Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Springe zu den aktuellen Kandidaten Springe zu den aktuellen Kandidaten

Dies sind die Kandidaten für die exzellenten Bilder. Beachte, dass es sich hierbei nicht um das Bild des Tages handelt.

Formalien[edit]

Nominierung[edit]

Leitsätze für die Nominierung[edit]

Bitte lies alle Leitsätze (Englisch) vor der Nominierung.

Dies ist eine Zusammenfassung von Kriterien, auf die du bei der Einreichung und Bewertung von Exzellenz-Kandidaten achten solltest:

  • AuflösungFotografien mit einer Auflösung unter 2 Millionen Pixel werden in der Regel abgelehnt, außer unter „stark mildernden Umständen“. Beachte, dass ein 1600 x 1200 großes Foto 1,92 Megapixel hat und damit weniger als 2 Millionen.
Grafiken auf Commons können auch in anderen Weisen als zur Anzeige auf einen herkömmlichen Computerbildschirm verwendet werden. Sie können auch als Ausdruck oder zur Anzeige auf hochauflösenden Bildschirmen verwendet werden. Man kann nicht vorhersagen, welche Geräte in Zukunft Anwendung finden, deshalb ist es wichtig, dass die nominierten Bilder die höchstmögliche Auflösung haben.
  • Eingescannte Bilder – solange es keine offizielle Richtlinie gibt, findet man unter Help:Scannen für verschiedene Typen von Bildern Hinweise für die Vorbereitung, die hilfreich sein können.
  • Fokus – jedes wichtige Objekt im Bild sollte normalerweise scharf sein.
  • Vordergrund und Hintergrund – Objekte im Vorder- und Hintergrund können stören. Kontrolliere, ob etwas vor dem Motiv des Bildes wichtige Elemente verdeckt. Auch soll nichts im Hintergrund die Komposition verderben, zum Beispiel eine Straßenlampe, die über dem Kopf einer abgebildeten Person „steht“.
  • Allgemeine Qualität – nominierte Bilder sollten von hoher technischer Qualität sein.
  • Digitale Manipulationen betrügen nicht in jedem Fall den Betrachter. Digitale Nachbearbeitungen, um Fehler von Fotografien zu korrigieren, sind allgemein akzeptiert, vorausgesetzt, sie sind begrenzt und gut gemacht, ohne dabei betrügen zu wollen. Akzeptiert werden normalerweise Beschneiden, perspektivische Korrekturen, Schärfen und Verwischen sowie Farb- und Belichtungskorrekturen. Umfangreichere Korrekturen wie das Entfernen von störenden Hintergrundobjekten sollten in der Bildbeschreibung mit Hilfe der Vorlage {{Retouched picture}} klar beschrieben werden. Nicht oder falsch beschriebenen Manipulationen, die dazu führen, dass das Hauptmotiv falsch dargestellt wird, sind unter keinen Umständen akzeptabel.
  • Wertunser Hauptziel ist das Hervorheben der wertvollsten Bilder von allen anderen. Bilder sollten irgendwie etwas Besonderes sein. Darum sei dir bewusst, dass:
    • nahezu jeder Sonnenuntergang ästhetisch ansprechend ist und die meisten keinen wesentlichen Unterschied aufweisen zu anderen,
    • Nachtaufnahmen hübsch sind, aber dass man normalerweise mit Aufnahmen bei Tag mehr Details zeigen kann,
    • schön nicht immer wertvoll bedeuten muss.

Auf der fachlichen Seite gibt es die Belichtung, die Komposition, die Bewegungskontrolle und die Fokustiefe zu beachten.

  • Belichtung bezieht sich auf die Verschluss-Blende-Kombination, die ein Bild mit einer Tonkurve wiedergibt. Idealerweise bildet diese Tonkurve in akzeptabler Genauigkeit Schatten- und Spitzlichtbereiche im Bild ab. Dies nennt man „Belichtungsspielraum“. Bilder können im niedrigen Teil der Tonkurve (unterer Bereich), im mittleren (mittlerer Bereich) oder hohen Teil (oberer Bereich) liegen. Digitale Kameras (oder Bilder) haben einen engeren Belichtungsspielraum als Fotofilme. Fehlende Genauigkeit im Schattenbereich ist nicht unbedingt ein Nachteil. Tatsächlich kann dies ein gewünschter Effekt sein. Eingebrannte Spitzenlichter sind dagegen ein störendes Element.
  • Komposition bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der Elemente im Bild selbst. Die „Drittel-Regel“ ist ein guter Grundsatz für die Komposition und ein Erbe der Gemäldemalerei. Die Idee ist, das Bild mit jeweils zwei horizontalen und zwei vertikalen Linien zu teilen. Dadurch wird das Bild in horizontale und vertikale Drittel geteilt. Das Motiv im Zentrum des Bildes zu platzieren, ist oft weniger interessant, als es auf einem der vier Schnittpunkte der horizontalen und vertikalen Schnittlinien zu platzieren. Der Horizont sollte eigentlich niemals in der Mitte des Bildes liegen, wo er das Bild in zwei Hälften „teilt“. Die obere oder untere horizontale Linie ist oft eine gute Wahl. Der Hauptgedanke ist, den Raum zu nutzen, um ein dynamisches Bild zu schaffen.
  • Bewegungskontrolle bezieht sich auf die Weise, wie die Bewegung im Bild abgebildet wird. Die Bewegung kann stillstehend oder verschwommen sein. Weder das eine noch das andere ist besser; es kommt auf den Zweck der Aufnahme an. Bewegung ist relativ innerhalb der Objekte des Bildes. Zum Beispiel vermittelt uns das Fotografieren eines relativ zum Hintergrund stillstehenden Rennwagens kein Gefühl für das Tempo oder die Bewegung. Also zwingt uns die Fototechnik, das Motiv stillstehend vor verschwommenem Hintergrund abzubilden, wodurch ein Gefühl für die Bewegung entsteht. Dies nennt man „Schwenken“. Andererseits kann eine Aufnahme eines im Vergleich zur Umgebung stillstehenden Basketballspielers während eines hohen Sprunges das „Unnatürliche“ der Natur dieser Pose sichtbar machen.
  • Fokustiefe (DOF – Depth Of Field) bezieht sich auf den Fokusbereich vor und hinter dem Hauptmotiv. Die Fokustiefe wird abhängig von den spezifischen Erfordernissen jedes Bildes gewählt. Große oder kleine Fokustiefe kann auf die eine oder andere Weise die Qualität der Aufnahme vergrößern oder schmälern. Geringe Fokustiefe kann die Aufmerksamkeit auf das Hauptmotiv des Bildes lenken, das Hauptmotiv erscheint dadurch von seiner Umgebung gelöst. Hohe Fokustiefe bringt Abstände zwischen Motiven zur Geltung. Objektive mit kurzer Brennweite (Weitwinkel) ergeben eine hohe Fokustiefe, umgekehrt haben Objektive mit langer Brennweite (Teleobjektive) eine flache Fokustiefe. Kleine Blendenöffnungen bringen große Fokustiefe, und umgekehrt große Blendenöffnungen bringen flache Fokustiefen.

Bei den grafischen Elementen gibt es Form, Volumen, Farbe, Struktur, Perspektive, Balance, Proportion, usw.

  • Form bezieht sich auf den Umriss des Hauptmotivs.
  • Volumen bezieht sich die dreidimensionale Qualität des Motivs. Diese wird durch Seitenlicht herausgebildet. Im Gegenteil zum allgemeinen Glauben ist Frontbeleuchtung nicht die beste Wahl. Frontbeleuchtung lässt das Motiv abflachen. Das beste Tageslicht hat man am frühen Morgen oder nachmittags.
  • Farbe ist wichtig. Übersättigte Farben sind nicht gut.
  • Struktur bezieht sich auf die Oberflächenqualität des Motivs. Diese wird durch Seitenbeleuchtung verbessert.
  • Perspektive bezieht sich auf den „Grad“ zusammen mit Linien, die in einen Fluchtpunkt innerhalb oder außerhalb des Bildes enden.
  • Balance bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der Motive innerhalb des Bildes, die entweder das scheinbar gleiche Gewicht haben oder schwerer auf einer Seite erscheinen.
  • Proportion bezieht sich auf die Größenunterschiede der Objekte im Bild. Normalerweise tendieren wir dazu, kleine Gegenstände klein im Vergleich zu anderen darzustellen. Eine gute Methode kann aber sein, kleine Objekte groß im Gegensatz zu wirklichen Größenverhältnissen abzubilden. Zum Beispiel: Eine kleine Blume überwiegt gegenüber einem großen Berg. Dies nennt man Maßstabsinversion.
Nicht alle Elemente müssen berücksichtigt werden. Einige Fotografien können anhand individueller Eigenschaften beurteilt werden. Für ein Bild kann die Farbe oder die Struktur wichtig sein, oder Farbe und Strukur, usw.
  • Symbolische Aussage oder Relevanz…. Der Meinungskrieg kann hier beginnen…. Ein schlechtes Bild von einem sehr schwierigen Motiv ist ein besseres Bild als ein gutes Bild von einem gewöhnlichen Motiv. Ein gutes Bild von einem schwierigen Motiv ist ein außergewöhnliches Foto.
Bilder können kulturell beeinflusst sein durch den Fotografen und/oder den Betrachter. Die Bedeutung des Bildes sollte vor dem kulturellen Hintergrund des Bildes beurteilt werden, nicht durch den kulturellen Hintergrund des Betrachters. Ein Bild „spricht“ zu Menschen und hat die Möglichkeit, Emotionen auszulösen, wie zum Beispiel Zärtlichkeit, Zorn, Ablehnung, Heiterkeit, Traurigkeit usw. Gute Fotografen sind nicht darauf beschränkt, gefällige Emotionen zu provozieren.

Um die Chancen für einen Erfolg deiner Nominierung zu erhöhen, lies vor der Nominierung alle Leitsätze.

Eine neue Nominierung aufstellen[edit]

Wenn du glaubst, ein Bild mit passender Bildbeschreibung und Lizenz gefunden oder geschaffen zu haben, das als wertvoll erachtet werden könnte, folge der anschließenden Anleitung.

Schritt 1: Kopiere den Bildnamen in dieses Textfeld (einschließlich des Zusatzes Image:), hinter den schon im Feld stehenden Text, zum Beispiel „Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DEIN-BILD-DATEINAME.JPG“. Danach klicke auf die Schaltfäche mit der Aufschrift „neue Nominierung aufstellen“.


Schritt 2: Folge den Anweisungen der geöffneten Seite, und sichere sie.

Schritt 3: Füge manuell einen Link zu der erstellten Seite oben auf der Seite mit der Kandidatenliste ein: Hier klicken, und füge folgende Zeile OBEN bei der Nominierungslist ein:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DEIN-BILD-DATEINAME.JPG}}

Abstimmung[edit]

Du kannst folgende Vorlagen benutzen:

  • {{Support}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support) (Stimme zur Unterstützung des Exzellenz-Status'),
  • {{Oppose}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose) (Stimme gegen den Exzellenz-Status),
  • {{Neutral}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral) (neutrale Meinung, keine Stimme),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment) (es folgt ein Kommentar, keine Stimme),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info) (es folgen Informationen, keine Stimme),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question) (es folgt eine Frage, keine Stimme)

Du kannst angeben, dass das Bild keine Chance für eine erfogreiche Kandidatur hat. Benutze die Vorlage {{FPX|reason}}, wobei reason angibt, warum das nominierte Bild klar unakzeptabel für die exzellenten Bilder ist.

Weitere Vorlagen gibt es hier.

Bitte füge ein paar Worte an, warum dir das Bild gefällt oder nicht gefällt, insbesondere wenn du dagegen stimmst. Bitte denke auch daran, zu unterschreiben (~~~~). Anonyme Stimmen sind nicht zugelassen.

Abwahlkandidaten der exzellenten Bilder aufstellen[edit]

Mit der Zeit ändern sich die Standards für die Exzellenten Bilder. Es kann entschieden werden, dass Bilder, die vorher „gut genug“ für die Exzellenten waren, es nicht mehr sind. Dies ist zum Aufstellen eines Bildes, welches deiner Meinung nach es nicht mehr verdient, exzellent zu sein. Dazu wähle mit

  • {{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep (das Bild verdient es immer noch, als exzellent zu gelten) oder mit
  • {{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist (das Bild verdient es nicht mehr, als exzellent zu gelten).

Wenn du denkst, dass ein Bild nicht mehr den Exzellenz-Kriterien entspricht, kannst du es für die Abwahl nominieren, indem du den Bildnamen in dieses Textfeld (einschließlich des Zusatzes Image:) hinter den bereits stehenden Text im Feld kopierst:


In der eben erstellten neuen Seite für die Nomination des Abwahlkandidaten solltest du einfügen:

  • Informationen über den Ursprung des Bildes (Ersteller, Uploader),
  • Einen Link zur originalen Exzellenz-Kandidatur-Seite (es erscheint unter „Links“ auf der Beschreibungsseite),
  • Deine Begründung für die Nominierung und dein Benutzername.

Danach musst du einen Link zu der erstellten Seite oben auf der Seite mit der Liste der Abwahlkandidaten manuell einfügen.

Richtlinien für Exzellenz-Kandidaten[edit]

Allgemeine Regeln[edit]

  1. Nach dem Ende des Abstimmungs-Zeitraumes wird das Ergebnis am Tag 10 nach der Nominierung festgestellt (im Zeitplan weiter unten gezeigt). Also dauert der Abstimmungs-Zeitraum 9 Tage, plus die Stunden bis zum Ende von Tag 9. Stimmen, die an Tag 10 oder danach abgeben wurden, werden nicht gezählt.
  2. Nominierungen von anonymen Mitwirkenden sind erwünscht.
  3. Mitwirken bei Diskussionen von anonymen Mitwirkenden sind erwünscht.
  4. Nur Nutzer mit einem commons-account, der mindestens 10 Tage alt ist und 50 Beiträge hat, können wählen. Ausnahme: Die eigene Nominierung kann gewählt werden, unabhängig von Alter und Beiträge.
  5. Die Nominierung zählt nicht als Stimme. Unterstützung muss explizit angegeben werden.
  6. Nominierungen können vom Einsteller jederzeit zurückgezogen werden. Dies geschieht einfach durch das Schreiben von „I withdraw my nomination“ (eng. Ich ziehe meine Nominierung zurück)
    oder durch Hinzufügen von {{withdraw}} ~~~~.
  7. Denke daran, das Ziel von Wikimedia Commons ist es, einen zentralen Speicher für freie Bilder, genutzt von allen Wikimedia-Projekten, bereitzustellen, einschließlich für mögliche zukünftige Projekte. Dies ist nicht einfach ein Speicher für Wikipedia-Bilder, deshalb sollten hier die Bilder nicht danach beurteilt werden, ob sie zu diesem Projekt passen.
  8. Bilder können vorzeitig am Tag 5 (fünfter Tag nach der Nominierung) von der Abstimmungsliste genommen werden („Regel des 5. Tages“):
    1. Wenn sie keine Unterstützung erhalten, die Einsteller nicht mitgezählt.
    2. Wenn sie 10 oder mehr Pro und kein Kontra erhalten haben.
  9. Bilder, welche durch die Vorlage {{FPX}} markiert wurden, können 48 Stunden, nachdem die Vorlage gesetzt wurde, von der Liste entfernt werden, vorausgesetzt, das Bild hat außer von den Einstellern keine positiven Stimmen (Unterstützung) erhalten.
  10. Bilder, welche durch die Vorlage {{FPD}} (FP denied) markiert wurden, können 48 Stunden, nachdem die Vorlage gesetzt wurde, von der Liste entfernt werden.
  11. Es dürfen von einem Benutzer maximal 2 Nominierungen gleichzeitig platziert werden.

Regeln zur Wahl und Abwahl[edit]

Ein Kandidat wird in die Galerie der exzellenten Bilder aufgenommen, wenn folgende Bedingungen erfüllt sind:

  1. Passende Lizenz (selbstverständlich)
  2. Mindestens 7 positive Stimmen (Pro-Stimmen)
  3. Das Verhältnis von unterstützenden zu ablehnenden Stimmen ist mindestens 2/1 (eine Zwei-Drittel-Mehrheit)
  4. Zwei verschiedene Versionen desselben Bildes können nicht beide exzellent werden, sondern nur das mit der höheren Zahl an Stimmen.

Die Abwahl-Regeln sind dieselben wie zur Wahl der exzellenten Bilder bei gleichbleibenden Abstimmungs-Zeitraum. Die Regel des 5. Tages gilt für Abwahlkandidaten, die keine Stimme für die Aberkennung des Exzellenz-Status' bis zum Tag 5 erhalten haben, außer die des Antragstellers.

Ein erfahrener Nutzer kann die Anfrage beenden. Wie man eine Anfrage beendet, siehe unter Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder/Was tun, wenn der Abstimmungszeitraum zu Ende ist.

Vor allem sei freundlich[edit]

Bitte bedenke, dass das Bild, das du beurteilst, das wohlüberlegte Werk von jemandem ist. Vermeide Phrasen wie „it looks terrible“ (eng. sieht schrecklich aus) oder „I hate it“ (eng. Ich hasse es). Wenn du dagegen Stellung nehmen musst, tu dies bitte mit Rücksichtnahme. Bedenke außerdem, dass deine Englischkenntnisse nicht die gleichen sein müssen wie die eines anderen. Wähle deine Worte sorgfältig.

Viel Spaß beim Bewerten …, und denke daran: Alle Regeln können gebrochen werden.

Siehe auch[edit]


Inhaltsübersicht[edit]

Contents

Exzellenz-Kandidaten[edit]

Seite erneut laden für neue Nominierungen: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Wolkenmeer über dem Neuköllner Schifffahrtskanal von der Sonnenbrücke aus gesehen 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 16:08:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

clouds above Sonnenallee

File:Eesti Üliõpilaste Seltsi maja, vapituba.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 15:01:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view on the coat of arms room of the Estonian Students' Society

File:Artamus superciliosus male 2 - Bushells Lagoon.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 13:35:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-browed Woodswallow

File:Dead Trunk with Moss in Fallätsche.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 09:50:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dead tree stump overgrown with moss
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Unsorted
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Domob - uploaded by Domob - nominated by Domob -- Domob (talk) 09:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are already some FPs of tree stumps, but I personally like the decay on this one as well as the contrast between the green moss and the brown leaves in the background (and that it otherwise is a very simple composition). --Domob (talk) 09:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 09:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The sharpness and detail level are not FP in my view, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 10:38, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. Good subject, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:59, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Жовна зелена (Picus viridis).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 09:31:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green woodpecker (Picus viridis). Chernivtsi, Ukraine.

File:Boiga nigriceps Red cat snake.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 07:20:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Kakadu (AU), Kakadu National Park, Yellow Water -- 2019 -- 3782.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 06:17:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ngurrungurrudjba (Yellow Water) in Kakadu National Park, Northern Territory, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 06:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 06:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Deserves a feature for composition but there seems to be a general sharpness issue about your Australian images. This is so soft I have to downscale to 50 percent to get it crisp sharp – well, that’s still around 7 megapixels. Can anything be done about the overexposed trees on the left background? They somehow spoil it a bit. --Kreuzschnabel 07:34, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Just two answers: First, the trees. The tree trunks are very bright, nearly without a dark bark - like a lot of trees in Australia. It was early in the morning and the sunlight is on the trees too. So I can't see an overexposed trunk. Sorry. Second, the sharpness. Yes, the photo was made without tripod. Yes, it was made sitting on a small (and swaying) boat. So 1/125 s may be a little bit long. Looking at pixel level there may be a quantum of blur. I've seen this starting with a 30 mpx camera. It's the limit of what affordable lenses can do. And additionally I used other sharpness parameters with Adobe Lightroom. I can improve this sharpness, but IMO it's not really an issue. --XRay talk 09:35, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I find no fault with the sharpness. The nearby trees and reflections are sharp. The background is somewhat unsharp at full size but IMO fine. I wanted to give my input on that now, although I'm not yet ready to vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:26, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I'll improve sharpness and midtone brightness as soon as possible. I'll to do this until tomorrow. --XRay talk 12:20, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done The improvements are done ... --XRay talk 16:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Bruderwald Birnen-Stäubling (Lycoperdon pyriforme)-RM-20191014-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 22:03:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

pear-shaped puffball or stump puffball (Lycoperdon pyriforme).Focus stack of 16 images.

File:Reichtstag, Berlín, Alemania, 2016-04-21, DD 31-33 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 21:39:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reichstag (Parliament), Berlin, Germany

File:Catedral de Salzburgo, Salzburgo, Austria, 2019-05-19, DD 27-29 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 19:30:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome of Salzburg Cathedral, Austria.

File:Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta mulatta), male, Gokarna.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 18:08:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta mulatta), male in Nepal
  • I guess. He was sitting on his own. Charles (talk) 23:06, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Helmmycena (Mycena galericulata) (d.j.b.) 06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 16:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Cirque de Navacelles (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 15:02:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cirque de Navacelles in the Massif Central, South of France
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the composition with the road :) I think it’d work even better with the building on the left cropped out, so the cliffs on the left and right look symmetric. --Kreuzschnabel 15:21, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose The composition is indeed very nice (although I agree with Kreuzschnabel that the building should perhaps be removed completely), but I find the picture (especially some parts of it, e.g. in the right -- maybe a bad frame?) too soft. --Domob (talk) 16:52, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - To me, none of it is that sharp for a panorama. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:28, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Maison Carree in Nimes (9).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 14:57:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maison Carrée in Nîmes, Gard, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Other architectural elements
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This image was awarded the 7th prize in the national contest of France in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019. Tournasol7 (talk) 14:58, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose It's a nice picture, but for me the very tight bottom crop doesn't work well (it looks incomplete). --Domob (talk) 16:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:31, 9 December 2019 (UC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't find this special enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile.--Peulle (talk) 07:33, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Maybe this motif could produce an FP with the right crop, but I don't think this is it. However, it might be a good VI, depending on its competition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Gliophorus chromolimoneus - Ferndale Park.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 13:41:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gliophorus chromolimoneus

File:Eesti Üliõpilaste Seltsi maja, raamatukogu.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 23:25:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view on the library of the Estonian Students' Society
  • ✓ Done Now added. Thanks! I didn't know it even existed here. Kruusamägi (talk) 02:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

File:ODEEP ONE (ship, 1986), Sète.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 20:20:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

ODEEP ONE (ship, 1986)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by me. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The dispersion stars are nice (although they seem a bit too much for me), but otherwise the picture just seems too ordinary (and quite noisy) for FP. --Domob (talk) 05:49, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 08:13, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wasn't wowed at the first sight but after a few seconds of looking at the picture I did get wowed :) --Podzemnik (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reflection of lights, well, but the main subject is unclear. Ship hidden in the darkness. Overall not special enough. Quality image but no wow -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:42, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:2018 01 (Blue) - Chaouen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 17:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Fbrandao.1963 - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportRhododendrites talk |  18:30, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Liking this - really interesting architecture. Cmao20 (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Two angels on my shoulder with this image - one wants to take away the doorstep carpet on the right to emphasize the blue theme; the other likes the carpet for the contrast it brings. Both agree that the image would benefit if the blip in the top right (marked with note) were cropped out. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question How do we know if the white balance is set correctly in an image like this? -- King of ♠ 01:05, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • How do you know the white balance is correct in a golden hour or sunset photo? Light is always subjective to the mood in the photo. Anyway, there are white details (albeight a bit yellowed with age) in both light and shadow in this photo (electrical wire and landline phone detalis) and things seems to be very "accurate" in this case. --Cart (talk) 09:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
King of In the image metadata show "White balance: Auto white balance". From my point of view, the camera found everything very golden or yellow due to the golden moment and I try to correct it by adding too much blue to the image. Cart, relativist fallacy is useful for anything, which means that it does not serve to explain anything in specific. --Wilfredor (talk) 14:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Not really sure where you are going with that comment. I mentioned the white objects since they can be used to check the WB. Seeing "white balance: Auto white balance" in the meta doesn't mean anything since it can be altered in post editing. Btw, check out the other photos in the category, Flickr and the article Chefchaouen about these blue houses. There seems to be a global conspiracy about wrong WB for these houses, or else they really are very blue. ;-) --Cart (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Cart you've convinced me --Wilfredor (talk) 15:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I've no idea if the blue is natural, but, yes or no, it doesn't appeal. Charles (talk) 23:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Whites look yellowish to me -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Châteaux du Pays cathare - Château de Quéribus - 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 11:43:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the housing of the governor of the Château de Quéribus (Cucugnan, Département Aude, France) on the Canigou (2785m).
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 11:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 11:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, funny idea, but image quality on the landscape is mediocre, and the flashlit masonry taking up 75 percent of the frame doesn’t look really nice. --Kreuzschnabel 12:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the idea is very good and the implementation successful --Milseburg (talk) 14:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Executed pretty well, I think. The resolution is sufficient that the frame-in-a-frame doesn't suffer too much. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:16, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not perfect quality but overall a good idea well done. Cmao20 (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice idea, and to me the quality of the landscape is certainly good enough. --Domob (talk) 05:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, it's a nice idea but I don't get wowed neither by the landscape or by the wall. The wall seems to be a bit overcooked (direct flash I guess?) and the landscape doesn't have a straight point too look at. I wish there was a more distinctive feature like here. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel and Podzemnik. — Draceane talkcontrib. 21:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Podzemnik Poco a poco (talk) 21:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question a tighter crop? see note. Charles (talk) 23:14, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Châteaux du Pays cathare - Château de Quéribus - 04a.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Crop as suggested by Charles --Llez (talk) 05:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This composition really works for me. Sharpness is not optimal, etc., but it's good enough for me to support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Much better, but the harsh flashlight on the inside wall at almost the same brightness as the sunlit parts still doesn’t appeal to me. Just looks unreal, can’t be "true", there’s two competing light sources here that won’t mix. Flashlight reduced to ⅛ or even less (plus softener) might have worked. --Kreuzschnabel 07:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Petermann Ranges (AU), Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, Uluru, Kuniya Walk -- 2019 -- 3615.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 08:41:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kuniya Walk near Mutitjulu Waterhole at Uluru (Ayers Rock) in Uluṟu-Kata Tjuṯa National Park, Petermann Ranges, Northern Territory, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 08:41, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 08:41, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lack of wow and sharpness, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 14:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lovely place and overall good image quality but I don't see an FP level composition. Perhaps a wider panorama would work better. Cmao20 (talk) 18:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Cmao20. I find especially the lack of balance between left and right a bit disturbing in the composition (if you know what I mean). --Domob (talk) 05:51, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Oh. It's better to withdraw this image (and nominate another one). --XRay talk 06:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, o neutral → not featured. /XRay talk 06:10, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Fin Garden Kushak.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 07:26:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fin Garden Kushak in kashan.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Amirpashaei - uploaded by Amirpashaei - nominated by Amirpashaei -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 08:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment strange artefacts on the water, how is this photo taken? No metadata either. --Ivar (talk) 14:15, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Iifar: thanks. you're right. I adjusted artifacts problem. this is an HDR panorama picture with 24mm tilt shift lens--Amirpashaei (talk) 16:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the composition is very good and the subject interesting, so it works well as a thumbnail, but there are technical issues at full size. There's chromatic aberration (a bit in the water, a lot in the trees) and some artifacts on the people in the background. The interior quality is good for FP IMO, nice high resolution, but the outside light is really harsh and has lost some detail. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:27, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Rhododendrites: thanks. you're right . I fixed chromatic aberration. and I fixed artifacts on the people too.--Amirpashaei (talk) 19:30, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Ultimately too soft and the trees outside a little overexposed. It seems like there was a long exposure, which might better explain this, but in the absence of metadata we can't know. Daniel Case (talk) 04:22, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Daniel. I also feel like the colors outside the structure are a little off. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:A tourist lady in Jameh Mosque of Isfahan.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 07:17:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A tourist lady in Jameh Mosque of Isfahan
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Amirpashaei - uploaded by Amirpashaei - nominated by Amirpashaei -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose blurry lady doesn't work for me, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 14:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Iifar: blurry person in architectural photography for show scales not problem--Amirpashaei (talk) 14:54, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The more I think about it, the blurry person doesn't actually bother me. It is indeed good for showing the scale. Cmao20 (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cmao20. --Pugilist (talk) 22:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice compo, but the blurry lady plus the blown areas at her feet and at the windows, chromatic aberration on the brickwork. Difficult scene that might require at least three combined shots (lady, overall, windows) to make it really good. --Cart (talk) 11:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If I pixel-peep, she's blurry. At full screen she's fine and like a painting all primary colours (yellow, red, blue). She's standing exactly in the spots of light from the window, and framed by the arch in the rear wall. And the brickwork with spirals and diagonals is well described with light cement contrasting. Yes I wish the glare from the window was handled better, but it can be really hard when you point your lens straight at a bright window. I do hope she isn't photoshopped in. Could you save your JPG with some EXIF data and an embedded colourspace please. -- Colin (talk) 12:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Regretfully I agree with Cart... Tournasol7 (talk) 15:07, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @W.carter:, @Colin:, @Tournasol7:, @Iifar:, you're right. thanks for your nice critiques. I improved the light. I fixed chromatic aberration and I improved blurry lady. I think because the picture merged from 3 shots(HDR)photoshop cant save file with EXIF.--Amirpashaei (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks, that's better, move to Symbol support vote.svg Support. For the exif, you can take one of the photos and add this as a top layer to it and merge into one. I know it will not cover all three shots, but it will be close enough and better that no exif. --Cart (talk) 17:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm not so worried about the EXIF data for camera lens, exposure, etc (though it is nice to add that detail for a complex shot to the description). You may have lost the colour profile when doing the HDR so may have to assign one again (e.g. sRGB) and don't use Photoshop's 'save for web' but instead use the save option that preserves exif. That way the image has a colour profile and we all see the same colours. Btw, it is a shame the lady's primary colours are not so vivid in the new version. Perhaps that is realistic, though -- you can judge from your individual exposures. What are you using for HDR? --Colin (talk) 17:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: thanks again Mr carter . The way you said it didn't work. the photo taken with 24mm tilt shift lens. 6D canon. f:14 , iso 100, exposure time (2,4,8) seconds.--Amirpashaei (talk) 17:40, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Too bad, it usually works for me. I've added the Template:Photo Information to the file, you can use that instead. I've filled in some of what you wrote here, but please correct if I got something wrong and feel free to fill in the rest. Also, I'm a "Miss" not a "Mr". :-) --Cart (talk) 17:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • excuse me Miss carter for my mistake. thanks for your useful information and your kindness.--Amirpashaei (talk) 18:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Better now but still has a lot of CA. Daniel Case (talk) 20:23, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ivar Poco a poco (talk) 21:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Poco a poco: I fixed chromatic aberration, blurry lady and artifact. is this another problem Mr Silva?--Amirpashaei (talk) 12:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Crokodille sunderban.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 06:43:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saltwater crocodile (Crocodylus porosus) at Sundarbans South Wildlife Sanctuary
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Md shahanshah bappy - uploaded by Md shahanshah bappy - nominated by RockyMasum -- Rocky Masum (talk) 06:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Rocky Masum (talk) 06:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Far off FP in composition (framing) and technical quality. And see note - cloning? Charles (talk) 10:35, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dof too shallow for me, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 14:18, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lacks sharpness --Fischer.H (talk) 17:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A spectacular sight but simply too little of it is in focus for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 18:51, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per the others. The jaw with teeth is not sharp, and overall the composition is not too special for FP in my opinion. --Domob (talk) 05:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:21, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much unsharpness, color noise on the tail, and the tail itself sort of competes with the head as the subject. There are enough opposes that at this point the nomination should be withdrawn. Daniel Case (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Corsica-geographic map-fr.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2019 at 21:16:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vector map of Corsica in French
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Maps
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by ikonact - uploaded by ikonact - nominated by Ikonact -- Ikonact (talk) 21:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikonact (talk) 21:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I don't have the expertise about Corsica that I have about New York State or some other areas, but this looks fairly comprehensive, and it's definitely elegant and clear. I do see a few rivers (rivières en français) that look long enough for names to be added, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:38, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Thanks. I am glad that I managed to achieve the state of comprehensive maps thanks to yours and other comments in the previous nomination :) I will add missing names on rivers. --Ikonact (talk) 10:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question You have made many maps that are generally automatically generated by computer. What makes this map special?. --Wilfredor (talk) 00:42, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
@Wilfredor: you are right, the maps are generated by computer but it is far from "automatic". I coded the software to generate the maps, I gathered and processed various data sources and spent hours to finalise the map and put the names and symbols in place. But what makes this map special? Nothing really. I liked this one out of all those I created because it looks nice and has a lot of details.--Ikonact (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
@Kreuzschnabel: This map is not really like all maps in Category:Topographic_maps. This map is fully vector and respects Wikipedia map conventions. There are few maps like this. --Ikonact (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Kreuzschnabel, further to Ikonact's response: There is a great variety of maps in that category. Many are not featurable on account of size or lack of detail. Which others do you think we'd be obligated to feature if we feature this one? And to all the opposers: What do you find lacking in this map that makes it not excellent? As a long-time geography buff who used to collect the best atlases I could find, I appreciate this as an excellent map of its subject, the entire island of Corsica. It's certainly possible to have more detail: I've seen maps that show every house and had maps like that in the 1970s. But choices have to be made about the scale you will use and the level of detail that can be reasonably and clearly covered at that scale. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not an excellent picture for me --Fischer.H (talk) 17:09, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 16:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Blick vom Feldstein auf Elleringhausen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2019 at 12:25:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Looking from the Summit of the Bruchhauser Steine in the Sauerlnd
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Autumn in the Sauerland. View from the Feldstein, the highest point of the Bruchhauser Steine. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 12:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Milseburg (talk) 12:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sure it's a nice view but I'm not really wowed by this image. There could be a bit more depth.--Peulle (talk) 14:15, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Per Peulle. It is a nice view and good quality, but just not special enough for me for a FP landscape. (In my opinion it is better than your other nomination, though, and only misses the cut closely.) --Domob (talk) 16:30, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 17:55, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not bad but boring lighting, so no wow --Kreuzschnabel 18:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. I do also prefer it to your other current nom, but the light is a bit flat and dull, I think you weren't lucky shooting on that day. Cmao20 (talk) 18:48, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose undistinguished landscape, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 01:30, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

File:L.A. Ring, Snebillede. Sankt Jørgensbjerg, 1915. Privateje. Særudstillingen 'Kunstnerbrødre. L.A. Ring & H.A.Brendekilde' Nivaagaards Malerisamling 22.9.19-26.1.20.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2019 at 19:37:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

painting from 1915 by L.A. Ring
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - OK, but I certainly believe that the lack of an interesting composition is a valid reason to oppose a feature for a picture of a painting, or to simply not vote to support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no reason for me to FP nomination --Fischer.H (talk) 17:19, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A painting should not become FP just because it is a painting by a notable artist. I don't see anything remarkable about it that would warrant a feature. -- King of ♠ 21:47, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support on the grounds that it is a well-done photo of a painting. We're not !voting on the painting itself. Daniel Case (talk) 01:27, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This painting is well-photographed and certainly would be QI. For FP, the whole visual effect has to say "wow" to me and unfortunately, it does not. Sorry. --GRDN711 (talk) 02:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The painting is lovely, it's working for me. The resolution is good too. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Planet Mercury diagram.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2019 at 09:30:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exploded diagram of the planet Mercury
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by A loose necktie - uploaded by A loose necktie - nominated by A loose necktie -- A loose necktie (talk) 09:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A loose necktie (talk) 09:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment To me, the size of the texts are strange and not good layout. I would like to easily see what the different layer are, even at smaller image size, instead the less important text "All layers shown are proportional" (should suffice to say "Layers are proportional") is screaming at me. That text should be in the font size of the 'layer text' and the layer info in bigger font size. Also a bit too close crop on the left side. --Cart (talk) 10:29, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm finding the eggshell layers quite hard to visualise especially in the smaller thumb vs full browser. I think you haven't quite got the lighting to look realistic. The inner layers seem to be lit from below with a darker upper-two-thirds. But the outer layer has a strange dark stripe and is darker towards the top/bottom. The second layer on the right has an odd glare spot on it. The inner layer flat cut surface is oddly dark at the top and bottom, when I'd expect that fairly equally lit. The Solid anticrust looks quite different on the left to the right. The very thin white lines from the text to the subject are a bit randomly placed and vary in how close they go to the text or the subject. It isn't clear to me why the right is more exploded than the left, or why this method of looking at layers is helpful vs a more traditional cut like File:Saturn diagram.svg. This style seems to over-play the idea you can neatly separate the layers. I'm a bit confused why the thumnail shows a san-serif font but when I view the whole thing in Firefox, it is a serif font. Also the thumb's left rocky mantel is shown with a uniform yellow-brown vs a much darker brown in the full size on Firefox. -- Colin (talk) 17:43, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good job, however, the font size is too big --Wilfredor (talk) 00:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin and Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 15:42, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Eurasian eagle-owl (44088).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 22:42:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A rescued Eurasian eagle-owl

File:Istenberg mit Bruchhauser Steinen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 18:22:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rocks "Bruchhauser Steine" in the Sauerland
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per King of Hearts. It is a nice and pleasing shot, but nothing very special. --Domob (talk) 06:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, plus most parts of the rocks being in the shadow. To me, this is just the standard walker’s view of them :) The leftmost one is the Bornstein. --Kreuzschnabel 08:38, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others; just a typical autumn landscape. Daniel Case (talk) 06:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pretty and good quality but IMO not an outstanding composition. Cmao20 (talk) 18:44, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Hills in Lewis Pass, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 08:10:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hills in Lewis Pass


Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:42, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)

File:Lake Clearwater, Canterbury, New Zealand 15.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 08:06:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Clearwater, Canterbury, New Zealand
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. It's Lake Clearwater in Canterbury, New Zealand. We already have this FP of the lake but I think this panorama is distinctive enough. -- Podzemnik (talk) 08:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 08:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 12:15, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dinkum (talk) 12:32, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:43, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:04, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I want to get a canoe or kayak and paddle across that lake now, except that it looks cold. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:25, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I hope you are getting checks from the New Zealand tourism board... — Rhododendrites talk |  20:44, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 22:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 00:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not the most successful composition in my view. Uninteresting bush in the center, aligned with the mountain. Cut lake. Lacks dynamism. However, I'm more on the support side, because the scenery is great -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Feel similar to Basil. The right two thirds isn't as strong as the left third, with the central bush and wedge of lake on the right. I'll suggest a crop which has imo much better composition and leading lines (which are interrupted by the bush in this one). -- Colin (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @Colin Thanks for the review, you'll be right. I've provided an alternative. --Podzemnik (talk) 08:18, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The left is leaning down, it needs a perspective correction Poco a poco (talk) 17:45, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Poco a poco I gave it a play, I think it's fixed now. --Podzemnik (talk) 08:49, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
      • It looks indeed better, but you stopped kind of halway --Poco a poco (talk) 10:09, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 22:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I have no problems with the composition, really, but what looks like polarization has left the lake and bush looking slightly unnaturally darkened. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 08:28, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 21:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative, another version[edit]

Lake Clearwater, Canterbury, New Zealand 15 - cropped.jpg

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Doesn't work for me. I love the great lateral/diagonal expanse in the other version. My eye doesn't move nearly as well around this picture frame. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like that it neatly brackets the distant mountain range, and that the path, the coast, and the wind-streaks on the water form leading lines. -- Colin (talk) 10:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very good, painterly composition. I'm not sure I like the panorama as much as the crop on the right seems somewhat arbitrary and aimless. Cmao20 (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With the cut bush, a part seems missing at the right. Just a nice image, but not really spectacular in my view, and in any case inferior to the one above. Actually I quite like the first version (will move to weak support if necessary), especially the highest mountains. The problem is the bush. I think you could have arranged the composition within the frame better, for example by putting this bush more to the right, and your camera higher with you climbing to the left, to get a better balance and a more satisfying harmony of the several elements composing the image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Ptilotula fusca - Glen Alice.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 07:21:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fuscous Honeyeater


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:41, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes

File:Hermite Crab Dry Tortugas.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 06:21:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Caribbean hermit crab (coenobita clypeatus) in the Dry Tortugas
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I personally find the simple composition with just the leaves (which I wouldn't expect as background for a hermit crab), the white shell and the red body quite nice, but that's of course just a matter of taste. And I have to admit that I'm not very experienced with either wildlife or closeup photography. --Domob (talk) 05:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel Case --Fischer.H (talk) 17:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A leaf is a good background for a land-dwelling crab. --Llez (talk) 08:25, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - How big was this hermit crab? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe about 10cm including the shell and excluding the antennas (as in the picture). Certainly not a real "macro" shot (if that is what you are interested in). --Domob (talk) 09:54, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Extatosoma tiaratum - Karlsruhe Zoo 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2019 at 16:25:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Giant prickly stick insect; Karlsruhe Zoo
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 16:25, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 16:25, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:06, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I was totally faked out by that insect in the thumbnail. Only when I looked at it on the screen could I see it wasn't plant matter. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:56, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Seven Pandas (talk) 01:11, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Rocky Masum (talk) 03:23, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:02, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:35, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dinkum (talk) 12:37, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:14, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 18:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Angle is weird but quality great and subject peculiar Poco a poco (talk) 17:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Orientation. Very strange and off-putting. Charles (talk) 10:45, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The animal is hanging at the branches, this is the natural position (like slothes; slothes also have always a "very strange and off-putting orientation"!) --Llez (talk) 08:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Ouster OS1-64 lidar point cloud of intersection of Folsom and Dore St, San Francisco.png[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2019 at 06:26:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Point cloud of a street intersection using a lidar mounted on a car
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Fascinating, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Valuable is a good reason to support this as FP since one of the FP guidelines is: "Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others." dllu (t,c) 06:03, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Right, but it's more clearly relevant to COM:VIC, and regardless of the results here, I'd recommend finding a suitable scope for a VIC nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting, but for me not suitable for FPC. --Domob (talk) 10:57, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The image is really interesting, but somewhen, the question could be: "What makes this image special in comparison with same-stlye images of other areas?" --PantheraLeo1359531 (talk) 18:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ah! A screenshot from a 90s cyberpunk video game! :) Really, though, I think there's an issue here of us (or, I'll just speak for myself) not knowing enough about what to look for with an image like this. It's definitely visually interesting, so I'm a little torn. — Rhododendrites talk |  21:08, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Rhododendrites. Daniel Case (talk) 18:34, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Not sure how you can oppose per someone who didn't oppose and merely said that he isn't knowledgeable enough to know whether to support. dllu (t,c) 19:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I find it rather compelling. Kruusamägi (talk) 23:20, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I do, too. After living with this photo for a time, I don't really understand the objections to it. It's a very good composition, really interesting to look at and a different way of experiencing the world. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Protests opposing Bolivarian Revolution in São Paulo, Brazil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2019 at 01:54:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Protests opposing Bolivarian Revolution in São Paulo, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1990-now
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 01:54, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Would like to support this, but there look to be a few stitching errors (in a couple of the flags, background on the right...). I can't annotate now, but will tomorrow if you haven't fixed them first. — Rhododendrites talk |  05:53, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I’ve pointed out the most obvious ones. --Kreuzschnabel 21:59, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow to me, sorry. Just a group of people on a political mission, nothing special. --Kreuzschnabel 07:43, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - It's well composed, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:29, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There aren’t many ways to miscompose a frontal shot of a lined-up group of ppl. They could have agreed before if the red or the yellow is the top side :) On the other hand, there are numerous stitching flaws, some of them deforming people. Not the best idea to take a multi-shot panoramic of a non-still subject. --Kreuzschnabel 14:23, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • That definitely makes sense about the problems of stitching photos of a moving subject. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. Indeed a good composition, but not a FP for me. --Domob (talk) 10:58, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is no wow for me. A group of people but visually nothing remarkable. --Dinkum (talk) 18:55, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support conditional on the stitching errors being fixed. I've learned that photos of protests/demonstrations/marches don't typically fare well at FPC. This is probably a better attempt than those I've nominated, but I'm not surprised by the opposition. Still, it's something I'd like to see more of here. — Rhododendrites talk |  20:23, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Rhododendrites. Cmao20 (talk) 21:23, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Compositionally, too random and chaotic. Daniel Case (talk) 16:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Dinkum --Fischer.H (talk) 18:00, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since the two supporting votes have been given on condition of the stitching errors being fixed, which has not been done yet, this nomination may be considered failed because of no valid support after five days --Kreuzschnabel 15:15, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
I think that this photo is very important for me because of the greatest diaspora of Venezuelans and that there has been in any country in Latin America and in the world, surpassed only by Syria. However, I think that I will not have the time to correct this week the stitching errors. --Wilfredor (talk) 15:41, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Please keep in mind that an oppose vote does not mean your picture is bad, or unimportant, or something like that. Furthermore, we do not judge the political importance of an image or the event it shows. We just judge image quality and originality, so any oppose just means the voter is not convinced that it’s one of the very best, finest, most breathtaking, cream-of-the-crop images we’ve got on Commons, the topmost 0.1 percent. --Kreuzschnabel 16:43, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Bergtocht van Prasüras,door het Val Trupchun naar Alp Purcher 18-09-2019. (d.j.b) 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2019 at 15:54:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The bridge and the mountain path invite you to explore the Swiss National Park.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:54, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:54, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is a nice idea with the bridge and the winding path in the background, but the composition still feels a bit unbalanced to me. The close and large bridge on the right seems a bit "too strong" for the very narrow and far away path on the left. --Domob (talk) 16:38, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Domob: you for your comment. You may find the alternative photo Better.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:55, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral This might be a mere matter of taste so I don’t give an oppose for that – I just would love to see more to the left side (where the riverbed leads to). So shortly, the framing is too tight for me. This composition suggests the bridge being the main subject, exactly in the thirds, but then there’s too little visible of it. --Kreuzschnabel 14:28, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition. Cmao20 (talk) 21:21, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Ultimately, this one doesn't really work for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:07, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A good recording, but unfortunately for me no FP--Fischer.H (talk) 16:44, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative, another version[edit]

Bergtocht van Prasüras,door het Val Trupchun naar Alp Purcher 18-09-2019. (d.j.b) 04.jpg

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:57, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 17:27, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I find this version much better. I like the composition. --Dinkum (talk) 18:59, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Sorry to spoil the party but I much prefer the other one. This is a much more conventional composition, and the bridge is quite small in the frame and looks a bit lost. Cmao20 (talk) 21:21, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This one does work for me. My eye moves across the bridge, across the trees and then can go any number of ways, and I love how the stream is a diagonal that comes closer to bisecting this composition, but it's just low enough to work perfectly with the hills on the upper left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:07, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. I also love the fading-summer mood ... I want to follow those hikers down the path. Daniel Case (talk) 00:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A far better composition. -- King of ♠ 00:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Much better! Another idea: What about a crop that is as wide as this, but only as high as the other? In other words, include more on the left, but not top/bottom. Maybe that would be the best balance? (But yeah, it is probably a matter of taste in the end.) --Domob (talk) 06:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Answer: this photo was made with a focal point of 18 mm. The photo above has a focal length of 27 mm. That is zoomed in.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Beech Forest (AU), Great Otway National Park, Beauchamp Falls -- 2019 -- 1271.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2019 at 09:23:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beauchamp Falls in Great Otway National Park, Beech Forest, Victoria, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 09:23, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 09:23, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support motion blur of the leaves on the right upper corner is a bit disturbing, but still an FP for me. Tomer T (talk) 09:45, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support per Tomer T. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:05, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support A lot of the background is quite soft or even blurry (and I'm not even talking about the motion blur), since the focus is on the rocks in the front. But that makes sense to me, and it is a nice picture for sure. --Domob (talk) 14:59, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I would prefer to give more darkness in the shadows to generate a better depth effect --Wilfredor (talk) 15:34, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Sure, you're right. It's done. --XRay talk 18:24, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
XRay Thanks for try fix it, however, I meant more to increase the texture by darkening the midtones, however, with the correction it seems that some areas that were formerly shadows with details became solid black. --Wilfredor (talk) 01:00, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
It's sometimes difficult with different types of monitors. I'd improved the midtones too. Now I've made modifications again, black to the former value and midtones a little bit darker. Hopefully it's OK. --XRay talk 05:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:25, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:43, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I agree with the above that it's a bit soft in places, but the composition makes up for it. Cmao20 (talk) 21:20, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 00:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colors look washed out, I'm afraid, with too many specular reflections. I think a polarizer could have helped. -- King of ♠ 00:36, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ne reason for me to FP nomination --Fischer.H (talk) 18:05, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Grisaglia allegoria con fascio littorio Santa Maria della Carità Brescia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2019 at 19:06:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Allegoric figure with fasces in a grisaille fresco by Enrico Albrici on the facade of the Santa Maria della Carità church in Brescia.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Benh; also in any event it needs a slight perspective correction. Daniel Case (talk) 20:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Good photo, but I'm somehow not wowed by it; maybe it's hard to get the gray composition across vividly enough for me, and I wonder what it would look like in black & white. However, this would be a great VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:56, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Ebrach Kloster Kirche Decke P4252488efs.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2019 at 16:45:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling in the former abbey church in Ebrach
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info That's a valid question. A mistake on my part.--Ermell (talk) 20:10, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (whatever the size) non symmetry. And even a crop won't fix because of unfortunate camera position (which looks arbitrary). - Benh (talk) 19:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Doesn't feel arbitrary to me and it's a beautiful interior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Good quality and high resolution but I'm not sure I like the fisheye distortion, even though I understand that's what you were aiming for. Cmao20 (talk) 21:16, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I kind of like the fisheye ... it gives the structure a slightly organic feel. Daniel Case (talk) 15:31, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Ebrach Kloster Kirche Decke distortion removed -RM-20190425-01.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Alternative. Ceiling in the former abbey church in Ebrach.The fisheye distortion was removed. The fisheye distortion has been removed here. Unfortunately you always lose details in the process. The Gothic church was baroqueized in the eighteenth century, which is why its form is unusually straight and narrow. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 12:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ermell (talk) 12:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Claus-Christian Carbon.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2019 at 14:41:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Claus-Christian Carbon in 3D
  • Ikan, if you look at the file page and scroll down a bit, you see that it's a stereogram and how such images should be viewed. C.Suthorn should pehaps have written this in the nom info since such photos are quite rare here and people don't always read the whole file page before commenting. --Cart (talk) 17:01, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
    • I added the info in the nomination. From the edit windows I can see that this ended up in CSS class wpImageAnnotatorFile and is shown as an alt tag/text on the nomination. Not very visible me thinks... --C.Suthorn (talk) 17:35, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Should we have special glasses to view this kind of image? I don't think I'll vote on this nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
    • There is a wiggle version of the file, it doesn't need any glasses and it is linked from the file description page. --C.Suthorn (talk) 20:59, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Ikan and others, there is a way you can see this photo in 3D without special glasses. Pull up the photo on your phone and hold the phone so that it fills the screen. Hold you hand flat, fingers straight up, right between the two parts of the photo so it acts like a "wall" between them. Then look at the photo so close that your thumb touches your nose, that way you will only use one eye for each part of the picture, and it comes out in 3D. --Cart (talk) 21:45, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Now that I have used the phone trick to view the photo, I'll admit it is a cleverly constructed 3D thing, with him leaning forward from the chair and the Mona Lisa behind, you get three layers on the left and the book case acts like a continuous front-to-back reference on the right. --Cart (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain Complicated. Can't see it, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Both Cart's method and the wiggle file are uncomfortable for me. I'm tempted to oppose this kind of trick photography on that basis, but I'll simply decline to vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
  • This is not some newfangled "trick photography", stereoscopy is an old and established method of creating 3D photos. View-Masters was something most kids had way back when (I loved mine). We need special programs to properly view 360-panoramas or they look really weird as ordinary photos; this is a similar thing where you need something extra to appreciate the photo properly. The panos are promoted regularly so I don't understand the adverse reactions to this. --Cart (talk) 10:55, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
  • That's because there's a comfortable way to view them. This site needs a tool for fairly judging a stereoscopic photo. But without one, I can't judge this photo. You've reminded me: I looked through a view-master, too, when I was a kid. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • And you're right, of course. I've seen 19th-century stereoscopic photos and should know better than to have made that silly remark above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:34, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Andrei (talk) 10:49, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I just let my eyes cross and it works. Daniel Case (talk) 00:24, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • I tried, but then I see four guys with four paintings Face-grin.svg -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:48, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • There are two types of steroscopic pictures: those for cross-eyed and those for wall-eyed vision. So if you choose the wrong sight (as you did by crossing your eyes), the depth of the background is inverted and disturbing. Therefore many stereos are signed with 'X' for cross- and '||' for wall-eyed vision. Here it is for wall-eyed vision, witch is unfortunately limited by the distance of your eyes. So if two conjugated points in the two picures are more distant than the distance of your eyes, you have to be Marty Feldmann to see it in 3D (or downsize the picture). Basically X-pictures like this or that, where you have to squint are more easyly to see and can be looked at over a wide scale of magnification. --PtrQs (talk) 01:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I don't get it – what's the point besides "it's 3D"? I mean, when somebody nominates a 360° spherical panorama, it's typically of a place that fore some reason lends itself to be shot in such a way. So what's the reason of choosing this person in the foreground, what does it/he have to do with La Gioconda and why are there two versions of the painting in the background? --El Grafo (talk) 09:21, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
    • Prof. Carbon is the author of a scientific paper, whose main point is, that the version of the Mona Lisa from the Prado and the version from the Louvre (both painted at the same time in da Vinci's studio) together form a 500 year old stereogram. --C.Suthorn (talk) 10:31, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
@El Grafo: did you get the point now? --C.Suthorn (talk) 18:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
@C.Suthorn: makes a lot of sense now, but that really needs to be part of the file description. This knowledge is essential for understanding the picture, it's the difference between "wtf?" and "this is genius!" … --El Grafo (talk) 09:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
@El Grafo: added to file decription. --C.Suthorn (talk) 10:44, 9 December 2019 (UTC)


Zeitplan (Tag 5 nach der Nominierung)[edit]

Thu 05 Dec → Tue 10 Dec
Fri 06 Dec → Wed 11 Dec
Sat 07 Dec → Thu 12 Dec
Sun 08 Dec → Fri 13 Dec
Mon 09 Dec → Sat 14 Dec
Tue 10 Dec → Sun 15 Dec

Zeitplan (Tag 10 nach der Nominierung)[edit]

Sat 30 Nov → Tue 10 Dec
Sun 01 Dec → Wed 11 Dec
Mon 02 Dec → Thu 12 Dec
Tue 03 Dec → Fri 13 Dec
Wed 04 Dec → Sat 14 Dec
Thu 05 Dec → Sun 15 Dec
Fri 06 Dec → Mon 16 Dec
Sat 07 Dec → Tue 17 Dec
Sun 08 Dec → Wed 18 Dec
Mon 09 Dec → Thu 19 Dec
Tue 10 Dec → Fri 20 Dec