Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 16 2013

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Ciasa_Rü_La_Val_04.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Manor house "Rü" in in La Val --Moroder 15:21, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Comment Looks a bit washed-out to me. Could you raise the contrast a little? --King of Hearts 22:36, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Thanks!--Moroder 10:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
     Oppose Still feels washed out, and blurry on left. Mattbuck 00:34, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
     Support Good enough for me. --King of Hearts 08:11, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

 Support QI -- Spurzem 12:51, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Cccefalon 10:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Peep_show_Iran.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Peep show in Golestan Palace --مانفی 09:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Needs perspective correction. --Cccefalon 19:03, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
    --مانفی 04:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
     Comment I am afraid to say so, but it is not properly done. Please observe the verticals of the ashlars: The building is supposed to be rectilinear while the golden box might stand on a slope. --Cccefalon 11:39, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
    I got your point now.--مانفی 21:36, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
    Not really. I made an annotation what I mean concerning the verticals of the ashlars. Also when I open the new version in fullsize, it shows up 90 degrees rotated. strange ... --Cccefalon 07:00, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
    Sorry. H had uploaded wrong ,actually first and non edited, version.مانفی 08:53, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
     Comment Back on track but still not sufficient. Observe the two annotations: One line is inclining to left the other to right side; that means that perspective is opening to the top of the photo. You have to correct the photo with by incremental modifing rotation and vertical distortion parameters in 100% view. It won't work if you do it on zoomed out view. Please give it a last try. --Cccefalon 11:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
    When I was fixing the perspective, I understood that problem but unfortunately I couldn't change the perspective more than this. Why? Because not only the right margin and peep show became unparalleled, but also the right crop became too tight (almost no margin remained).مانفی 12:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
     Oppose I'm so sorry, but I cannot let it pass as QI then. If you object, you can still send it to CR.--Cccefalon 12:44, 28 November 2013 (UTC) --Cccefalon 12:44, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
    ✓ DoneI tried one more time. Please have a look again.مانفی 08:30, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It is a very interesting and strange object, and I'm sorry to decline, but I find it is not sharp enough at full size. It is a pity.--Jebulon 09:44, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
  •  Support QI for me --Stepro 01:31, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Cccefalon 10:12, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Liverpool Street station MMB 15 379021.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Interior of 379021. Mattbuck 08:05, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose I think it is too dark. Sorry. --EveryPicture 21:14, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
    I can brighten it, but this seems fairly natural to me. It was taken at an underground station with no natural (and little artificial) lighting. Mattbuck 00:41, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
     Oppose : chromatic noise visible, especially on the grey areas. --JLPC 19:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

I fixed most of the noise and tuned the lighting. Maybe the critics can have another look? I hope I didn't destroy too much of the unfriendly look that may have been intentional.--Cartoffel 16:59, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Cccefalon 10:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)