Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 19 2024

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Coronilla_valentina_RF.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Scorpion vetch (Coronilla valentina) --Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose low JPEG compression --Draceane 12:26, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Thanks for the reviews and the votes, but I cannot understand this one. Did you find disturbing JPEG artifacts (I can't) or do you feel that the file size is too big or too small (which should be irrelevant)? --Robert Flogaus-Faust 18:24, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment For me this picture is ok, but indeed it seems to have high JPG compression applied, resulting in a rather low level of detail in the yellow flowers. Might be better to save it in higher JPG quality. --Plozessor 19:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
✓ Done Less JPEG compression and slightly wider crop. Is this better? --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good now. --Draceane 08:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Yes, better! --Plozessor 08:17, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 15:51, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

File:Paris_Air_Show_2019,_Le_Bourget_(SIAE8896).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Pilatus PC-21 on static display at Paris Air Show 2019 --MB-one 14:03, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment Sky is blown, and perspective needs correcting, maybe fixable? --Mike Peel 19:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Doesn't seem fixable, clouds seem OK to me when focusing on the plane. --多多123 22:36, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Moving this to discuss, I think the perspective at least needs fixing. --Mike Peel 20:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The clouds are overexposed. Tournasol7 05:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Clouds are ok (you can't demand full details in the brightest parts of clouds when the image focuses on an object on the ground). I can't see any issue with verticals (the buildings and tents in the background are perfectly aligned; the mobile fence might stand crooked. --Plozessor 05:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Clouds are indeed overexposed. Yann 23:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Burnt clouds, cluttered surroundings. --Smial 09:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

File:St_Mary_cathedral_in_Vitoria-Gasteiz_(5).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Bell tower of the Saint Mary cathedral in Vitoria-Gasteiz, Basque Country, Spain. --Tournasol7 05:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
    This seems to have an unnatural blue tint; also the distortion is annoying, should probably compress at least the upper part a bit. --Plozessor 05:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    The blue tint is natural for this time of day (blue hour) and there is no distortion for me here. --Tournasol7 13:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
     Oppose Sorry, the blue tint is minor and can be tolerated, but the distortion in the upper part is IMO unacceptable. The upper part of the tower is too much stretched vertically due to the way you applied perspective correction. Gradual compression (most on the top and none at the bottom) would fix this. I'd like to hear other's opinions, so would appreciate if you'd move it to discussion. --Plozessor 15:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    Sorry, but I disagree, discuss please. Tournasol7 19:12, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose. The tower is too distorted. -- Spurzem 10:09, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment I consider the perspective correction to be geometrically correct. I also think that, as is so often the case with wide-angle photographs that have also been digitally corrected, it looks exaggerated and unnatural. However, we have a problem with "double standards", because in recent years countless similarly strongly verticalised images have not only been tolerated, but actually demanded by many here on QIC. The question arises as to whether forcibly verticalised photographs can become QI at all if they appear all too unnatural. And: Where do you draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not? --Smial 09:18, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support, because this picture is borderline, but in the past many even worse verticalised photos have been praised. Colours are fine. --Smial 09:18, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)