Commons:Javaslatok kiemelt képekre

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Javaslatok kiemelt képekre más nyelveken:

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

Ha úgy gondolod, hogy egy Commonson található fotó/kép eléggé vonzó ahhoz, szerepeljen a Commons:Kiemelt képek lapon, akkor tegyél új javaslatot ez a szöveg alján levő listán. Ha kialakult egy általános konszenzus 15 napon belül, a képet feltüntetik: a Commons:Kiemelt képek lapon.

Contents

Javaslatok[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Landscape of Don Khon with pirogues and children.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2018 at 13:58:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape of Don Khon with pirogues and children

File:Smiling woman holding a cup and a bottle of beer.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2018 at 14:01:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Smiling woman holding a cup and a bottle of beer

File:20180520 Peona with Oxythyrea funesta 850 9353.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2018 at 11:46:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Peona with Oxythrea Funesta on Pentecost 2018
Don't know what exact kind of Peona that is. --Granada (talk) 13:52, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Bosc's fringe-toed lizards (Acanthodactylus boskianus asper) love bite.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2018 at 11:42:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bosc's fringe-toed lizards (Acanthodactylus boskianus asper) courtship love bite
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info Liz had found her soul mate. It was love at first bite.
    A male holding onto a female with a bite is part of the courtship ritual of a number of reptile species. It is rare to see the white of the eye of a lizard. He does look pretty happy with life in the Jordanian desert! All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 11:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Charles (talk) 11:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Good catch ! -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:28, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - Fantastic! How much time did you spend in the Jordanian desert? I'm so impressed with the photos you took there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Sankt Veit an der Glan Bürgergasse Klosterkirche Zu Unserer Lieben Frau 18052018 3372.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2018 at 08:05:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Former citizen`s hospital and monastery church Our Lady on Bürgergasse, Sankt Veit an der Glan, Carinthia, Austria

File:Vitoria - Parque de Olárizu - Niebla y cencellada -BT- 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2018 at 18:20:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hoar frost on a foggy morning at Olarizu Park. Vitoria-Gasteiz, Basque Country, Spain
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info All by me. -- Basotxerri (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I've used B&W because as in many foggy, misty, winterly pictures it allows to work better with contrasts. I personally like the melancholic winter scene, the leading lines of the bikeway and the trees. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Very pleasant Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:56, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 20:19, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Wow, the fogg makes this photo nice while it's mostly disturbing --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:44, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  SupportMeiræ 02:00, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --XRay talk 09:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:55, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Cart (talk) 19:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Panorama auf dem Roten Kliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2018 at 17:43:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view (360°) on the Rotes Kliff on the island of Sylt

File:Borboleta monarca.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2018 at 11:07:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Soldier butterfly (Danaus eresimus), Boa Esperança do Sul, Brazil.

File:Barn on Mastlé mountain Gherdëina.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2018 at 19:13:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Barn on the Mastlé mountain. In the background the Pitla Fermeda and Gran Fermeda peaks in the Puez-Geisler Nature Park in the Dolomites UNESCO World Heritage Site.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Thinking about it, I think the location has potential of reaching FP, but this current photo has a little bit too boring light for me to go "wow". With more exciting light, I think the shot could succeed.--Peulle ( talk) 18:56, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I thought of going back there but snow conditions have changed ;-) --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 18:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Снежинка на разноцветном фоне.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2018 at 18:21:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Snowflake on a multi-colored background
  • Well it looks very messy now and the background colours don't seem right for this kind of image. Neither true-to-life or artistic. Charles (talk) 07:31, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • In this a totally agree with Charles, the background is not a good choice. --Cart (talk) 08:02, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 00:34, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Tozina (talk) 05:27, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose for now. The image hasn't been cleaned up for presentation, which I'd expect at FP, and defects are visible at thumb size. I can have a go at removing the blemishes this weekend if nobody else does. -- Colin (talk) 07:27, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Colin.--Peulle (talk) 08:47, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Charles, Cart and Colin -- P999 (talk) 13:04, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Colin—I can see the dust spots at thumb. Daniel Case (talk) 04:50, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Przełęcz Karkonoska (Slezské sedlo, Spindlerpass) - view from Odrodzenie.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2018 at 17:15:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Przełęcz Karkonoska (Karkonosze pass, Slezské sedlo, Spindlerpass) - view from Odrodzenie hostel. Krkonoše mountains

File:Śnieżne Kotły (Snežné jámy, Schneegruben), Krkonoše mountains 03.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2018 at 17:12:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Śnieżne Kotły (Snežné jámy, Schneegruben), Krkonoše mountains

File:Anshan train station.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2018 at 10:47:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Train station in Anshan
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info created by Jan Alonzo - uploaded by Rincewind42 - nominated by ParadiseDesertOasis8888 -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 10:47, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 10:47, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I'm not seeing this as sufficiently high quality for FP, both because of the object near the top, the perspective warp and the light rendering.--Peulle (talk) 11:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment While this photo is large enough, it has the same perspective distortion and some other issues as the one you nominated earlier. I think it would be a big help for you to read the Image Guidelines first, so you know what is expected from an FP. You could also take a look at COM:PT where photo techniques and terms are explained. If you know some of this, your nominations are more likely to be sucessful. Best, --Cart (talk) 11:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Even apart from the technical issues, it just looks too ordinary. Daniel Case (talk) 00:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Addis Ababa City view.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2018 at 10:36:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Addis Ababa cityscape
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info created by Ninaras - uploaded by Ninaras - nominated by ParadiseDesertOasis8888 -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 10:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I nominated this picture because I feel like it illustrates the development that Ethiopia is going through in that it shows poorly made buildings in a crowded area right next to high-rises under construction which dramatically shows the vast difference between Ethiopia's not-so-distant past and its not-so-distant future. -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 10:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I see the nominator's point but the image is not that evocative for me personally.--Peulle (talk) 11:01, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Per Peulle. --Karelj (talk) 20:33, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Light and composition (cut feet for the most obvious element) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:34, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 22:05, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Ebensfeld-Ansberg-Maintal-Staffelberg-Pano-P1060051.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 May 2018 at 07:00:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Ansberg near Ebensfeld to the north into the upper Main valley and the mountains of the Thuringian Forest

All by me -- Ermell (talk) 07:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Ermell (talk) 07:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Too much fog and dull colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Not fog but the haze of a frosty morning.--Ermell (talk) 07:19, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Interesting, detailed and amazing view. The light is right for this intention. --Milseburg (talk) 17:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Basile, although like Milseburg I do want to give the photographer credit for the detail. Daniel Case (talk) 22:05, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Palestine sunbird (Cinnyris osea osea) male.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2018 at 21:31:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palestine sunbird (Cinnyris osea osea) male, Dana Biosphere Reserve, Jordan
  • Thanks. Happy to crop a bit off the left if there is a consensus, but I positioned the vertical plant and the bird's eye on the rule of thirds. Charles (talk) 08:56, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Stift Melk Nordseite 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2018 at 20:06:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Melk Abbey

File:Iglesia católica, Beaver Creek, Yukón, Canadá, 2017-08-25, DD 13.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2018 at 19:31:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Our Lady of Grace church, Beaver Creek, Yukon, Canada
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info Catholic church of Our Lady of Grace, Beaver Creek, Yukon, Canada. This original small church belongs to the Diocese of Whitehorse and was built by Father Morriset in 1962 using a Butler hut (a redesign of the famous Quonset hut) left by the US Army after construction of the Alaska Highway was completed. The church is located in an area with a very low population density and Beaver Creek, the last populated place in Canada before Alaska, has a population of 93 (2016). All by me, Poco2 19:31, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Poco2 19:31, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Nothing special for FP, good image but no wow. --Karelj (talk) 21:57, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg  Support I'm not sure, but IMO the shadows are a little bit disturbing. But I like the composition. --XRay talk 05:12, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 10:28, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Karelj.--Peulle (talk) 11:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Not loving the composition, especially the trees cut on top, and I find the image too busy -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others; I can see what might have been but this just doesn't work for so many reasons, mainly the composition and colors. Daniel Case (talk) 22:48, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment @Karelj, XRay, ParadiseDesertOasis8888, Peulle, Basile Morin:, Daniel Case: I reduced the shadows, cropped a bit on the left to improve the composition and "cooled" it a bit. --Poco2 11:23, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment IMO still OK. And I like the composition. --XRay talk 12:27, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Not much difference for me, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:49, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I'm surprised by how big a difference the cropping made. This composition is harmonious to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:35, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Anton Francesco dello Scheggia - The Seven Virtues - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2018 at 18:17:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anton Francesco dello Scheggia - The Seven Virtues
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Not a mosaic (tempera and gold leaf are painting techniques) but it is painted in a style to emulate a Bysantine mosaic, hence the gold leaf. Mosaics were very fashionable at the time, but few could afford them. I agree that the colors are not very well captured. There is some croma noise we could do without. --Cart (talk) 20:26, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Schokland. UNESCO-Werelderfgoed actm 27.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2018 at 16:00:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural #Netherlands. Pollard willows.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info Schokland. UNESCO World Heritage. Pollard willows at the foot of the former island (on the flight port road). All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Just admit it: You painted those clouds yourself in the sky to match the trees perfectly! Face-tongue.svg --Cart (talk) 17:03, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I love the trees! And as Cart mentions, the light and clouds. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:18, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Ikan -- P999 (talk) 23:04, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:07, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support keenly observed --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:08, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --XRay talk 05:13, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Some CA on the pole on the right side is still left but very good--Ermell (talk) 07:19, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Yann (talk) 07:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Nice composition. Charles (talk) 09:02, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I noticed the clouds, too, before reading the comments -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Tozina (talk) 05:35, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Nice! Both sides are slightly leaning in, BTW. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:53, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Milseburg (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I like the way the clouds reinforce the willow branches. Daniel Case (talk) 18:29, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:01, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Poco2 12:55, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:2018I5834 - Лиса Гора.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2018 at 05:20:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Forrest in Holohory, Ukraine

File:Praděd v Jeseníkách 03.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 May 2018 at 23:25:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Praded TV Tower in Jeseniky mountains, Czech Republic

File:Ballet, 1940245.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 May 2018 at 15:43:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ballet
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info created by ivanovgood, uploaded and nominated by Yann (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Yann (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose The scene is quite nice, but at this resolution I have a problem with the level of quality; I just don't think it's one of the best images on Commons.--Peulle (talk) 16:12, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I think that quality is acceptable and in this area we don't have much, so a plus for me for originality Poco2 19:28, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Fine for 10 years ago but not acceptable for a studio image from 2017. Our guidelines strongly discourage downsizing. High JPG compression and posterised lighting. No colourspace specified/embedded. Yann, none of our Commons regular photographers would get away with nominating 3.95MP studio image in 2018. Why don't you try contacting the photographer to upload their 16MP original (assuming it is like their other photos) and we can then judge it against what the finest photographers on Commons are nominating in 2018. -- Colin (talk) 20:12, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Colin: What makes you know that it is a studio image (i.e. not a real show)? Regards, Yann (talk) 06:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Because all their other photos are studio photos. And the lighting. -- Colin (talk) 08:04, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • That this is staged was my first reaction to it. Had it been a real show, there wouldn't have been a wall that close behind the dancers. The flow of her hair and the fabric would also require a big fan or wind machine, you don't get that from motion alone. Plus the light, stage spotlights create much harder shadows than this. (I've seen hundreds of ballets and danced myself, so gut feeling.) --Cart (talk) 08:43, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • OK, thanks. I wasn't sure. Yann (talk) 09:11, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others. Very obvious posterization. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:22, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg  Neutral torn between Diego and Colin... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:10, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Colin. Daniel Case (talk) 13:42, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Eberndorf Köcking Sonnenblumenfeld Biohof Tomic 18072014 0792.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 May 2018 at 10:25:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunflower at a field in Köcking, Eberndorf, Carinthia, Austria
  • ratio 5:4? Why? Charles (talk) 20:41, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I like leaf and insect. Charles (talk) 20:41, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Pile-on support Daniel Case (talk) 04:13, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Tozina (talk) 05:39, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Milseburg (talk) 17:54, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:38, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants/Asterales

File:Sunlight on beech leaves in Gullmarsskogen ravine 5.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 May 2018 at 09:43:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunlight on beech leaves in Gullmarsskogen ravine
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Fagaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info Let's try this one instead. This is brighter and more about the structure of the leaves than graphical forms. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 09:43, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Cart (talk) 09:43, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Nice. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 10:27, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- P999 (talk) 20:30, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I like how the leaves fill the frame in this one. The light is good filtering through the leaves and outlining the branches and hairs. -- Colin (talk) 20:37, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - I think the other photo has a much better composition, with the bright leaves extending diagonally from the upper right to the lower left. The light is nice in both pictures, but this one feels to me like a photo of a phenomenon, not a picture with such a compelling composition. At least 3 people would seem to disagree with me. I'll live with this a little longer, because there's something to be said about the light itself creating a shape, but I'm currently leaning toward opposing this one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:55, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Colin --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:07, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Nothing special for FP, good image but no wow. --Karelj (talk) 22:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Karelj and my comments above. I really don't understand why some people prefer this to the other photo. The pattern of leaves in this photo feels random and not compelling to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --XRay talk 05:20, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Karelj and Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 07:23, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Colin. I love leafglow. Daniel Case (talk) 04:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Tozina (talk) 05:43, 18 May 2018 (UTC) Thank you for showing the leaves' details through contrast by shadow and light
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Per Karelj --Poco2 12:58, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Wainui Bay 20.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 May 2018 at 22:59:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wainui Bay in Tasman Region, South Island of New Zealand

File:Münster, Beresa, Mercedes-Benz C-Klasse Cabrio -- 2018 -- 1757.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 May 2018 at 17:00:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rear light of a Mercedes-Benz C-Klasse Cabrio at car dealer Beresa in Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Automobiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 17:00, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- XRay talk 17:00, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support A very professional shot of a car's detail. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:56, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Peulle (talk) 13:18, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Suisant7 (talk) 14:50, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Per Johann --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:26, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:25, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:02, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Good composition. The silhouette reflecting in the mirror is well done : seat looking like a passenger, and this element of the background leads the sight back to the foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Weak oppose Sorry, this subject is not amazing me, quality is great and the composition looks fine (although the ultimative plus would have been a nice motif in the mirror), but all in all I don't believe it's outstanding. Poco2 13:03, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:ET Tigray asv2018-01 img28 Debre Damo Monastery.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 May 2018 at 15:27:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church in Debre Damo

File:Petřín tower 05 2018.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 May 2018 at 13:52:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Top of the Petřín Tower in Prague
This shouldn't be declared a requirement for support. Most people here are photographers in the first place - not botanists. ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:52, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I understand that, but this is FPC, and I think that for this photo to be truly outstanding, the tree, which is a primary subject and for its particular shape as a deciduous tree with leaves, really should be identified. Johann, if you're confident, we can add that category and be done with it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:17, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not absolutely sure about the determination of a fraxinus excelsior (ash, European ash, common ash), but the shape of the leaves give a strong hint to my conjesture. I am around 95% confident that the deciduous tree is an ash. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:39, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your categorization Johann. -- Suisant7 (talk) 14:55, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - Thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:37, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support The tree looks like a fraxinus excelsior. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:01, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:52, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 07:16, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Just something delightfully unpretentious about it. Daniel Case (talk) 01:31, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --XRay talk 05:21, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Karelj (talk) 20:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Composition doesn't work for me. Strained. Charles (talk) 20:43, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Looks good to me Poco2 13:04, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Nordkirchen, Naturschutzgebiet Ichterloh -- 2018 -- 2327-31.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 May 2018 at 11:19:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nature reserve Ichterloh, Nordkirchen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 11:19, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- XRay talk 11:19, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - You captured a glorious moment in such a way that we who weren't there can hold onto it. And what a fine composition! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:52, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 07:17, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Nice clouds, but nothing really special. Yann (talk) 09:01, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I'm sure the scene looked fabulous in reality, but this image doesn't look "real" to me. The tone mapping is way too obvious for my taste. I think what puts me off here is the section of sky adjacent to the trees on the left. It has too much of a "happy" blue that doesn't really fit the over-all dark and moody feel. --El Grafo (talk) 12:56, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Exactly per El Grafo -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:31, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Nice landscape but having the sun obscured by the clouds gives the ground here a cold, unpleasant blue tint and the sky looks a bit freakish and strangely processed. I think this is the first time I've seen a rapeseed field deliberately shot in shadow. Sorry. --Cart (talk) 21:08, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Ikan; I don't find the image unrealistic or unnatural. Daniel Case (talk) 00:25, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
It was indeed an impressive weather. First blue sky and then the clouds gathering. --XRay talk 04:13, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Per Yann and El Grafo. --Karelj (talk) 14:10, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Spruce tree stump in Gullmarsskogen ravine.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 May 2018 at 09:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spruce tree stump in Gullmarsskogen ravine
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info The ravine in Gullmarsskogen Nature Reserve is carved out by a stream and tall trees grow both in and around the ravine. The ravine is in an almost perpetual dusk, even on sunny days, the sun only pierce the foliage with bright spots of light. (More info at the category) This creates an almost magical light down in the ravine, but it is also very difficult to handle when shooting. Even HDR is sometimes not enough with the extremely bright spots next to darkness. I have tried to fix up the photos of the scenes as they appear IRL. I really like this tall tree stump with the small new sapling growing in front of it. A promise of new life next to the old dead tree. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 09:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Cart (talk) 09:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I like light and the shadows. --XRay talk 11:12, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per XRay --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:06, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Also per Xray, an excellent composition --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:39, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:20, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Shows that that "forest primeval" quality doesn't always require a low-angle shot of an endless expanse of uniformly tall trees. Daniel Case (talk) 14:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Daniel -- P999 (talk) 14:28, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:04, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:20, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Quality is good here, but I'm just not wowed by this kind of shots --Poco2 13:12, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Sorry to disappoint. Panoramas down in a ravine, not a good idea. Face-wink.svg --Cart (talk) 13:46, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Au Vieux Paris d'Arcole, 24 Rue Chanoinesse, 75004 Paris, 1 May 2018.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 May 2018 at 08:13:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info created by Pedro Szekely (Flickr) - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 08:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 08:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I like the scene but I don't like the harsh lighting. --Basotxerri (talk) 20:01, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Basotxerri.Symbol support vote.svg  Weak support now that Cart fixed the highlights. Daniel Case (talk) 01:41, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - The opposers have a point, but I don't think the highlights are irretrievably blown. Dialing down their brightness just a bit would make this featurable, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @Paris 16:, Basotxerri, Daniel Case and Ikan Kekek since the author of this is not active here on Commons, I took the liberty of fixing the light a bit, soften it. If you don't like it please revert it. --Cart (talk) 10:03, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support A really pleasant scene I would very much like to be in. :) --Cart (talk) 10:03, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I looked at this a few times now and I definitely quite like the scene; it's reminiscent of an old-style street photography or an early 1900s painting. Yet I don't feel the quality is quite up to scratch. Perhaps another similar shot can be made in the future.--Peulle (talk) 11:04, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Peulle. The right crop bothers me slightly, but it's quite a good scene. Quality is fine to my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per others -- Suisant7 (talk) 16:55, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I do not like the crop and per Puelle. --Karelj (talk) 14:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:August Friedrich Albrecht Schenck - Anguish - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 May 2018 at 18:35:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anguish
"soles"!? I don't understand what do you mean, where is it written? "Object type Unknown" : the template description is autogenerated from wikidata and the field should be "paintnig" (instance of (P31)), I don't know why this don't work, I will ask to someone. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:44, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
oh ok I see now, I don't know what "soles" means, but I fixed "Object type" Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:57, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Sharp, good colours --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:11, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Very nice. There is a 1-pixel-thick line at the bottom and on the right of the image to be removed, though -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not able to see what is to be removed or even what is disturbing, furthermore I'm not very excited about changing anything, because exception made to lose quality by editing this high resolution jpg I'm not able to see what we have to win in overwriting this file, or by creating a new one very very similar. No sorry I will not edit it, and I tend to disagree that someone do that for so small gain. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose until these 10477 black pixels are removed. Opening the picture at full size on Photoshop (or any other picture viewer), these lines are very visible. You see them even better by pasting the image on a white background. Which means they will appear on any print, corrupting the so-called "good quality" certification. We're here to select featured pictures. This mistake from the photographer is clearly a lack of requirement, accordingly to our official image guidelines. I don't think my screen invents anything. Such a correction will not reduce the quality of the image since the good pixels are not transformed. Also minor crops on existing files are totally valid, per Commons:Overwriting_existing_files#Minor_improvements -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
"very"?! I guess the word does not have the same meaning for all of us. And yes re-save a jpg mean a loss of quality, each time you save a jpg you have a new compression. And in order to remove a 1 pixel black line invisible for almost everybody exception made by who know where to look or maybe except for 1% of the viewers? Yes you will damage more pixels than you will remove, you will damage here 25 million pixel in order to remove those almost invisible 10477 pixels (furthermore 10477 pixels? I let to you the responsibility of this number). To oppose for that is silly. And an incentive to edit jpg files (=loss of quality) for only a few pixels may even be harmful for the project IMO. Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:03, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Not true. "When you resize an image and do not resample it, you change the image's size without changing the amount of data in that image. Resizing without resampling changes the image's physical size without changing the pixel dimensions in the image. No data is added to or removed from the image." Quote from Adobe's website, section Resizing images without resampling. Screencapture Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:03, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
@Basile Morin: Please read this too: Commons:Overwriting_existing_files#Exceptions_to_the_minor_changes_rule --XRay talk 12:23, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Minor croppings are ✓ okay. This painting is not even yet a QI -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Adobe is promoting adobe. They don't say "take an image from Wikimedia servers, save it on your pc, crop it with adobe, save the result and re-upload it on Wikimedia server, no data is added to or removed from the image". Sorry I don't read the same thing as you. And for the screenshot, I see that only on your screenshot, I'm also sorry but at full resolution I'm not able to see that. The purpose of FP project is to promote the finest, not to put the finest in the file histories. I prefer an oppose vote and I even prefer that the image be not promoted than to run after a "support" or after a potential promotion at the prize of damage of the image. Sorry, end of discussion for me. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:26, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
"take an image from Wikimedia servers, save it on your pc, crop it with adobe, save the result and re-upload it on Wikimedia server" ✓  Done  : File:Test_disappeared_1_pixel_lines_warning_message.jpg -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- P999 (talk) 05:36, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:44, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:38, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:24, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Basile has a point. The bottom black line is not nice. It can easily get cropped without any loss of quality. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:42, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - The black line looks like it's damage to the painting. If it's actually on the painting, I don't think the photo should digitally restore the painting. If it's not in the painting, it absolutely should be removed. However, if you look carefully at the photo on the museum's site, the line is there. So unless any of you know for a fact that it's not, I don't think you should be judging the photo as wanting for showing it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Yann, for confirming I'm not inventing ! Ikan (and the others), we're not talking about the same line. This extra line full of black pixels is definitely not part of the painting. This is just the last lines of pixels (at the bottom, and on the right) which are completely black, as if the frame had been cut and added to the image by the photographer / technician. I already joined a screenshot at 200% above (here again), but to be very explicit I will add this one too at 800% and that other one at 3200% (extracted from the download). Of course, there's no reason to have these lines in the file, it's just corrupting the beautiful painting, and that's only a technical problem. BTW, I don't understand why Peulle and other users notice the technical issue of this painting Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Anton_Francesco_dello_Scheggia_-_The_Seven_Virtues_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg, but not this one. There's also the same black line at the bottom and on the right of this last FPC. Easy to spot : you just need to zoom. But bigger problem : this line is also displayed on the thumbnails, at small size, probably interpreted as an important part of the image by Google Chrome and other browsers. Tested on Firefox + Internet explorer + Safari. So definitely polluting the previews, and of course definitely not welcome on the original image. Also, checking the quality of this photograph, we can notice it was already slightly deteriorated by a jpeg compression. You can check this by zooming very big, for example on Photoshop at 3200%, we see all the squares of 8x8 pixels which characterizes a moderate jpeg compression, inferior than the maximum quality (one more screenshot). When a jpeg picture is recorded with the best quality on a camera, only pixels are visible, not the compression. So claiming the purist argument to avoid to make the correction is not really a valid reasons in my opinion, here. Any clean modification of the file from the original at the maximum quality rate will have absolutely no impact compared to what the picture already suffered from in the past -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
I see the line and I don't understand why you don't just remove it if it's such a huge problem. To answer your question I'll quote the Guidelines for you: "Given sufficient "wow factor" and mitigating circumstances, a featured picture is permitted to fall short on technical quality." This is a tiny technical problem on an outstanding photo with huge wow factor. My vote stands. --Peulle (talk) 14:26, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Peulle, why I just don't remove it ? Because of the controversy. Christian writes "No sorry I will not edit it, and I tend to disagree that someone do that for so small gain." Also : "To oppose for that is silly. And an incentive to edit jpg files (=loss of quality) for only a few pixels may even be harmful for the project IMO." Don't want to fight. And concerning your quote of the guidelines, that's really an interpretation, here ! -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
OK, so it's there, but I can't see it at full size unless I look for it specifically, and even then, I see only enough to be able to see where you must be seeing it, not that it's clearly there to my eyes. It's so de minimis that in no way would it affect my vote. However, since it bothers you, I would support its removal if that would cause no damage to the image. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:22, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Sure, the black line is there and is above all on every previews at small size (not only on Commons). But if this and this is normal for a FP for everyone, then let's close the discussion, and just turn the page. I will have learnt something new today about the FP requirements -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:58, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
That's clearer than any other demonstration. I'll temporarily strike my supporting vote, and the edit should be made. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:31, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:47, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I just do not like this painting. The scene is so kitschy and unrealistic. --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:22, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  SupportMeiræ 02:05, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Karelj (talk) 14:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Cañón Miles, Yukón, Canadá, 2017-08-26, DD 144-154 PAN.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 May 2018 at 13:28:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Volcanic basalt formations in Miles Canyon, near Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info Panoramic view of the volcanic basalt formations in Miles Canyon along the Yukon River, not far from Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada. Poco2 13:28, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Poco2 13:28, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose The cylindrical projection introduces too much misleading distortion here. I thought this might be some significant meander in the river where it turns through 180° but Google Maps shows this section of the river is straight. -- Colin (talk) 14:40, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment This is a panorama, not a frame, there is no way that you can look at what is shown in the image from this viewpoint at once, you need to move your head from left to right, and the image here shows what you would view when panning your head. My intention was to show the volcanic basalts and for that I needed to stand there where I was, otherwise they would be hidden by the closer side of the river. There is no other type of projection that would work here, you suggest a rectilinear projection? as said, for that I would have had to be futher back and a portion of the basalts would be hidden. I like the way it looks, but if this kind of perspective is not welcome here I see definitely no point in uploading about 50 more such panos from Alaska and Yukon. Poco2 16:33, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I know it is difficult to represent a wide scope of view in a 2D frame. We've all had plenty discussion about projections, particularly with Diliff's cathedrals. I know you can't do this wide angle in rectilinear. We do now have nominations with 360° projections that can use a special viewer, and I think for some subjects that's a really immersive way of looking at a view. They way it looks here is too much like one of these -- someone unfamiliar with the scene/location would be mislead. Whereas some of our more extreme projections are obviously distorted (curved buildings, etc) so the viewer isn't fooled (e.g. File:King's Cross Western Concourse - central position - 2012-05-02.75.jpg). Two other examples of mine are File:St Matthew's Church - Paisley - Exterior - SouthEast.jpg -- a regular projection -- and File:St Matthew's Church - Paisley - Exterior - South Panorama.jpg -- a cylindrical projection that I think is pretty awful. The cylindrical projection only shows a very little more of the subject but is unacceptably distorted. The closer you are to the subject (e.g. the river or the road) the worse the distortion. -- Colin (talk) 17:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I understand that the viewer could get it wrong, but I still don't see it as a big problem. Falling lines, fish eyes, extreme perspectives, they all may decieve the viewer, but that's iMHO not a reason to exclude them. This FP of mine is exactly the same view (road instead of river), became FP 2 weeks ago and is IMO not as interesting as this one. Poco2 23:12, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Well perhaps most viewers of that other photo thought you were standing at a crossroads, or perhaps didn't care that some random piece of road in a desert was distorted. Here you have taken a photo of a "wow" bend in the river that should attract photographers like flies, except it isn't. It's an illusion. Many of the extremely wide panoramas we have are taken on mountain tops, where most of the subject is distant. For example: File:Panoramic view north from Ben Lomond.jpg. These photos have the effect of taking around 180° and compressing it to around 90°. If the close features are minor and insignificant, like the Ben Lomond photo, then it isn't so disturbing. But when the distorted features are actually the subject, then there's a problem. -- Colin (talk) 08:03, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Am I reading this right? You only want to upload photos here on Commons if they can become FPs? Or you only see FPs as useful to the project? Both sounds really bad to my ears. --Cart (talk) 16:54, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I've become the most productive user in the project in terms of quality and fetured content, that's not just by chance like this. I've spent a great deal of time and money to get there. So, I don't think that anybody here can demand that I upload anything more. The other way around, I think that I've the liberty to decide what I upload and what I don't and I expect other users to respect that. Poco2 23:12, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Ok, I stand corrected. --Cart (talk) 08:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I normally don't have any problems with these distorted 180 deg panoramas, but for some reason this much bending of a straight river bothers me a bit. That is why I added the location to the file, so that each viewer could see it and form their own opinion. I won't go as far as to oppose this, since this might just be me being square. --Cart (talk) 15:42, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - I will support this nomination if you state in the file description by about how many degrees you've bent the straight river in this projection. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:40, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
    • My guess, since there is riverbank on each side, is around 180° made to look like 90°. -- Colin (talk) 08:03, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Reasonable, but it's important for the file description to say. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:05, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Ikan: ✓  Done Poco2 08:14, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support . Perhaps you should say the actual appearance of the riverbank is straight, but maybe the number of degrees by itself are clear enough for most readers. To me, the number of degrees of the panorama is not the same as the number of degrees that the river is bent, but maybe I'm just confused. I do like the photo, though, and I think this kind of distortion is legitimate when it's clearly described. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Ikan: I added an additional note to make that more clear. Poco2 08:32, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Excellent note, thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:35, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I think it's pretty clear from looking at it that it's a panoramic; we have already promoted plenty that showed obviously straight roads bent this way. To me this may have been the only way to show the whole canyon. I could wish for a softer highlight on the cloud above the bridge, maybe, but I'm OK with it as is. Daniel Case (talk) 23:21, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support This is a panorama so it's obvious that the picture is distorted. This photo is good technically and very picturesque. FP for me. Tournasol7 (talk) 23:09, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per others -- Suisant7 (talk) 16:59, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Milseburg (talk) 17:56, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:45, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Hyacinthoides non-scripta, bastaard van Hyacinthoides hispanica . Boshyacint. d.j.b.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 May 2018 at 05:09:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hyacinthoides non-scripta. Boshyacint.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants Hyacinthoides non-scripta bastard of Hyacinthoides hispanica, #Family Asparagaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg  Info Cracked flower bud of the forest hyacinth.
    The wild hyacinth ( Hyacinthoides non-scripta bastard of Hyacinthoides hispanica, is a plant from the ( Asparagaceae ) The favorite place is in forest and blooms in May. All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:09, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:09, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:53, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Don't think this is among our finest flowers. This side is in shade. Buds are generally less interesting than open flowers, so I think the composition/light needs to be something special to compensate. Here is a rather central arrangement with an oddly narrow aspect ratio. The photo is rather small, like you had taken it landscape format and cropped it hugely. I don't see why the flower couldn't have been photographed to fill the frame and thus be much larger. Also I don't think this is Hyacinthoides non-scripta. I'm no flower expert, but I did research bluebells quite a bit when photographing them, and the vertical flower stalk here is not typical at all (it should be bent over, with flowers on one side like this). This is more like Hyacinthoides hispanica or a hybrid (and looking at your other photos, with pink variants, makes me even more confident this is not the same flower). The common bluebell generally appears in a mass, covering the wood floor, rather than isolated. So it would be more appropriate to have bluebell bokeh like this. -- Colin (talk) 06:58, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
    • Looking again at my photos, it is perhaps a bit harder to tell when just in bud (like this). Guides for telling the difference include this, this and this. I'm pretty sure your other photo here is the Spanish one. This photo is the right colour but it might be a hybrid. Until it opens, we don't have all the clues. The thickness of the leaves might help you based on this guide. -- Colin (talk) 07:21, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • If we see a bent stalk or not, may depend on the angle of the photo. Example of plant we all know is usually bent, here at a straight angle. Also, and unusual background can contribute to the wow-factor. --Cart (talk) 09:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • True but the other photos here and here were taken at the same geolocation, and those are definitely not non-scripta. They have blue anthers/pollen, the petals gently bend back rather than curl round, and the flowers come from all directions of the vertical stem. Given the multitude of British articles on the easy and unfortunate hybridisation of the native bluebell with the cultivated Spanish one, and that these are co-located, then probably the best one can hope for is a Hyacinthoides × massartiana hybrid. -- Colin (talk) 10:32, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Note: There are many of these wild hyacinths in the area. The stems are more or less slightly bent. Almost all of them are blue. With the occasional pink or white species in between. I like to photograph flower buds that almost come true. Is not done that much. But I find photos of flower buds interesting. And also quite difficult to photograph them nicely.--Famberhorst (talk) 11:31, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • If the are "slightly bent" then they are definitely naturalised garden-introduced Spanish bluebells, not "wild" and not non-scripta, which has a very distinctive droop like a shepherd's crook. I think it quite important that it is identified properly, because people look to Commons and Wikipedia to help identify flowers, and this misleads them. -- Colin (talk) 11:50, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
✓  Done . Name changed. Thank you for your explanation.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:23, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:32, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - Pretty impressive closeup to me, with a pleasant background. And while I agree that buds are generally less spectacular than flowers, they certainly have their place and merit being included among the FPs when warranted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Cart (talk) 09:27, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Given that this quite obviously was a staged shot in a semi-controlled studio-like environment, the lighting is pretty meh for me. Could use a bit more fill from the bottom left maybe? A simple piece of white cardboard or similar used as a reflector can do wonders … --El Grafo (talk) 10:04, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
    • Note: the background is just grass. So in a natural environment. The flower buds are photographed in the shade.--Famberhorst (talk) 11:19, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose It doesn't work for me.--Peulle (talk) 10:17, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Bad light, nothing special. -- -donald- (talk) 12:58, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Yann (talk) 09:04, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Tozina (talk) 17:58, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Weak oppose I went back and forth on this for a while, have seen some good arguments for it, but I can't shake one of Colin's points: that as a tighter image of the flowers this had a chance. As it is there's just too much dead green space around it. And unfortunately it's too small to crop down. Daniel Case (talk) 00:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 09:22, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Colin.--Ermell (talk) 07:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:36, 20 May 2018 (UTC)