Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 14 2023

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Алматы,_гора_Мохнатка_сверху_зимой_(1).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Mokhnatka Mtn near Almaty, Kazakhstan (by Красный) --SHB2000 11:22, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    can you reduce the colour noise? Otherwise would be QI for me --Grunpfnul 08:38, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
    Since this isn't my image, I'm a bit reluctant to do it myself. If no-one does it within a few days, you can take this nomination as withdrawn. --SHB2000 03:23, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
     Support Good quality, stunning landscape. --Аныл Озташ 03:44, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Question Why is this here? User:Аныл Озташ supported the image. I added the assumed supporting vote. If there are no more comments or votes during this time, the image should be promoted after another 2 to 3 days. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 18:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Meleagris gallopavo, Neuss - 0240.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) --Аныл Озташ 03:19, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Sorry, DoF low. Why do you add red links for the equipment? The location is missing in the categories and description, geo location is missing too. --XRay 04:20, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment The photographer uses user templates to denote gear used, as can be seen on his other photographs, but he misapplied the template or forgot to specify a parameter. It's an easy fix, and it seems a bit overkill to outright decline a submission over it instead of adding a comment. Photo looks plenty detailed to me too for this resolution. ReneeWrites 05:52, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
    I don't agree about the supposed low DoF. As for the formalities: The linked photo equipment was red because I had only created my template for it a few hours ago, I have also added the location.--Аныл Озташ 07:48, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Just for my information. The resolution of your camera is 6.000×4.000 px. Your photograph has 4.000×2.667 px. It may be cropped, but it looks like downscaled. Is it cropped or downscaled? --XRay 10:48, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Some of my issues are fixed now. I still see a problem with the DoF. What aperture did you used? --XRay 10:48, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support IMO DoF still low. The aperture should be closer than f/5.6. But all other issues are fixed, a weak pro is acceptable. --XRay 06:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 18:17, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Lemur catta, Duisburg - 0859.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Ring-tailed lemur family (Lemur catta) in summer. --Anil Ö. 14:57, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Shallow depth of field with focus on foreground. The leg in center is sharp, The face of a juvenile, not so much. Other animals are not sharp at all --Jakubhal 20:02, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
  • It's about the juvenile. --Anil Ö. 00:46, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support To my eyes, the focus plane is on the juvenile's face and hind leg. Personally I like the use of a shallow depth of field, as it helps draw the eye to the centre of the image. In any case, at this focal length (no EXIF, but would assume more than 300mm?) it would be hard to get much more in focus. --Julesvernex2 (talk)
It's 400 mm. --Anil Ö. 02:57, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support per Julesvernex2, really great shot. Is it also FPC? I would like to support it there. --Smial 13:33, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Not yet. :-) --Anil Ö. 02:57, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Composition is good, the eye is drawn to the juvenile in the center. Cute photo also :) ReneeWrites 08:19, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support per others --Kritzolina 18:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 18:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Bamberg_Corona_Testcenter-20230114-RM-110201.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Corona Test Center at Bamberg Hospital --Ermell 06:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Oppose Unlucky crop on the right side. --CherryX 18:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
    •  Comment I don´t ageree. Discussion please.--Ermell 21:51, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
      Container on the right side.--CherryX 16:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unfavorable lighting conditions. -- Spurzem 09:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. Admittedly, it's cloudy here, but that doesn't detract anything from this photo. It's not a candidate for FP. And besides, everyone has their own taste, for example, I like cloudy scenery. --Tournasol7 15:11, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support IMO good enough. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 18:44, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 18:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Prinses_Margriettunnel_(Aquaduct)_18-06-2023._(d.j.b.)_07.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Restoration Prinses Margriettunnel Work area for the repair of the broken anchors which are supposed to hold the tunnel troughs in place. (piling rig)
    --Famberhorst 04:54, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 05:06, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unlucky crop at the bottom. --CherryX 18:42, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose random composition, wb off. --Kallerna 09:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support QI to me but the machine should be better described.--Ermell 19:40, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your comment. the pile driving device is for repair of steel and concrete foundations and is located in the defective tunnel. The top edge of the tunnel is visible at the bottom of the photo.--Famberhorst 04:43, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per CherryX --LexKurochkin 10:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support IMO good enough. --XRay 05:31, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 18:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)