Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 14 2016

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:পান_পাতা.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Betel leaf.--Masum-al-hasan 11:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support A bit small, however, good quality --The Photographer 11:23, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Right upper side overexposed. Too tight IMO. Poor composition IMO!!--Lmbuga 14:38, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Partially overexposed. --Basotxerri 17:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --W.carter 06:37, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Pabellón_Criollo_Venezolano.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Pabellón Criollo Venezolano --The Photographer 10:51, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Too noisy and unfocused, IMO. Also, the white rice blends into the background - may I suggest using coloured background/plate? --Peulle 11:49, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done Noise is gone --The Photographer 12:26, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment - Mostly looks good enough for QI to me, but there are several dark spots that disturb me. What caused them? I do agree with Peulle that using a colored plate would produce a better photo, but I wouldn't hold up promotion on that basis alone. -- Ikan Kekek 13:09, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
I will buy a cheaper chinese plate, what color could work better?. Thanks for the recomendation --The Photographer 13:14, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
What colors do you figure are your options? I could try to picture them in context. -- Ikan Kekek 13:34, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Not great because it's hard for the eye to distinguish between the light that filtered through the clear plate on the left and the plate itself, but I think that with the latest edit, this is good enough for QI. -- Ikan Kekek 10:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Yes, this less noisy version is better.--Peulle 12:05, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose First version too noisy (why ISO500? The subject is not running away), the denoised version doesn't look like food, looks like plastic. Sorry, some photos of food with better quality have been declined recently. Composition is rather nice, also colors. --Smial 00:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support The current version looks fine to me, I think that the applied denoising was just fine, not too much. Poco a poco 07:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --W.carter 14:39, 13 December 2016 (UTC)