Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives February 20 2020

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Fog_in_Wawayanda_State_Park_01.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination A picknick place on the Wawaynada lake shore in the fog in Wawayanda State Park --Kritzolina 00:13, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. --Beninho 19:56, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
    @Beninho: Please always give a reason, when declining a nomination. --MB-one 12:04, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support - Perfectly fine fog picture. What could be wrong with it? -- Ikan Kekek 07:19, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support a bit chroma noise in the fog but still o.k.--Ermell 09:28, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ikan. --Milseburg (talk) 09:29, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support per others. --Smial 21:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Milseburg 13:52, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Musée_Unterlinden_-_couvent_des_Unterlinden_-_église_(Colmar)_(2).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Interior of the Unterlinden Convent Church in Colmar (Haut-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 11:20, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose too soft and chroma noise at the top --MB-one 18:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
    Weak  Support Interesting impression; no quality for FP but good for QI as I think. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 22:42, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now. I'll agree with Spurzem if the near parts of the ceiling are worked on to eliminate the chromatic aberration and decrease noise. I agree that this is worth a discussion and worth some editing. Gzen92, please make the edits if you feel inspired to do so. -- Ikan Kekek 21:01, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ikan --Ermell 09:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 13:51, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

==[edit]

  • Nomination Staircase at the Unterlinden museum in Colmar (Haut-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 11:33, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support ok for me --Uoaei1 05:01, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment why is it in CR, error? Ezarate 18:32, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. – The CR is probably due to a meanwhile removed vandalism. -- Spurzem 12:30, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality - --GRDN711 21:01, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Milseburg 13:50, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Expo_Quillota_20200129_04.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Germán Casas, Expo Quillota 2020, Estadio Municipal Lucio Fariña Fernández, Quillota, Región de Valparaíso, Chile --Carlos yo 13:38, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality: overprocessed. --Peulle 13:58, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. -- Spurzem 21:48, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Peulle --Cvmontuy 13:54, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Focus is not perfect, but regarding the rather high resolution and low light situation good enough. --Smial 00:37, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Peulle.--Ermell 09:14, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 Comment It is often very difficult for me to understand the reasons that lead to a decline. What does "overprocessed" mean here? In my opinion, the exposure and processing of the photo are perfect. -- Spurzem 15:08, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 Comment I also don't understand this "overprocessing" thing. Yes, the photo does have some visible noise due to the ISO5000 setting, and probably that could be made a little more pleasant, but that would be more like additional processing, not less, as apparently required. -- Smial 16:45, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 Comment This is the portrait, the eyelashes must be visible IMO, and some parts of the face looks like an oleo painting regards --Cvmontuy 12:53, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 13:48, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Knossos,_Throne_room,_Sept._2019.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Throne room in Knossos, isle of Crete. --Cayambe 14:32, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Review
     Oppose Overprocessed. Sorry. --Ermell 19:34, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
     Comment New version uploaded, reprocessed from the RAW file. Please, have a look. --Cayambe 21:31, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
     Comment The second version is much better, but still shows a bad balance between noise reduction and sharpening. Try less denoising. --Smial 10:30, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Absolutely no denoising has been done here. This is the best I can do :-( --Cayambe 13:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 Support Good enough for me, maybe the part on the right could be cutted more(?)--Kaga tau (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
✓ Done Right side cropped, thanks for the hint. --Cayambe 22:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 Support OK for me --PantheraLeo1359531 16:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --PantheraLeo1359531 16:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Vista_del_Puerto_de_Victoria_desde_Sky100,_Hong_Kong,_2013-08-09,_DD_12.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination View of the Victoria Harbour from Sky100, Hong Kong --Poco a poco 17:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. Tilt, noise and out focus --Wilfredor 19:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good for me; please discuss. -- Spurzem 19:31, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support IMHO good. --Aristeas 15:17, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Too much noise and not enough focus. -- Ikan Kekek 08:33, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others --Cvmontuy 06:07, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 13:49, 19 February 2020 (UTC)