanks for the reviews anyway :) --Myrabella (talk) 10:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was not voting for this image in the photo challenge, mainly because of the crop I think. But when I look at it again, everything (composition, colours...) are very nice. --ArildV (talk) 12:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done. -- Smial (talk) 06:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:24, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Iziko Koekoe resistance beacon.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 12:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An example of some of the beacons that marked key sites in territory at the Cape claimed by the Dutch. Both are made of Robben Island slate and bear the coat-of-arms of the Netherlands (a lion with seven arrows representing the seven Dutch provinces). This beacon was found on the farm Ongegundefontein on the southern side of Olifants River mouth, near present-day Papendorp, and was donated to the South African Museum in 1893.
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Savin, what about this image would have made this image featurable and of quality?
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject... but uneven lighting and unsharp. --Cayambe (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The lighting is a one source light from above, thus the uneven nature of its look. Quality? Its 20mp image. Which part of the image lacks sharpness? In the museum with their limited light sources and the beacon secured in a glass cage, this happens to be the closest to best I could achieve with my camera.
      • The lighting would not really be a problem for me. Uneven lighting in this case enhances the readability. The image *is* unsharp, however. View the image at full resolution to see. Kleuske (talk) 08:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Hans Gadamer.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2014 at 16:30:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Copyleft portrait of german XX Century philosofer Hans-Georg Hadamer, developer of philosophical hermeneutics, who argued that a artwork's meaning is not reducible to the author's intentions, but is dependent on the context of interpretation.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Oto Vega Ponce - uploaded by Oto Vega Ponce - nominated by Dvdgmz -- Dvdgmz (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Remarkable and impressive portrait of the German philosopher. Similarity well achieved, quality of drawing, encyclopedic approach. - Dvdgmz (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is a good and valuable portrait. The stains on the paper are rather ugly though and I think an attempt should be made to make a digital restoration prior to considering nomination for FPC, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 19:35, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
    • It isn't a deteriorated paper. The author included digitally this background to give texture to the portrait.--Dvdgmz (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File:BEP-GIRSCH-Declaration of Independence (Trumbull).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014 at 22:50:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Engraving based on Trumbull's Declaration of Independence
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bureau of Engraving and Printing - uploaded, restored, and nominated by -- Godot13 (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Bureau of Engraving and Printing engraved vignette of John Trumbull’s painting Declaration of Independence (c. 1818). Engraving by Frederick Girsch. This vignette has been featured on U.S. currency beyond the $2 bill. It was the reverse of the $100 National Bank Note from roughly the 1860s to 1880s. The vignette was also on Certificates of Indebtedness in the early to mid 1900s.--Godot13 (talk) 23:05, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Godot13 (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High value, and of course very good timing (Happy birthday USA !). I'ved cleaned out more spots, but a very good and clear restoration, IMO. --Jebulon (talk) 15:37, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:22, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. Very impressive. --Slaunger (talk) 20:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Loads of wow. Very impressive. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 11:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you give some details of the restoration technique and how was it photographed/scanned? And what did you use as the source? I think all this should be specified in the file. Gidip (talk) 18:55, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Added to the image file.-Godot13 (talk) 20:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 11:45, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 12:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 12:23, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Historical

File:Sarah Vaughan - William P. Gottlieb - No. 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2014 at 21:02:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sarah Vaughan
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William P. Gottlieb - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Last nomination got six out of the seven supports needed for a quorum. As it is featured on four different Wikipedias, I suspect it's suited for Commons as well, despite the minor flaws of a candid photograph. And it's taken by a notable photographer, so that's a plus. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yes, and a very striking portrait. Lovely. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The flying saucer that is trying to kidnap her is rather distracting. Would editing that out affect EV? Saffron Blaze (talk) 01:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I would support editing it out providing it's a documented separate file linked to the original. I'm not sure it can be within the guidelines. And besides maybe she was really being 'lifted'... It is pretty intrusive I have to admit. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
It's something I'd like to remove, but which would be misleading to. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Misleading to whom? No one would care, as the image is about her not some murky prop in the background. Saffron Blaze (talk) 00:00, 12 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 21:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Steinway & Sons upright piano, model 1098, manufactured at Steinway's factory in New York City.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2014 at 21:48:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Upright piano made in the United States
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Steinway & Sons - uploaded by Fanoftheworld and McZusatz - nominated by Nobelpeopleuploader -- Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Great picture of a piano made in the United States. After having voted for Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sukhoi SuperJet 100 (5114478300).jpg I would like to nominate this picture. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:55, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:55, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A quite similar image is already featured, but it is a .png and not exactly the same model: File:Steinway & Sons upright piano, model K-132, manufactured at Steinway's factory in Hamburg, Germany.png. --Myrabella (talk) 22:09, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for letting me know. However I still think this picture of an American made piano is great and could be a featured picture. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:13, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We can't really have two FPs that differ only in the file format. I assume PNG was the original and someone created a JPG. From the previous FP it appears the original had a colour profile embedded in it that was for printing on coated paper, and someone just removed the profile to make the file smaller. This JPG has no colourspace metadata or profile so the colours are arbitrary. I know it is not a particularly colourful image, but colours are important. It is also rather low resolution (3MP) for a product shot (which these days, would probably have been taken with a 50MP medium-format camera). So too many problems to be "finest". -- Colin (talk) 11:00, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No, model 1098 and model K-132 are two different pianos. We can easily have two feautured pictures of two different pianos like we already have two feautured pictures of two different Mercedes sports cars: File:DTM Mercedes W204 Lauda09 amk.jpg and File:DTM Mercedes W204 DiResta09 amk.jpg. Regarding the file format: Some people prefer PNG other prefer JPG. But both file formats are suitable for featured pictures, see also the complete guideline for featured pictures. Regarding the resolution: The resolution (3MP) is not low and it is suitable for featured pictures, according to the complete guideline for featured pictures it should be "at least 2MP". I hope you please would reconsider your vote. Thanks. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 16:20, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
      • You are right, they are different. Still, I don't personally see much merit in featuring a remarkably similar image. My other comments stand, and I'm quite familiar with the guidelines, which are just that: guidelines. The 2MP guideline is a very low bar and 3MP is quite unacceptable for a product shot. Nobelpeopleuploader, I suggest you consider what "Finest" means in terms of contemporary photography, rather than arguing about rules. Actually, I'm surprised the PNG was accepted as FP as it is not a optimal choice for photographic images. -- Colin (talk) 17:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
        • To Colin: I'm not arguing about rules, I'm just trying to make something clear. And my way of judging featured picture candidates is always based on the guideline for featured pictures and my own opinion. If my opinion on some points is completely against the guideline I respect the guideline made by the Wikimedia community. I'm not going to raise my very own opinion above the guideline. If every person who vote does that, then the guideline is nothing worth and the voting process is like the Wild West. If you perceived my previous info/comment as an insult I apologize - that was definitely not my intention. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 19:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
          • No insult taken. Just you seem to be arguing I should support because it passes the guideline (e.g, 2MP) or that I can't oppose on some issue the guideline has a lower threshold on. The guideline is just the base of what we all agree should apply (with very few exceptions) to all images. But beyond that everyone is free to set their own standards and they should be higher than that! I might consider a difficult bird-in-flight photograph to be fine at 2MP but a studio or landscape photograph is unlikely to impress anyone with that little detail. Compare my own product shots (iron, camera) with far more detail and only an entry-level DSLR rather than pro kit. This piano image lacks any detail in the wood and is actually quite noisy. The award of FP is based on consensus rather than following rules. It is a bit random at times. The overall judgement is whether this is among our finest images. I don't think a rather plain product photograph at 3MP is anywhere close to the expected standard. -- Colin (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
            • I see we two have a difference of opinion on how the guideline should be understood and how the voting process should be performed. I don't think we can come to some sort of an agreement on that. Så let us leave it for now. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 20:57, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
            • By the way: Regarding your opinion "This piano image lacks any detail in the wood..." - that is because the actual piano does NOT have any detail in the wood. The lacquer is very thick - between 1,0 and 1,5 millimetres. The finish of the piano is called "satin" because of the details in the lacquer, which can be seen in the photo. (Here you have a picture of a much cheaper piano with a thin layer of lacquer resulting in visible details in the wood: www.steinway.com/pianos/boston/upright/up-118s-pe). --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
              • Well I don't think my interpretation of the guideline is out-of-sync with consensus, whereas... well nobody else is supporting this. That other photo looks like the sort of "black ash" wood effect that was popular for cheap hifi in the 80s. Perhaps this isn't real wood finish either (the website seems to indicate that paying for a veneer is an option for discerning customers.) -- Colin (talk) 21:53, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
                • You are right that nobody else is supporting this picture. That is of course because of the long discussion and not because of the picture. Candidates with long discussions usually don't get supported. There is too much to read before people can make a vote so it's easier just to jump to some other images. I still don't understand why you think "This piano image lacks any detail in the wood..." when the actual piano doesn't have the details you want in the wood? --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:26, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
                  • There are plenty FPs (some my own) with long discussions. What makes you think people need to read other voter's opinions before making up their minds. They may often do so, but it is the image that is important. Nobelpeopleuploader, this is quite important: the FP guidelines do not describe the minimum objective criteria for FP. Indeed, the objective criteria are identical to QI (which this image wouldn't qualify due to authorship). The subjective criteria are judgement as to whether this is among our "finest" and the need for "wow". I can't underestimate how important "wow" is (though sadly often forgotten by some voters who think "nice" is sufficient). A 3MP standard studio product shot that is not creatively lit or presented has no wow. The fact that the detail is insufficient to determine the finish accurately, just emphasises the deficiencies in the image. -- Colin (talk) 08:44, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin. It's among finest, because it's not just a common sharp touristy shot, but it suffers from the comparison with the similar subject (compression artifacts all over the place, jaggy lines probably coming from bad downsampling algorithm...). Also, IMO this is a case where PNG is preferable to JPEG. - Benh (talk) 11:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Please, see my info above. Model 1098 and model K-132 are two different pianos, like these two feautured pictures of Mercedes sports cars: File:DTM Mercedes W204 Lauda09 amk.jpg and File:DTM Mercedes W204 DiResta09 amk.jpg. Please, reconsider your vote. Thanks. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 16:20, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
      • My concern is about the quality of the picture itself (again, over compressed jpeg, and jaggy lines). My reference to the other similar (not identical) picture was to show what this picture misses to get FP label IMO. - Benh (talk) 23:21, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
        • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question What do you mean by "over compressed jpeg" and "jaggy lines". I'm not able to see that. When I look at the picture with zoom 100% the lines look normal to me. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 17:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In my opinion (and I may be wrong), the 2MP limit is there because there might be scenarios (especially action shots in difficult scenarios and scientific imaging) where a higher resolution is almost impossible to get or useless. For a studio product shot, the resolution should be much higher. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A very well done studio shot, but the low resolution kills it. Look at the highlights along the edges of the piano: Even at full resolution they look like stairways. --El Grafo (talk) 13:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I'm not able to see that. Will you please specify what you mean? Maybe I could learn something. I can't see that "the highlights along the edges of the piano: Even at full resolution they look like stairways". Hope you will tell me. Thank you. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 17:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Annotations added to image. Poor anti-aliasing they call it. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:33, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you for that. Now I understand what you mean. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 19:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It seems a lot of accounts involved in the promotion of "Steinway & Sons"; so be careful in reviewing them. Jee 16:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just above the 2MB limit is way too small for a high-quality studio shot IMHO. Poor detail, pixelating edges. It’s a nice image but nice is not wow. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 18:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --19:53, 15 July 2014 (UTC)Nobelpeopleuploader (talk)

File:Merfeld, Wildpferdebahn, Weg am Waldrand -- 2014 -- 7923.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2014 at 10:53:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Composition of elements; nature reserve "Wildpferdebahn" in Merfeld, Dülmen, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 10:53, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 10:53, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question What exactly should be featurable here? --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:37, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I like the simplicity of the image, but I'm sure it's not everyone's cup of tea.--XRay talk 18:24, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Agree. Coat of Many Colours (talk)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment FYI: CAs on the top left were removed. --XRay talk 09:45, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Colors look washed out to me and the branches on the left are disturbing. Poco2 11:28, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I've improved the colors. You're right, it's better.--XRay talk 12:37, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment So, if I get it right, you want this image to be featured for showing outstandingly little to be featured? LOL. Now I’m at least convinced that FPC is not my cup of tea at all. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 15:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not simple enough to be arty and otherwise rather boring. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination ... may be better ... --XRay talk 16:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Iziko World Wars Statue 02.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2014 at 12:16:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monument at Iziko South African Museum, Cape Town. Table Mountain and Iziko South South African Museum & Planetarium building in the background. This monument is in remembrance of those who lost their lives in the Big wars. 1914 to 1918 and 1939 to 1945.
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 great loss of detail due to compression artifacts, perspective distortion and clipped whites on the house --Kadellar (talk) 13:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Sukhoi SuperJet 100 (5114478300).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 04:53:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 10.664 MP, 2.6 MB → can't see anything wrong with that? --El Grafo (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 17:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic to see others seeing SuperJet International's photos are featured quality. Can only support this too. russavia (talk) 17:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 08:55, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 22:34, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not your usual setting for a jet photo. Perfect! Daniel Case (talk) 18:02, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 09:45, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:08, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:05, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Vehicles

File:Chateau Luynes.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2014 at 11:57:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Myrabella - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 11:57, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 11:57, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 12:58, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:31, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think it's shot (cropped) a bit to tight. --Uberprutser (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I uploaded sharper version. Please revert, if it's not better. --Ivar (talk) 16:58, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 17:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 22:10, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support @Tomer T: Once again, thank you so much, Tomer! @Iifar: Yes, I find it better with your editing, thank you! I am used to be light with sharpening (if any) but your edit is perfectly fine by me. --Myrabella (talk) 08:57, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:36, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:08, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 15:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral For a building with such nice surroundings, I really can't support this tight crop, especially on the left. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:12, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 19:51, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications

File:Cypriot statue - Neues Museum.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 08:32:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cypriot statue - Neues Museum
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by MrPanyGoff -- MrPanyGoff 08:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MrPanyGoff 08:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 07:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good work balancing the sometimes jarring contrast between the natural and artificial light one encounters with these (Is that the actual background? Or is it something you swapped in? It just looks so clean). Daniel Case (talk) 04:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the words. As for the background, no, it is not the actual one.--MrPanyGoff 07:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 19:18, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI but not special enough for FP. Not especially detailed (low resolution and not super-sharp) and I dislike the "floating in space" substituted background. -- Colin (talk) 11:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice but Im not not entirely convinced by the sharpness and level of detail at the lower right part.--ArildV (talk) 12:12, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 19:56, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de los Remedios, Kotor, Bahía de Kotor, Montenegro, 2014-04-19, DD 29.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 11:05:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Roman Catholic Church of Our Lady of Remedy with the city of Kotor and the homonymous bay in the background, Montenegro. The church, located in the slope of the St. John Mountain and only reacheable on foot, dates from 1518. All by me, Poco2 11:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 11:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnikcontribs 06:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have a problem with the big white water part it looks blown out. For me it unbalances an otherwise very nice picture. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    That is the reflection of the clouds and according to LR5 there is no real overexposure here. Poco2 19:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Einstein2 (talk) 16:20, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Although it is no real overexposure, its still disturbing. The composition and the environment is exciting, but the weather conditions was probably not good enough for FP imo.--ArildV (talk) 12:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It works for me --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:59, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And I can't find a part that looks blown out, let alone is. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 11:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 19:53, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Pen-y-ghent from South.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 13:25:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pen-y-ghent as seen from the south
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Pennine Way and Pen-y-ghent from South – c/u/n by Kreuzschnabel -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 13:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sorry but what is Pen-y-ghent? Could you please add a decent description? I find a good description very important when making the decision if I find a picture feature worthy. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment On a photograph of a mountain, I think it’s decent enough to give the mountain’s name along with the geocoding and point of view. What else do you expect? For further information just look up its name on Wikipedia. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:35, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was about to say the same. A wikilink in the nom or information page is always handy but my browser has a search box. There's a geocode link too. I'd much rather nominators explained why they think the image is among our finest, which is something I can't find out for myself with a click. -- Colin (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sure I can do a search, but I'm not going to. If you think a picture is feature worthy you can take the time to add a decent description. For me a good description is important and At some point I'm going to ignore pictures without. I'm making a point here. Don't take it personally :) But to many pictures are missing descriptions --Baykedevries (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since I haven’t understood your point yet, let me ask once again: What do you expect? Or maybe point out some of the active nominations that do have descriptions after your liking (most don’t have any at all, just "c/u/n by $NAME", without you complaining, AFAIS). I really don’t know what you mean. The picture shows the Pennine Way climbing a mountain named Pen-y-ghent from its southern side. That’s what my description says, so IMHO it’s a proper description of the photograph. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Baykedevries that often file descriptions (on the file page - it is those that matters) are inadequate as important information is often missing regarding the particular image, but this is not one of those cases. The file page is adequately categorized to e.g. Pen-y-ghent and Pennine Way and if you follow those links, there are interwiki links to articles in several different languages (after I have added them, that is, as they were initially missing). If the nominator were to copy that information to the file page (in how many languages?), it would just be maintenance of redundant information. It would contaminate, not add value. I do think though that it is generally a good idea if nominators check that main categories are adequately linked to wikipedia articles, such that the relevant information can be found fast and efficient. The interwiki links are often missing on Commons categories. --Slaunger (talk) 23:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:54, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a pretty picture of good quality, but it does not stand out for me as extraordinary. Background is a little soft in focus. --Slaunger (talk) 07:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:26, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pleasant composition and a reasonable QI (could be sharper). The 4:3 ratio isn't generally good for landscape IMO and it is too ordinary a result to be featurable. -- Colin (talk) 07:09, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
    • See this professional image for a better composition from further back. That image has probably had some pop added through processing but it does have good evening light. -- Colin (talk) 17:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow and the crop ratio chosen is very appropriate for a landscape IMO. --Graphium 19:48, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, the 4:3 ratio is quite an issue with the micro 4/3 cameras (obviously !). Shooting 3:2 is an option but you loose quite some resolution in the process of course... How sad for those otherwise nice cameras. - Benh (talk) 15:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:59, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Anemone tomentosa 'Albadura' 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 05:10:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Beautiful swelling buds of Anemone tomentosa 'Albadura' created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request How about a tighter crop on left side to get the main object out of center? Would look more interesting. Altogether it’s a bit dull for me, maybe not the best light. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Tighter crop.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Since you're doing requests, would it be possible to photoshop the spiderweb thread out? They bother me a bit. --Baykedevries (talk) 17:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Cobweb removed.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:06, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very good composition, but light is too dull for me to support. --Slaunger (talk) 07:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Fleuren.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I really don't like the crop. If you see here an imitation of a face with two eyes - emphasize it by more lead room on the right (if possible) and a tighter crop on the left (and maybe on bottom too). If, on the other hand, it is just a plant with no reminiscence of other things - go for an upright crop that emphasizes the shape of the plant. Gidip (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If I go right off the picture is more or less square (as https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anemone_tomentosa_%27Albadura%27_02.JPG) because the space below is missing.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I really prefer that crop! Gidip (talk) 04:44, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 12:23, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Detail destroyed through postprocessing in all areas. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 11:54, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:51, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants/Flowers

File:HMS Belfast with rainbow.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2014 at 22:05:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

HMS Belfast with rainbow.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dmitry A. Mottl - uploaded by Dmottl - nominated by Dmottl -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- on this day we've all been treated to gorgeous images of Thames side in London by helicopter Tour de France, very happy to support. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The colors seems not natural, it lacks a lot of blue, not only on the sky and the water. As you can see in this picture the blue parts of the bridge disappeared on your image. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 10:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice for me. Even thought I would have prefer a 16:9 crop --PierreSelim (talk) 11:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic. --Tupungato (talk) 16:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support What a lucky moment. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Famberhorst (talk) 05:11, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment More sharpness would be good IMO. The photo is too soft. --Graphium 19:54, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The rainbow and colours is not exciting enough WOW for me here.--ArildV (talk) 12:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:25, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The conditions are pretty fantastic. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 11:53, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:43, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Vehicles

File:James Webb Primary Mirror.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2014 at 07:25:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"NASA engineer Ernie Wright looks on as the first six flight ready James Webb Space Telescope's primary mirror segments are (prepared) to begin final cryogenic testing at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center."
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA/MSFC/David Higginbotham - uploaded by Originalwana - nominated by Pine -- Pine 07:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pine 07:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fine composition but way too noisy. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Specially the scientist is noisy (it must be a very dark room and it's backlighted) but it has lots of wow and a great composition and EV. --Kadellar (talk) 09:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great image of a interesting subject. The noise doesn't bother me. For a second I thought the guy was standing in front of a giant VCR! --Baykedevries (talk) 17:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 01:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Composition mitigates minor technical flaws. --Slaunger (talk) 07:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk