Commons:Segnalazioni per la vetrina

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

Shortcut: COM:FPC

Passa alla lista di candidati Passa alla lista di candidati per la vetrina Passa alla lista di rimozione dalla vetrina Passa alla lista di candidati per la rimozione dalla vetrina

Queste immagini sono candidate per la vetrina. Fare attenzione a non confondere questa pagina con le immagini del giorno.

Guida[edit]

Candidare un immagine[edit]

Linee guida per candidare un'immagine[edit]

È importante leggere le linee guida prima di candidare un'immagine.

A seguito è riportato un riassunto dei punti essenziali per candidare e valutare le immagini candidate:

  • Risoluzione - Le fotografie con una risoluzione inferiore a 2 milioni di pixel vengono generalmente rifiutate e rimosse ad eccezione di motivi contrari di particolare importanza. Si noti che le immagini con risoluzione 1600 x 1200 hanno 1.92 Mpx, appena inferiore al limite minimo di 2Mpx.
Ricordiamo che le immagini caricate su Commons vengono visualizzate non solo su schermi tradizionali di PC ma sono utilizzate anche per stampa e visualizzazione su schermi ad alta risoluzione. Non possiamo certo prevedere quali tecnologie verranno utilizzate nel futuro quindi è importante che le immagini scelte per la vetrina abbiano una risoluzione quanto più alta è possibile.
  • Scansioni - È consigliabile seguire la guida alla scansione, che propone suggerimenti per l'ottenimento di immagini ottimali
  • Fuoco - ovviamente ogni oggetto significativo dell'immagine deve essere ben definito e a fuoco.
  • Primo piano e sfondo - Oggetti in primissimo piano o di sfondo possono distrarre dalla vista dal oggetto principale dell'immagine. È il caso di controllare se qualche elemento in primo piano non copra nessun elemento importante e che lo sfondo non distolga l'attenzione e renda confusa l'immagine (per esempio evitare che vi sia una luce forte alle spalle di un viso)
  • Qualità generale - le immagini candidate devono essere di alta qualità tecnica.
  • Le manipolazioni digitali non devono essere effettuate per ingannare, ma vanno usate solo limitatamente e con cura per correggere difetti fotografici. Le manipolazioni comunemente accettate sono il ritaglio e la correzione di prospettiva, focale, colore ed esposizione. Manipolazioni più estese, come può essere la rimozione di un elemento di distrazione dello sfondo, vanno chiaramente descritte nel testo di descrizione per mezzo del template {{Retouched picture}}. Manipolazioni non descritte o descritte in modo insufficiente non permettono la candidatura alla vetrina.
  • Valore - il nostro principale obiettivo è eleggere le immagini con il maggior valore rispetto a tutte le loro simili. Le immagini devono essere in qualche modo speciali, perciò fai attenzione:
    • quasi tutti i tramonti sono esteticamente piacevoli, infatti molte immagini sono simili alle altre,
    • gli scatti notturni sono gradevoli ma generalmente le foto scattate di giorno mostrano molti più dettagli,
    • non tutte le belle foto hanno in realtà un valore che non sia esclusivamente personale.

Per quanto riguarda l'aspetto tecnico abbiamo come parametri l'esposizione, la composizione, il controllo del movimento e la profondità di campo.

  • L'esposizione si riferisce alla combinazione tra tempo di esposizione e diaframma. Questa combinazione permette generalmente di avere una curva di tono che è in grado di rappresentare ombre e luci con un dettaglio accettabile. Questa curva viene detta latitudine di posa. Un'immagine può essere nella banda bassa, media o alta. Le fotocamere digitali (e le loro foto) hanno una latitudine di posa più stretta delle macchine a pellicola. La mancanza di dettagli nelle zone d'ombra non è necessariamente una caratteristica negativa. Infatti questa può essere parte dell'effetto desiderato, mentre ampie zone eccessivamente sovraesposte possono distrarre la vista.
  • La composizione si riferisce alla distribuzione degli elementi nell'immagine. La “Regola dei Terzi” è una buona linea guida per la composizione e eredita molto dagli studi di disegno. Il concetto principale considera l'immagine divisa con due linee orizzontali e due verticali, che dividono l'immagine in tre parti. Generalmente se l'oggetto viene centrato si ha un effetto poco interessante, mentre se l'oggetto viene posizionato in uno dei punti di interesse, ovvero l'intersezione delle quattro linee, si ottiene un effetto decisamente migliore. Le linee dell'orizzonte infatti non dovrebbero essere posizionate nel centro, perché taglierebbero la foto a metà; è invece preferibile scegliere una delle linee orizzontali. Complessivamente bisogna tendere a creare un'immagine dinamica.
  • Il controllo del movimento si riferisce al modo viene rappresentato il movimento nell'immagine. Il movimento può essere bloccato (seguito dalla fotocamera) oppure può essere lasciato scorrere, tuttavia l'oggetto principale dell'immagine deve essere visibile. Nessuna delle due tecniche è migliore dell'altra, la buona riuscita dipende esclusivamente dal tipo di effetto ricercato. Per esempio, fotografando una vettura da corsa che appare statica in relazione allo sfondo, che invece scorre sul retro, si ottiene l'oggetto principale in una condizione statica mentre lo sfondo crea il senso di movimento. (questa tecnica è chiamata "panning"). D'altra parte, fotografando un giocatore di basket in salto, bloccato in relazione a tutto il resto dello sfondo, si otterrebbe un buono scatto proprio per la posa innaturale.
  • La profondità di campo (PdC o DOF dall'inglese depth of field) è la distanza davanti e dietro il soggetto principale che appare nitida (a fuoco). Questo parametro viene scelto a seconda delle necessità di ogni immagine e può parimenti migliorare o peggiorare la qualità di una fotografia. Generalmente viene utilizzata una PdC ridotta per mettere al centro dell'attenzione il soggetto principale, separandolo da tutto il resto dello sfondo. Invece viene utilizzata una grande PdC per enfatizzare la profondità di un immagine. Gli obiettivi grandangolari in genere una grande PdC mentre i teleobiettivi ne hanno una decisamente ridotta. In gran parte la PdC dipende dall'apertura del diaframma: aumenta con il diminuire dell'apertura e viceversa.

Per quanto riguarda l'aspetto grafico prendiamo invece in considerazione nitidezza, profondità, colore, superficie, prospettiva, bilanciamento, proporzione, ecc.

  • La nitidezza si riferisce alle linee di contorno del soggetto principale.
  • La profondità si riferisce alla qualità dell'aspetto tridimensionale del soggetto. Ciò si ottiene soprattutto tramite un'adeguata illuminazione laterale (come quella della prima mattinata o del tardo pomeriggio) e non esclusivamente frontale, al fine di evitare l'appiattimento del soggetto.
  • Il colore è un elemento molto importante e non deve essere né troppo né poco saturo.
  • La superficie si riferisce alla qualità della superficie degli oggetti fotografati.
  • La prospettiva si riferisce all'angolazione dalla quale è stata scattata la fotografia. Essa crea una serie di rette immaginarie che seguono gli spigoli paralleli degli oggetti e si incontrano in un punto che può essere dentro o fuori l'immagine.
  • Il bilanciamento si riferisce alla disposizione degli oggetti nell'immagine e può essere equilibrato o porre maggior peso verso una direzione.
  • La proporzione si riferisce alla relazione tra le dimensioni degli oggetti all'interno dell'immagine. Generalmente si tende a rappresentare oggetti con ridotta relazione, ma una buona tecnica è quella di rappresentare gli oggetti di dimensioni minori in modo più esteso, contrariamente a quanto è in realtà. Per esempio, un piccolo fiore che viene rappresentato con le stesse dimensioni di una grande montagna: questa tecnica viene chiamata inversione di scala.
Ovviamente, non tutte le caratteristiche devono essere necessariamente presenti. Le immagini possono essere giudicate sia per una sola caratteristica che per diverse caratteristiche, anche contemporaneamente.
  • Significato simbolico o rilevanza particolare …Le guerre d'opinione possono iniziare!…. Va ricordato che una pessima fotografia di un soggetto difficilissimo da fotografare è sicuramente migliore di un'immagine ordinaria e tradizionale (come un comune tramonto).
Le immagini possono essere scelte da un fotografo o da un osservatore anche per motivi culturali, tenendo però sempre conto del contesto dello scatto e non di quello dell'osservatore. Un'immagine inoltre può "parlare" alle persone e avere la capacità di evocare emozioni, che tuttavia non devono essere necessariamente piacevoli.

Per ottimizzare le possibilità di successo delle candidature delle tue immagini è consigliabile leggere le linee guida complete.

Come candidare un'immagine[edit]

Se credi di aver trovato o creato un immagine che può essere presa in considerazione per la vetrina, che abbia una appropriata descrizione e una licenza adeguata, allora segui queste indicazioni.

Punto 1: copia il nome dell'immagine dentro la casella di testo (includendo anche il prefisso Image: ) a seguito del testo già presente nella casella (per esempio Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:IL-NOME-DELLA-TUA-IMMAGINE.JPG.) ed infine clicca il pulsante candida una nuova immagine.


Punto 2: segui le istruzioni della pagina alla quale vieni collegato e salva le modifiche apportate.

Punto 3: inserisci manualmente un collegamento alla pagina creata in cima alla lista candidati: Clicca qui e aggiungi il testo che segue all'inizio della lista di candidature:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:IL-NOME-DELLA-TUA-IMMAGINE.JPG}}

Votare[edit]

Per votare puoi usare i seguenti templates:

  • {{A favore}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support) per supportare la candidatura,
  • {{Contrario}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose) per opporsi alla candidatura,
  • {{Neutrale}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral) per esprimere un parere neutrale,
  • {{Commento}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment) per esprimere solo un commento,
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info) per aggiungere delle informazioni riguardanti l'immagine,
  • {{Domanda}} (Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question) per chiedere informazioni.

Puoi inoltre evidenziare che l'immagine non ha possibilità di essere eletta con il template {{FPX|motivo}}, inserendo al posto di motivo le ragioni per cui è chiaramente inaccettabile per la vetrina.

Ogni votante è pregato di motivare il proprio voto con qualche parola, in particolar modo se si vota contro. Ricorda inoltre di aggiungere la tua firma (~~~~). I voti anonimi non sono accettati.

Candidare un'immagine alla rimozione dalla vetrina[edit]

Gli standard della vetrina cambiano col tempo. Può succedere che un'immagine che era stata eletta per la vetrina non sia più adatta agli standard attuali.

Questa lista è perciò composta dalle immagini considerate non più adatte a rimanere nella vetrina. Vota:

  • {{Mantenere}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per far sì che l'immagine rimanga nella vetrina.
  • {{Rimuovere}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per far sì che l'immagine venga rimossa dalla vetrina.

Se consideri che un'immagine non rispetti più i criteri delle immagini in vetrina, candidala per la rimozione copiando il nome dell'immagine dentro questa casella di testo (includendo il prefisso dell' Image:) a seguito del testo già presente in essa:


Nella pagina appena creata includi:

  • Le informazioni sull'origine dell'immagine (autore dell'immagine, autore della candidatura);
  • Un collegamento all'iniziale candidatura per l'inserimento nella vetrina (che va inserito sotto ==Collegamenti== nella descrizione dell'immagine);
  • Il motivo per cui l'hai candidata per la rimozione dalla vetrina e il tuo Nome utente.

Dopo aver fatto ciò devi inserire manualmente un collegamento alla pagina creata all'inizio della lista di rimozione dalla vetrina.

Politica di elezione per la vetrina[edit]

Regole generali[edit]

  1. Il periodo di votazione è di 9 giorni completi, a partire dalla candidatura. I risultato verrà determinato alla fine di questo periodo. I voti aggiunti il decimo giorno o a seguito non verranno considerati.
  2. Sono benvenuti i contributori anonimi.
  3. I contributi di anonimi alle discussioni sono benvenuti.
  4. I voti di contributori anonimi non saranno accettati.
  5. La candidatura non conta come voto. Il voto di supporto va esplicitato.
  6. Gli autori delle candidature possono ritirare le loro immagini candidate in ogni momento. Questo si ottiene scrivendo semplicemente "I withdraw my nomination" (in inglese: ritiro la mia candidatura)
    o aggiungendo il testo {{withdraw|~~~~}}.
  7. Ricorda che l'obiettivo del progetto Wikimedia Commons è di costruire una raccolta di immagini utilizzabili da tutti i progetti Wikimedia, inclusi possibili progetti futuri. Perciò non bisogna pensare che questo sia una raccolta dedicata esclusivamente al progetto Wikipedia e per tanto le immagini non vanno valutate in funzione di ciò.
  8. Le immagini vengono rimosse dalla lista di candidature se non hanno voti a supporto (escluso quello dell'autore della candidatura) entro il quinto giorno dalla candidatura (La regola del quinto giorno)
  9. Le immagini dotate del template {{FPX}} non devono essere rimosse dalla lista entro le 48 ore successive al momento in cui è stato applicato il template, purchè non vi sia nessun voto a supporto oltre quello dell'autore della candidatura.

Regole di ammissione e rimozione dalla vetrina[edit]

Un'immagine candidata viene ammessa alla vetrina se si verificano le seguenti condizioni:

  1. La licenza è adeguata (ovviamente).
  2. Se ha almeno 5 voti a supporto.
  3. Se il rapporto tra voti pro/contro è almeno 2/1 (se ha due terzi di maggioranza).
  4. Non possono essere ammessi alla vetrina diverse versioni della stessa immagine, ne deve essere scelta una sola versione.

I criteri per la rimozione dalla vetrina sono gli stessi per l'ammissione ad essa, compreso il periodo di voto e la regola del quinto giorno (vedi nelle Regole generali).

Ogni utente esperto può portare a termine una votazione: per istruzioni su come compiere questa operazione vedi la guida per portare a termina la votazione.

Infine, sii cortese[edit]

Per piacere non dimenticare che l'immagine che stai giudicando è frutto del lavoro di qualcuno. Evita di usare frasi come è orribile: se devi opporti non fare spiacevoli considerazioni. Inoltre ricorda che è necessario scrivere in inglese se vuoi essere compreso dagli altri utenti e che il tuo utilizzo di questa lingua e quello degli altri utenti può comunque generare incomprensioni se non si ha un'ottima conoscenza, perciò scegli le parole con cura.

Buon voto… e ricorda che.... tutte le regole possono avere qualche eccezione.

Vedi anche[edit]

Indice[edit]

Contents

Candidati per la vetrina[edit]

Aggiorna la pagina: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Rock dove (Columba livia) walking on place de la Bourse, Brussels, Belgium (DSCF4422).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2018 at 20:54:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rock dove on Place de la Bourse, BE
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - They're city birds. Just like homeless people, it's hard for them to keep clean. But it's not for lack of trying. I observe pigeons a lot because they roost across from my bathroom, and they spend a lot of time grooming themselves and their partners. On the other hand, they crap everywhere, including in their nests, so that's pretty dirty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:15, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Life in the cities is hard for many species, rats and cockroaches included. But try to nominate a dirty flower here, even if there are excellent reasons for this flower to be ugly (pollution, car gaz, poor light, fuel oil, etc.), the emotion won't come. There's no poetry in this pigeon on asphalt, in my eyes. Taking pictures of people is difficult, since humans are conscious, while no personality right is needed with an animal. Nevertheless not any photograph of homeless people is good, just because "life is hard" for them, too. The picture has to show something, either an environment, a situation, a moving facial expression, a particular action, etc. If there's nothing else than a body, the subject is too ordinary -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:17, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but a wider crop at the top would definitely be preferred. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:01, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Bohdan Khmelnytsky Kiev 2018 G2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2018 at 06:55:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Bohdan Khmelnytsky Monument in Kiev
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by George Chernilevsky -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a good idea, but taking a picture of an equestrian monument is one of the toughest tasks: the horse is usually placed in a very high position and depending on the hour of the day you will have problems with the sun that might disturb so that you can not take the subject from the right angle. Here the profile of head of the horse, which is a main part of the horse, is not visible and the result is quite an uninteresting shape where horse and rider create an amorphous figure, IMO. I like the background, though even if it looks a bit false with its pinkish tone.Paolobon140 (talk) 07:48, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your review. The sky here is displayed naturally, without any special effect of Photoshop. It is a thin layer of clouds at sunset with uncommon color at present time. The viewpoint is really low because the square with the monument is surrounded by high buildings. This photo was published several times in the news feeds of Kiev and Ukraine, because it really attracts attention and has a free license. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:54, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it and like to support art photos --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 10:37, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The statue actually looks as if it was moving. I've no problem with the sky, I see that color often through my window. --Cart (talk) 10:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think we had one from the same angle which we were cool about because of the overcast sky. This one is different. Daniel Case (talk) 22:08, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Weird angle. Same than this one in my view. The silhouette is dark and lacks detail. The picture too contrasted for me. The shape is not clear, the rock too dominant. From this point of the bottom, it puts me in a position of subordination, and the fact that this "hero" is also known to be a tyrant and mass murderer doesn't help to appreciate. I feel crushed -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:08, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:23, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:33, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Pato aguja africano (Anhinga rufa), parque nacional de Chobe, Botsuana, 2018-07-28, DD 46.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 22:09:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exemplar of African darter (Anhinga rufa) looking for fish in the Chobe River, Chobe National Park, Botswana.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Exemplar of African darter (Anhinga rufa) looking for fish in the Chobe River, Chobe National Park, Botswana. All by me, Poco2 22:09, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 22:09, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Nice, but head could be sharper. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:10, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan.Symbol support vote.svg Support now Daniel Case (talk) 02:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
    A tough review, I believe. This is wild life, very high resolution, 600 m lens required, taken from a moving boat,... I've uploaded a new version with some extra sharpening. FYI Ikan Kekek, Daniel Case --Poco2 18:20, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
    I think this might be a tiny bit unfair in that the image is being penalised for being high resolution. If you downsize to about 3000px across - still well above the size limit for FPC, and above the size of some fairly recently-promoted images - the head looks sharp. It isn't even that bad at full size. 131.111.184.8 20:40, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
No-one is saying it's bad. The fact is, the great wildlife photos nominated here by various people including Charles and Martin Falbisoner have brought with them a very high standard. I can well imagine Charles pointing out that the focus is not on the head but on the back. Also, I am judging the photo at 300% of my 13-inch laptop, not at full size, so while it would be unfair to penalize the image for being high-resolution, I am not doing that. I also haven't voted against a feature. I like the photo, but the rest of my remark stands, as I still think the head could be sharper - maybe not in this shot, but in another one which would be an obvious FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sharpening artifacts but still nice. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The dynamic background is another plus! Btw., I think I've never nominated any wildlife pic, Ikan. I'd love to though... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I thought you nominated birds in California. Sorry for the confusion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:46, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Amanita muscaria 2018 G01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 21:42:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fly agaric

File:Perchtoldsdorf Pfarrkirche Innenraum 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 15:11:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the parish church Perchtoldsdorf, Lower Austria

File:Estanque, parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-24, DD 02-03 PAN.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 11:00:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the watering hole in the vicinity of Pretoriuskop in the southwestern Kruger National Park, Mpumalanga, South Africa.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of the watering hole looking southeast from Mestel Dam towards the granite dome of Shabeni hill (759 metres (2,490 ft)), 4.3 kilometres (2.7 mi) away on the horizon, in the vicinity of Pretoriuskop in the southwestern Kruger National Park, Mpumalanga, South Africa. The veld type is Pretoriuskop sourveld on a substrate of granite and gneiss. Various jackalberries (Diospyros mespiliformes) line the banks of the Phabeni River, a tributary of the Sabie. A party of hippos (Hippopotamus amphibius) are resting on the sandy bank near the intake. All by me, Poco2 11:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 11:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colours are quite blown out and the resevoir doesn't have IMO any special wow to it. Sorry. --Msaynevirta (talk) 12:05, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree Msaynevirta Seven Pandas (talk) 12:33, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 16:33, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Msaynevirta. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination before I get burnt here --Poco2 22:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Foro Romano Musei Capitolini Roma.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 10:14:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Roman Forum from the Capitoline Museums in Rome.

File:Swissôtel The Stamford reflecting in the water.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 08:46:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Skyscraper Swissôtel The Stamford reflecting in the basin of the roof garden at level 6 of the National Gallery in Singapore
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Singapore
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. The only thing that bothers me a bit is the cut off box on the left but it's FP-worthy anyway. --Basotxerri (talk) 09:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I find this architecture a bit cold and corporate-authoritarian, but it's nonetheless impressive, and what I feel to be its arrogant grandeur is well-captured in this picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:39, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan Kekek. --Cayambe (talk) 11:19, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:32, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. --Cart (talk) 14:51, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose The image did make me stop when I was scrolling through, it's that striking, but too much of it is unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 19:11, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Impressive. No problem with sharpness in my eyes.--Milseburg (talk) 12:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:25, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Phlox paniculata 'Fujiyama' (d.j.b.) 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 07:33:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Haukilahti marina, Espoo (October 2018).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Nov 2018 at 22:29:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Haukilahti marina in Espoo, Finland.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Finland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:29, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:29, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Very peaceful, but too much empty space in the sky and water for me to feel wowed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:06, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh light, strong shadows. Too early in the evening for a pleasant mirror effect. I also find the format not adapted. As Ikan says, there's too much sky and water. Perhaps a 2:1 crop would improve a bit, at least to get rid of the distracting branch at the bottom left corner -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan and Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 02:49, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To me this is an ordinary and not very special marina photo, and there is the harsh light too. Sorry. --Cart (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Alternative recropped image.

Haukilahti marina, Espoo (October 2018, crop).jpg


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Daniel Case, Basile Morin, Ikan Kekek: I recropped the image to 2:1, what do you think, is it any better? --Msaynevirta (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Still oppose It addresses the too-much-earth-and-sky issue, but not the harsh light and shadows noted by Basile (and, by reincorporation, me). To be honest even if these weren't problems it doesn't really stand out from so many other pictures of waterfronts. Daniel Case (talk) 06:47, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Much better. I find the light normal, not harsh. What I'm still not sure about, though, is whether the remaining largely undifferentiated sky and only slightly ripply water provides sufficient eye movement to complement the nice arc. I'll live with this a little longer, but I'm liking the feeling of this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Still oppose Even if the scenery is quiet and peaceful, it is counterbalanced by the hard light which creates agressive contrasts -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:28, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Same as above. --Cart (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Dehnbare Helmling Mycena epipterygia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 15:32:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Holleday - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:32, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:32, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Beautiful, but for FP, really should be sharper, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support For me the sharpness is acceptable here. I like the composition, the light, the moss in the foreground and particularly the gelatinous appearance of these mushrooms. But it seems that the picture has been downsized, measuring exactly 3,000 × 2,100 pixels -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:57, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support per Basile Daniel Case (talk) 02:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Biguatinga Tomando Sol.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 15:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by & uploaded by LeonardoRamos - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:28, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:28, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background is noisy; also it's kind of busy and distracting even without that being an issue. Daniel Case (talk) 22:58, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice but the branch is a bit too much eye-catching Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:00, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I propose a tighter crop (see note) to get rid of a large part of the darkness behind. Though I'm not sure to support because I don't really like the flashlight, I think the bird is sharp and the image worth this improvement -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:L'insurrection des vaisseaux L'America et Le Léopard (6 septembre 1790).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 10:26:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • I think that's right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Saint Faith Abbey Church of Conques 22.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 09:37:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Faith Abbey Church of Conques, Aveyron, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This photo has 3rd place in WLM 2018 in France. A bit similar to this photo, which is FP. Tournasol7 (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:31, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But im not sure this is the best result you could get by such a scene: the right part is too bright, too much detailed and too much colourful. The central part, which is meant to be the main subject, is not as bright as the right part, which should be a secondary part in the composition. Vignetting and a slight darkening of the whole right part would be a great improvement to an already excellent composition with flaws about lightening.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No added vignetting please! --Cart (talk) 14:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
    A good vignetting would hide the evidently too much bright right part of the composition which is not intended to be the main subject but comes out clearer thn the subject. That right part is killing the whole photograph IMO,Paolobon140 (talk) 14:38, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per Paolobon, the entire right, up to the road edge, needs to be cropped out. I can understand what the photographer wanted to show us, what he saw, but it was more than the photograph could handle. But the church by itself could be featured. Daniel Case (talk) 18:18, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The view is beautiful, but with all of that on the right of the church and nothing on the left, it feels unbalanced. The linked photo has a different kind of balance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:11, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The edges catch the eye too much, being very contrasty and strongly sharpened, as well as being out of the mist. The vignette-to-focus-on-centre proposal is old already, with limited acceptability on a educational media repository and an outdoor scene. Anyway, the centre clouds are a little blown so drawing the eye towards them, and away from the church, wouldn't work. I think the image has been a bit over-processed, with a bit too much local contrast and sharpening (the woman's t-shirt has steps on the diagonal). I'll suggest a crop. -- Colin (talk) 10:24, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:44, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm surprised that I can nearly always recognize Tournasol7's pictures at first sight here and in QIC, just because they are heavily processed. I think you should try to keep everything (colors, saturation, contrasts, etc.) more natural -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:20, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • This kind of processing is the signature of the photographer and you are admitting that its his signature: it is a big result for a photographer and a big compliment to Tournasol7. Among dozen of undistinguished pictures shown here where the only problem is wether they are enough sharp or not in the very top left pixel, this kind of images are a gift becasue they show a creative signature. Photography is also made of colour processing. I would suggest you to try to cross-process some of your pics and enjoy the result. Lookf of photographs have changed a lot in the last decades and heavy colour processing is very fashionable lately. By the way, why is black and white accepted here? Black and white is a very evident colour processing.Paolobon140 (talk) 07:56, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Paolobon140, actually fashion isn't a sign of individual creativity. Following the herd to get a tattoo or beard, say, is more a sign of conformance to the group than independent thinking. Fashions come and go, and an educational media repository like Commons tends to value images that stick close to reality. Anyone can take a photograph of an Italian church interior, push the Clarity/Highlights/Shadows/Sharpness sliders around with a heavy hand, and expect folk who've never seen the church to have their eyes pop. There's a place for photos that adopt a certain style, but I wouldn't want heavy colour processing to be fashionable at Commons FP. While it might be fun to look at a movie and recognise it was colour graded in a way popular for 2018, I would prefer if the photos on Commons were timeless. Back and white works for the very reason that it doesn't make any pretence to represent the scene's colour: the viewer is not tricked. The guidelines for Commons FP require that significant post-processing be documented. -- Colin (talk) 08:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Many photographers here have developed a distinct and recognizable style. I've even seen voters refer to photos as being in "Cart style". However, almost none of these photographers have relied on effects or over-processing to achieve that style. You don't need to pull out every toy in the tool box to get a signature, it has more to do about chasing a certain light, subject, angle and composition. Btw Paolobon140, since Basile is a recognized artist, I don't think he needs to be told that he can play with colors. :-) Since you don't know the people behind the signatures here, I suggest you treat users here more like your equals than someone with their first camera. When we post photos here, we sort of try to keep them in the style of the Commons project. That doesn't mean we don't know any other styles. --Cart (talk) 10:11, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This post-process is not a personal touch in my view, but more like a heavy make-up. You can put 3 kilos foundation every morning on your face to try to be beautiful, this is just artificial and spoiling your natural appearance. My comment was not a compliment. Paolobon140 fails in the interpretation. Instagram is certainly a better place to play with trendy filters to transform everything normal into magically impossible -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per discussion above. I don't think the proposed crop would save it for me, either, as it would still be unbalanced, due to the left crop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:08, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Bamberg Cafe Rondo am Schönleinsplatz 9201807.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 08:23:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Former waiting hall of the former Reichspostdirektion. Today used as a café.
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Ermell (talk) 08:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ermell (talk) 08:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for infor; this one has a 1st place in WLM 2018 in Germany. --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:31, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very delicate light. --Cart (talk) 15:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. Travel-guide worthy (or let's try it auf Deutsch: Reiseführerwürdig). Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A very rationalistic picture, as rationalistic the buidling is. Rationalism was not a big fan of trees near buildings though, and I think that tree on the left is quite "a punch in the eye":-) I wonder if there was a way to avoide the presence of the tree.Paolobon140 (talk) 18:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Nice, but I think the highlights have been decreased too much, because the dark parts look a bit grey. HDR or selective correction would have been better -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 03:34, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:27, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:06, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:45, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:52, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The picture reminds me of Edward Hoppers painting NIghtthawks--Christof46 (talk) 14:18, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:28, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Paolobon140's remark. The encroaching tree creates tension that I think hurts the photo. If you had moved somewhat to your right (if possible) and created enough separation between the tree and the building, I would have likely supported. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:11, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Vanha voimalaitos.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 22:32:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vaajakoski old power plant
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by TeuvoSalmenjoki - nominated by Msaynevirta -- Msaynevirta (talk) 22:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Msaynevirta (talk) 22:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Has a lot of elements that by themselves would work but altogether overwhelm the viewer. Perhaps at least if you cropped in from the left a little ... Daniel Case (talk) 02:35, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good management of the light colour.--Ermell (talk) 08:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is techically very well taken, with good balance of colours and light. Did you use a tripod? But i agree there are too many object in it, starting with those trees which are more disturbing than pleasant in my taste. The reflection is too heavy, with hese kind of compositions based on such a heavy reflection i would rather try to avoid any object which is not the main subject, the buidling.Paolobon140 (talk) 18:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 03:35, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Oleg (talk) 12:02, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:07, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:47, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:White noise - Horn loudspeakers at Brastad soccer arena.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 18:18:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White noise - Horn loudspeakers at Brastad soccer arena
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Always wanting to explore things that are normally frowned upon, I think I've found a subject where an overcast sky actually adds to the composition. -- Cart (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cart (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Maybe a useful VI, but I don't get what you found compelling about the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – While those horns aren't anything super gorgeous, these ordinary infrastructure elements can definitely make for a somehow interesting composition. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose An interesting idea, but I think it might have worked better if you had had just the speakers ... the tower has different forms that sort of clash with the curvilinearity and gradients of the horns. Also, you need to rename it to eliminate the superfluous "r" in "loudspearkers", and there's a bit of CA on the rims, too. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed Title and CA fixed. Thanks for noticing that. --Cart (talk) 05:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Uhm, no. Sky is uniform grey and dull and I cannot see a subiect. And if there is a sublejct it is not enough WOW or interesting to me, IMO.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Any non-uniform sky would just make the whole thing messy. Of course the subject is the horns. As usual I make compos of everyday objects, for me their forms and colors are just as photographically interesting as art objects. I like all the shades of white in the image. --Cart (talk) 14:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I understand your point ov view, but im sure you have much more WOW pics in your archive. Why choose such a difficult subject? A question might be: would you ever print this pic and hang it on your living-room wall?:-)Paolobon140 (talk) 14:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I think it would make a rather cool canvas in a hallway or an office. I don't confine art to a living room and neither should Commons. Imagine this in the reception of a sound studio. :) It's true that I could do just easy pretty subject, but where is the fun and challange in that? The Wikimedia project needs good photos of all kinds of things not just pretty flowers, churches and birds on twigs. I chose dificult subjects because almost no-one else does. --Cart (talk) 15:00, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me, this is a balanced image with a refined background. It fits perfectly in the interior of offices of certain companies. In my opinion, Cart is looking for other ways that sometimes evoke resistance. I think that's courageous.--Famberhorst (talk) 08:05, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not very interesting subject, the white background is ugly in my view, and a bit depressing too -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not see any reason for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 22:43, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral a bit of CA but I like the composition, however, the overcast sky does not appease my sensory receptors imho. :p ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Eternal Procession.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 02:48:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Sigh. I have to agree with the criticism of the horizon. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:19, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good motive but unfortunately not very well implemented technically. The sky should be darker so that the noise is not so disturbing. Besides, the horizon is quite sloping.--Ermell (talk) 08:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per other --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:33, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 15:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I really can't see the reason for the tilted horizon. Also the merge of what I think are two photos, one of the rocks and one of the sky and lights, is not very well done. The sky is too noisy in comparison to the land. --Cart (talk) 19:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
@King of Hearts: - Any comment concerning merge? --Neptuul (talk) 20:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Image:20180819 Panorama ReutteBerge DSC00900 cut PtrQs.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 01:12:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mountain ranges east of Reutte/Tyrol in summer's early morning light.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by PtrQs - uploaded by PtrQs - nominated by PtrQs -- PtrQs (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- PtrQs (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Evocative and beautiful. You half expect to find some vertical lines of kanji characters somewhere on this "scroll". --Cart (talk) 09:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The crop is too tight for me at the bottom, I miss the valleys. --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Uoaei1, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but there were reasons to cut the lower 600px of the original stitch. Below the frame you see, the shadows drop and the contrast vanishes. So instead of graded silhouettes like in the peaks you only see areas with few contours. As this happens especially on the left side and there the edge of the effect looks rather sharp, I'd call it unbalanced. So I decided to crop it like this. --PtrQs (talk) 22:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose useless for encyclopaedia Pan Tau (talk) 18:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
"Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project."
FPs are not just for the encyclopedia, they are also for all the other WikiProjects (take a look at the list at the bottom of the main page) plus those we don't even know about yet, so ALL sorts of really good photos are welcome. --Cart (talk) 20:03, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
My rating is my personal opinion. So don't proselytize me. Pan Tau (talk) 21:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Ok then. Thanks for teaching me a new English word: "proselytize". I didn't know that one. :) --Cart (talk) 21:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful landscape. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Uoaei1. Doesn't really work for me structurally. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Uoaei1 & Pan Tau --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good for a web banner but format is absolutely a problem as a photograph.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Paolobon140, I've read that you are satisfied by 20x30 cm handouts. But in this format every picture of a full mountain range would present only some millimeters of rock and a real lot of sky above. So maybe you could spend some time and look up the definition of 'panorama'? --PtrQs (talk) 16:21, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, well, assuming that an Italian speaker like me must know what "panorama" means (and most probably a greek speaker even more) I perfectly understand that you might love this kind of format. Personally I do not appreciate this format unless is used as a web banner or printed and hanged on a wall. But still, even on a web banner or sticked on a wall i do not appreciate this photograph, I find it too panoramic, too large and not enough high. I gave my explanation which seems to be similar to others who wrote "Doesn't really work for me structurally" (i must imagine its more or less what i worte too). Techincally it is a well done work but still i dont feel to vote it as a Featured picture for the reasons i said above. I appreciate a lot the smothness of tones and the different tones. But i also find the mountain on the right too visible and dark, catching much of my attention, while in a panoramic picture i expect to let my eye go around without being captured by a single detail.Paolobon140 (talk) 16:51, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Adolfo Wildt (1868-1931) Carattere fiero-Anima gentile 3 (1912).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 19:25:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Adolfo Wildt (1868-1931) Carattere fiero-Anima gentile 3 (1912).jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Paolobon140 - uploaded by Paolobon140 - nominated by Paolobon140 -- One of the masteripeces of sculptor Adolfo Wildt; yellowish tone is typical of Wildt's way to treat marble, I chose to divide the pic in 2 area, keeping the lower one as negative space; vignetting is natural, and given by illumination on the scenePaolobon140 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paolobon140 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Do we really need all of the pedestal? It's dark and doesn't really add anything to the image. Daniel Case (talk) 05:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, in my opinion: the picture is evidently formed by 2 distinct parts: a bright golden one with the main subject at the top (eyes start looking at one object from the top, usually) and a black one at the bottom which creates a large negative space which emphasizes the top part by giving more strenghth to the sculpure and visibility. Tha lower part might even be seen as a kind of "bust" of the head, with shoulders and body. The sculpture itself is quite complicated to be framed becasue of its shape and this picture doesnt want to be a simple description of the sculpture, but wants to create a kind of atmosphere around the sculputure. No square composition was allowed here, so choice was one only. Vignetting and bottom black part area intended to focus atention on the sculpture. Paolobon140 (talk) 07:54, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A "heavy" compo, like something you'd see in a Batman or Marvel album, but such a compo needs to be flawless and the cut corner on the top is the pedestal really bugs me, even if you probably aren't responsible for how the sculpture was displayed. Also technical quality is not up to what might be expected from a static shot, lots of red CA, chromatic noise and a bit too short DoF. Camera settings might not have been optimal. --Cart (talk) 09:52, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment. I will not discuss about composition, that is the composition i chose becasue it was the one i liked the most and your taste is most respectful. Only thing id say is that the heavy composition fits the heavy expression of the face...For the quality i often have the sensation, here, that commenters are putting an over attention on the pixels. Digital photography produces large files which, when printed, become much smaller than the file itself. Many of the small details you can see at full size disappear in a normal format print. Just for information: one picture of the same set (different sculpure with different marble tones, same sculptor, but same camera settings, same place, same day and same hand of the photographer), is the cover of one quite good book by a well known editor. The editor didn't find any flaw in the file and printed it with a perfect result. When we had to print from films it was the opposite way and small flaws on the negative would look more evident in prints. A kind of photograph like this gives its best if printed at some 20x30 cm. Paolobon140 (talk) 11:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, we are much more fastidious here than most publication editors. If the technical level can be improved in post-processing or by re-shooting the photo, we would like it too be. We can overlook such things if the "wow" is so great that the situation/composition overrules the technical issues. Regarding the "heavy" compo, I never said that it was a negative thing, just commented on what kind of compo it was and as such I'd like it to be flawless for an FP. --Cart (talk) 12:06, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Btw, googling "Carattere fiero-Anima gentile" I see that the marble is a bit yellowish, but not as much as in this photo. This saturation makes it look almost waxy and not like marble. --Cart (talk) 12:50, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Yellow is much more stronger than you see in other pics; i think other pics are taken with those cameras that balance everything till it gets white. Wildt was famous for his yellow marbles, obtained by shining marble with urine and tobacco. This picture is very close to the original tone but the museum, in tht occasion, chose a yellowish illumination to enhance the golden tones of marble. I reproduced exactly what the human eye was seeing in that exposition. It was a choice by the light designer. In the book cover you will see a less yellow tone becasue that sculputure is less yellow itself and light was chosen whiter.Paolobon140 (talk) 13:50, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This is one of the cases in which our tastes differ. A photo that's utterly pitch black in the lower half doesn't work for me, or at least this one doesn't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition and the top of the face is not very sharp (the top is likely a bit out of focus). Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:05, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral for now, cropping half of the pedestal would probably garner my support though. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:13, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Baby Huwae, c 1963, Tati Photo Studio 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 18:37:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Baby Huwae, Indonesian film actress and singer
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tati Photo Studio, restored and uploaded by Crisco 1492, nominated by Yann (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 20:27, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I would vote to support, but are watermarks allowed in historical photos? I hope so and would like for it to remain in the photo, but I think it's important to resolve the question. Normally, no copyrights or watermarks are allowed for featured photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:41, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:15, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Gaura lindheimeri, prachtkaars. (actm) 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 17:54:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants Gaura lindheimeri, 'Whirling Butterflies' #Family Onagraceae.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Elegant small flower between the flower buds of the Gaura lindheimeri.
    All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In many shots like this I would complain about the bluish whitebalance, but with these flowers and setting I think it works for the photo in a melancholy way. --Cart (talk) 19:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart; the bluish tint nicely counterbalances the hot pink. Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment too noisy at the moment. Charles (talk) 23:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:24, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background is very distracting and the main subject gets lost in it. A shallower dof would be better.Paolobon140 (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice square. The temperature is a bit cold but the composition is working in my view because all the colorful parts of the background are well separated in space from the main subject. Flower popping from its texture. The DoF makes the object totally in focus, including the stem and the buds -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The plant is great but the background is so "busy" that I feel tension when looking at this photo. Maybe if you faded the background further, I might react differently. The bottom crop is a little close, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. Background slightly blurred. Thank you.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:52, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Thanks. That doesn't seem like a big change, but it feels different enough for me to relax. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Alpine House, Kew Gardens, 2018 edit.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 18:46:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

New version of recently defeatured image
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#United Kingdom
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Daniel Case - uploaded by Daniel Case - nominated by Daniel Case -- Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is actually the back half of an unintentional slow delist and replace. After my 2015 version was recently demoted due to the discovery that its margin of promotion had been due to one now-banned user !voting twice with one of his sock accounts, I looked at it and decided against renominating it as it was since a) I'm not totally sure as it was that I would have voted for it if someone else had nominated it and b) I have learned more about editing my images since then. I also realized that some of the oppose !votes in the original had had some points.

    So, instead, I dragged out the original raw file and started from scratch. The result is an image that I would definitely support if someone else nominated it ... less brightness on the building and the clouds and thus easier on the eyes, its perspective slightly corrected, and not cropped in as much at the left so we can see a bit more of its locational context. (I would also like to thank Cart for one last tweak she suggested).

    I see this as not just a worthy candidate but a testament to how regular participation in this forum can help us grow and improve at our art. Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yep. The Star Trek building is definitely better than before, so here is my vote. --Cart (talk) 18:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 19:03, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 19:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:41, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The lower part of the picture is quite messy. The guy on the left and the cut-off signs on the right do not belong in on the image, the lamppost on the left is not vertical. That' s no FP for me.--Ermell (talk) 21:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Ah, to live in a world where all lampposts really are vertical. I never assume that a lamppost is perfectly vertical IRL. --Cart (talk) 22:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the info. Of course I don't think that all the lampposts are vertical, but you can see here that the image is distorted, which is nothing unusual with the focal length used. But one could try to change that. Just because the building has no horizontals or verticals nobody is bothered by it.--Ermell (talk) 10:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ermell: I have cropped the image at bottom and left to eliminate those two things. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • That looks much better, but the guy with the camera doesn't make any sense at all.--Ermell (talk) 07:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
You know, I honestly didn't realize he was there until I started working on the image again, as I'd cropped him out of the first one. And I decided this time that, given that the first one had been criticized as a little tight (or at least I remember that it was), I would give it more space on the left since the heavy building was on the right. I agree it is a question of taste and might be the sort of thing I'd object to in other images (especially since he's shooting something outside the image). But judging by the !votes here, not many other people mind. Daniel Case (talk) 02:53, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But the guy is annoying! Charles (talk) 23:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, and I agree that this is a better composition than the 2015 version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Despite some unsharpness in the corners --Llez (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 20:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:08, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a messy composition, too many things, too many objects, too many clouds, too many colours and mainly, no depth.Paolobon140 (talk) 13:46, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice compo, great sky Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:50, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Bologoe asv2018-08 img04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 14:02:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

L-type steam locomotive in Bologoye
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An L-class steam locomotive in operation at Bologoye-2 railway station, Tver Oblast, Russia ------ all by A.Savin --A.Savin 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice old Soviet lady! The little platform in front is a bit disturbing as it partially hides the wheels. --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Peulle (talk) 16:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Definitely a QI if that were sought, but for me it has too many distracting elements—not just the platform, but the buildings, trees and tracks, for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Rich in detail. --Milseburg (talk) 18:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I'm with Daniel here. The light is also rather glary, making it unpleasant to look at. --Cart (talk) 19:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose platform. Charles (talk) 09:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor sublject and poor composition, the trains gets lost in the building in the back.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:27, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great colours, pleasant light and nice subject. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Building behind, distracting, and cut lines at the bottom -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel Case. --Karelj (talk) 22:46, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File:M81.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 07:15:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

M81 also known as Bode's Galaxy is around 12 million light years away. It has an irregular satellite galaxy known as Holmberg IX.

File:Young girl smiling with teeth in sunshine.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:32:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Young girl smiling with teeth in sunshine
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Evocative.--Peulle (talk) 11:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 19:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 19:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Good portrait, almost too detailed at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 18:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow, no depth, too much dof, dull light and a simple composition. This pic might have been taken enywhere in the wordl, nothing that adds that special feeling about a distant country. That prt of her right arm really look like a disturb and the tree above her hada shoud not be there. Paolobon140 (talk) 13:59, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • "...that special feeling about a distant country." There are no distant countries on Commons, we all depict what we have in "our own backyard" on equal terms, and the Wikimedia project is way past orientalism, thankfully. --Cart (talk) 16:17, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, i dont know what Orientalism is and actually im not much interested in knowing what it means as I have spent years all over in Asia. We are commenting on a picture that you have selected to be a Featured picture. Im an italian, and when i see a close portrait of some person who seems to live on the other side of the world, id like to see what is around that person, how she is dressed, what makes her look different from the people i see around in my country, how is the world around that person. I want to see something "special", "particular", "different", i want to see a small piece of Asia in a picture. If not we are obliged to judge your pic for what it is, a very close portrait of a smiling little kid. Your choise to shoot a close portait, cutting everything which is not the face of the model (you even cut her 2 arms), and then let's judge the portrait without talking about Orientalism. Close portraits have rules, and i think you didnt follow any of those rules for a good close portait. She might be african, esquimese, american, albanese, chinese, but it remains a dull close portrait. We can then comment on the techinque of your portrait and I find it quite a dull normal portrait with no depth that anybody with a mobile phone can take. What did your photographic art or skill add? For me you didnt add anything. Should i comment on the beauty of the subject? She is not a particulr beauty in my eyes, she has an average childish siling expression which is cute but can be seen on the face of any child around the world. Should i comment on the lighting you chose? There is no lighting, there is a frontal single light (the sun) that makes a heavy shadow under her chin. Should i comment on how good this close portrait is composed? I see one tree above her hair which shouldnt be there and a large spot on the right side of the photo, just near her hear. What elese should I say? When i see a close portrait [http://www.repubblica.it/speciali/arte/2016/01/15/foto/ragazza_afgana_steve_mccurry_foto_all_asta-131322463/1/#1 i would like to see a picture like this becasue the photographer chose the model and found the way to make thta model look extraordinry. Ew are selecting Featured pictures for Commons, why should i be contented with a simple portrait? Lets try to make something better, this is what i expect personally.Paolobon140 (talk) 17:22, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • That's not Cart's nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

File:The Bubble Nebula - NGC 7635 - Heic1608a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:11:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Bubble Nebula, also known as NGC 7635, is an emission nebula located 8,000 light-years away. This stunning new image was observed by the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope to celebrate its 26th year in space.
  • Better than normal. But this is FPC, not QIC. If photos by non-Commoners were eligible for QI, this would be a no-brainer QI. I'm quite unsure it's an FP, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Gallina de Guinea (Numida meleagris), parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-25, DD 48.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2018 at 19:47:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Helmeted guineafowl (Numida meleagris), Kruger National Park, South Africa.
+1 Daniel Case (talk) Symbol support vote.svg Support now. 23:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
+1 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Charles, Daniel, Martin: ✓ Done --Poco2 18:50, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 19:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support much better. Charles (talk) 22:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:00, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Lighting is a bit too harsh, I would've given an oppose but I wouldn't like to ruin your day if someone else supports. However, if another user comes along and agrees with me I might change my vote. Nice try though. :-) ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:20, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Cumbre dorsal - Teide.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 08:30:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cumbre Dorsal with Mount Teide, Tenerife
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 08:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 08:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely layers and a cloud plume in the right place. --Cart (talk) 10:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice shot. Charles (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 21:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 18:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It had the potentials for a good photo but in my opinion there is no subject: the picture is correctly divided in 4 areas: sky, the background mountain, the right part with clouds and a foreground with anther mountain. It is a kind of composition that might give great resutls if only one of the 4 areas contained somethng notable, but as you can see none of the 4 areas of the pic contain anything interesting to watch and contemplate. Actually one subject is missing, and the dull sky doesnt help with those few small clouds. It looks like an empty scene where no subject comes out to catch the eye of the observer.Paolobon140 (talk) 20:02, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:29, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 22:48, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


Candidati per la rimozione dalla vetrina[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Rock dove (Columba livia) walking on place de la Bourse, Brussels, Belgium (DSCF4422).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2018 at 20:54:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rock dove on Place de la Bourse, BE
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - They're city birds. Just like homeless people, it's hard for them to keep clean. But it's not for lack of trying. I observe pigeons a lot because they roost across from my bathroom, and they spend a lot of time grooming themselves and their partners. On the other hand, they crap everywhere, including in their nests, so that's pretty dirty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:15, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Life in the cities is hard for many species, rats and cockroaches included. But try to nominate a dirty flower here, even if there are excellent reasons for this flower to be ugly (pollution, car gaz, poor light, fuel oil, etc.), the emotion won't come. There's no poetry in this pigeon on asphalt, in my eyes. Taking pictures of people is difficult, since humans are conscious, while no personality right is needed with an animal. Nevertheless not any photograph of homeless people is good, just because "life is hard" for them, too. The picture has to show something, either an environment, a situation, a moving facial expression, a particular action, etc. If there's nothing else than a body, the subject is too ordinary -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:17, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but a wider crop at the top would definitely be preferred. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:01, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Bohdan Khmelnytsky Kiev 2018 G2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2018 at 06:55:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Bohdan Khmelnytsky Monument in Kiev
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by George Chernilevsky -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a good idea, but taking a picture of an equestrian monument is one of the toughest tasks: the horse is usually placed in a very high position and depending on the hour of the day you will have problems with the sun that might disturb so that you can not take the subject from the right angle. Here the profile of head of the horse, which is a main part of the horse, is not visible and the result is quite an uninteresting shape where horse and rider create an amorphous figure, IMO. I like the background, though even if it looks a bit false with its pinkish tone.Paolobon140 (talk) 07:48, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your review. The sky here is displayed naturally, without any special effect of Photoshop. It is a thin layer of clouds at sunset with uncommon color at present time. The viewpoint is really low because the square with the monument is surrounded by high buildings. This photo was published several times in the news feeds of Kiev and Ukraine, because it really attracts attention and has a free license. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:54, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it and like to support art photos --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 10:37, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The statue actually looks as if it was moving. I've no problem with the sky, I see that color often through my window. --Cart (talk) 10:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think we had one from the same angle which we were cool about because of the overcast sky. This one is different. Daniel Case (talk) 22:08, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Weird angle. Same than this one in my view. The silhouette is dark and lacks detail. The picture too contrasted for me. The shape is not clear, the rock too dominant. From this point of the bottom, it puts me in a position of subordination, and the fact that this "hero" is also known to be a tyrant and mass murderer doesn't help to appreciate. I feel crushed -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:08, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:23, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:33, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Pato aguja africano (Anhinga rufa), parque nacional de Chobe, Botsuana, 2018-07-28, DD 46.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 22:09:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exemplar of African darter (Anhinga rufa) looking for fish in the Chobe River, Chobe National Park, Botswana.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Exemplar of African darter (Anhinga rufa) looking for fish in the Chobe River, Chobe National Park, Botswana. All by me, Poco2 22:09, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 22:09, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Nice, but head could be sharper. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:10, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan.Symbol support vote.svg Support now Daniel Case (talk) 02:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
    A tough review, I believe. This is wild life, very high resolution, 600 m lens required, taken from a moving boat,... I've uploaded a new version with some extra sharpening. FYI Ikan Kekek, Daniel Case --Poco2 18:20, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
    I think this might be a tiny bit unfair in that the image is being penalised for being high resolution. If you downsize to about 3000px across - still well above the size limit for FPC, and above the size of some fairly recently-promoted images - the head looks sharp. It isn't even that bad at full size. 131.111.184.8 20:40, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
No-one is saying it's bad. The fact is, the great wildlife photos nominated here by various people including Charles and Martin Falbisoner have brought with them a very high standard. I can well imagine Charles pointing out that the focus is not on the head but on the back. Also, I am judging the photo at 300% of my 13-inch laptop, not at full size, so while it would be unfair to penalize the image for being high-resolution, I am not doing that. I also haven't voted against a feature. I like the photo, but the rest of my remark stands, as I still think the head could be sharper - maybe not in this shot, but in another one which would be an obvious FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sharpening artifacts but still nice. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The dynamic background is another plus! Btw., I think I've never nominated any wildlife pic, Ikan. I'd love to though... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I thought you nominated birds in California. Sorry for the confusion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:46, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Amanita muscaria 2018 G01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 21:42:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fly agaric

File:Perchtoldsdorf Pfarrkirche Innenraum 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 15:11:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the parish church Perchtoldsdorf, Lower Austria

File:Estanque, parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-24, DD 02-03 PAN.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 11:00:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the watering hole in the vicinity of Pretoriuskop in the southwestern Kruger National Park, Mpumalanga, South Africa.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of the watering hole looking southeast from Mestel Dam towards the granite dome of Shabeni hill (759 metres (2,490 ft)), 4.3 kilometres (2.7 mi) away on the horizon, in the vicinity of Pretoriuskop in the southwestern Kruger National Park, Mpumalanga, South Africa. The veld type is Pretoriuskop sourveld on a substrate of granite and gneiss. Various jackalberries (Diospyros mespiliformes) line the banks of the Phabeni River, a tributary of the Sabie. A party of hippos (Hippopotamus amphibius) are resting on the sandy bank near the intake. All by me, Poco2 11:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 11:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colours are quite blown out and the resevoir doesn't have IMO any special wow to it. Sorry. --Msaynevirta (talk) 12:05, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree Msaynevirta Seven Pandas (talk) 12:33, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 16:33, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Msaynevirta. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination before I get burnt here --Poco2 22:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Foro Romano Musei Capitolini Roma.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 10:14:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Roman Forum from the Capitoline Museums in Rome.

File:Swissôtel The Stamford reflecting in the water.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 08:46:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Skyscraper Swissôtel The Stamford reflecting in the basin of the roof garden at level 6 of the National Gallery in Singapore
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Singapore
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. The only thing that bothers me a bit is the cut off box on the left but it's FP-worthy anyway. --Basotxerri (talk) 09:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I find this architecture a bit cold and corporate-authoritarian, but it's nonetheless impressive, and what I feel to be its arrogant grandeur is well-captured in this picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:39, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan Kekek. --Cayambe (talk) 11:19, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:32, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. --Cart (talk) 14:51, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose The image did make me stop when I was scrolling through, it's that striking, but too much of it is unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 19:11, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Impressive. No problem with sharpness in my eyes.--Milseburg (talk) 12:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:25, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Phlox paniculata 'Fujiyama' (d.j.b.) 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2018 at 07:33:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Haukilahti marina, Espoo (October 2018).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Nov 2018 at 22:29:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Haukilahti marina in Espoo, Finland.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Finland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:29, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:29, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Very peaceful, but too much empty space in the sky and water for me to feel wowed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:06, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh light, strong shadows. Too early in the evening for a pleasant mirror effect. I also find the format not adapted. As Ikan says, there's too much sky and water. Perhaps a 2:1 crop would improve a bit, at least to get rid of the distracting branch at the bottom left corner -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan and Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 02:49, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To me this is an ordinary and not very special marina photo, and there is the harsh light too. Sorry. --Cart (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Alternative recropped image.

Haukilahti marina, Espoo (October 2018, crop).jpg


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Daniel Case, Basile Morin, Ikan Kekek: I recropped the image to 2:1, what do you think, is it any better? --Msaynevirta (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Still oppose It addresses the too-much-earth-and-sky issue, but not the harsh light and shadows noted by Basile (and, by reincorporation, me). To be honest even if these weren't problems it doesn't really stand out from so many other pictures of waterfronts. Daniel Case (talk) 06:47, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Much better. I find the light normal, not harsh. What I'm still not sure about, though, is whether the remaining largely undifferentiated sky and only slightly ripply water provides sufficient eye movement to complement the nice arc. I'll live with this a little longer, but I'm liking the feeling of this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Still oppose Even if the scenery is quiet and peaceful, it is counterbalanced by the hard light which creates agressive contrasts -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:28, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Same as above. --Cart (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Dehnbare Helmling Mycena epipterygia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 15:32:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Holleday - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:32, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:32, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Beautiful, but for FP, really should be sharper, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support For me the sharpness is acceptable here. I like the composition, the light, the moss in the foreground and particularly the gelatinous appearance of these mushrooms. But it seems that the picture has been downsized, measuring exactly 3,000 × 2,100 pixels -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:57, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support per Basile Daniel Case (talk) 02:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Biguatinga Tomando Sol.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 15:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by & uploaded by LeonardoRamos - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:28, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:28, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background is noisy; also it's kind of busy and distracting even without that being an issue. Daniel Case (talk) 22:58, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice but the branch is a bit too much eye-catching Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:00, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I propose a tighter crop (see note) to get rid of a large part of the darkness behind. Though I'm not sure to support because I don't really like the flashlight, I think the bird is sharp and the image worth this improvement -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:L'insurrection des vaisseaux L'America et Le Léopard (6 septembre 1790).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 10:26:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • I think that's right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Saint Faith Abbey Church of Conques 22.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 09:37:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Faith Abbey Church of Conques, Aveyron, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This photo has 3rd place in WLM 2018 in France. A bit similar to this photo, which is FP. Tournasol7 (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:31, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But im not sure this is the best result you could get by such a scene: the right part is too bright, too much detailed and too much colourful. The central part, which is meant to be the main subject, is not as bright as the right part, which should be a secondary part in the composition. Vignetting and a slight darkening of the whole right part would be a great improvement to an already excellent composition with flaws about lightening.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No added vignetting please! --Cart (talk) 14:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
    A good vignetting would hide the evidently too much bright right part of the composition which is not intended to be the main subject but comes out clearer thn the subject. That right part is killing the whole photograph IMO,Paolobon140 (talk) 14:38, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per Paolobon, the entire right, up to the road edge, needs to be cropped out. I can understand what the photographer wanted to show us, what he saw, but it was more than the photograph could handle. But the church by itself could be featured. Daniel Case (talk) 18:18, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The view is beautiful, but with all of that on the right of the church and nothing on the left, it feels unbalanced. The linked photo has a different kind of balance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:11, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The edges catch the eye too much, being very contrasty and strongly sharpened, as well as being out of the mist. The vignette-to-focus-on-centre proposal is old already, with limited acceptability on a educational media repository and an outdoor scene. Anyway, the centre clouds are a little blown so drawing the eye towards them, and away from the church, wouldn't work. I think the image has been a bit over-processed, with a bit too much local contrast and sharpening (the woman's t-shirt has steps on the diagonal). I'll suggest a crop. -- Colin (talk) 10:24, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:44, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm surprised that I can nearly always recognize Tournasol7's pictures at first sight here and in QIC, just because they are heavily processed. I think you should try to keep everything (colors, saturation, contrasts, etc.) more natural -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:20, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • This kind of processing is the signature of the photographer and you are admitting that its his signature: it is a big result for a photographer and a big compliment to Tournasol7. Among dozen of undistinguished pictures shown here where the only problem is wether they are enough sharp or not in the very top left pixel, this kind of images are a gift becasue they show a creative signature. Photography is also made of colour processing. I would suggest you to try to cross-process some of your pics and enjoy the result. Lookf of photographs have changed a lot in the last decades and heavy colour processing is very fashionable lately. By the way, why is black and white accepted here? Black and white is a very evident colour processing.Paolobon140 (talk) 07:56, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Paolobon140, actually fashion isn't a sign of individual creativity. Following the herd to get a tattoo or beard, say, is more a sign of conformance to the group than independent thinking. Fashions come and go, and an educational media repository like Commons tends to value images that stick close to reality. Anyone can take a photograph of an Italian church interior, push the Clarity/Highlights/Shadows/Sharpness sliders around with a heavy hand, and expect folk who've never seen the church to have their eyes pop. There's a place for photos that adopt a certain style, but I wouldn't want heavy colour processing to be fashionable at Commons FP. While it might be fun to look at a movie and recognise it was colour graded in a way popular for 2018, I would prefer if the photos on Commons were timeless. Back and white works for the very reason that it doesn't make any pretence to represent the scene's colour: the viewer is not tricked. The guidelines for Commons FP require that significant post-processing be documented. -- Colin (talk) 08:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Many photographers here have developed a distinct and recognizable style. I've even seen voters refer to photos as being in "Cart style". However, almost none of these photographers have relied on effects or over-processing to achieve that style. You don't need to pull out every toy in the tool box to get a signature, it has more to do about chasing a certain light, subject, angle and composition. Btw Paolobon140, since Basile is a recognized artist, I don't think he needs to be told that he can play with colors. :-) Since you don't know the people behind the signatures here, I suggest you treat users here more like your equals than someone with their first camera. When we post photos here, we sort of try to keep them in the style of the Commons project. That doesn't mean we don't know any other styles. --Cart (talk) 10:11, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This post-process is not a personal touch in my view, but more like a heavy make-up. You can put 3 kilos foundation every morning on your face to try to be beautiful, this is just artificial and spoiling your natural appearance. My comment was not a compliment. Paolobon140 fails in the interpretation. Instagram is certainly a better place to play with trendy filters to transform everything normal into magically impossible -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per discussion above. I don't think the proposed crop would save it for me, either, as it would still be unbalanced, due to the left crop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:08, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Bamberg Cafe Rondo am Schönleinsplatz 9201807.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 08:23:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Former waiting hall of the former Reichspostdirektion. Today used as a café.
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Ermell (talk) 08:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ermell (talk) 08:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for infor; this one has a 1st place in WLM 2018 in Germany. --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:31, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very delicate light. --Cart (talk) 15:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. Travel-guide worthy (or let's try it auf Deutsch: Reiseführerwürdig). Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A very rationalistic picture, as rationalistic the buidling is. Rationalism was not a big fan of trees near buildings though, and I think that tree on the left is quite "a punch in the eye":-) I wonder if there was a way to avoide the presence of the tree.Paolobon140 (talk) 18:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Nice, but I think the highlights have been decreased too much, because the dark parts look a bit grey. HDR or selective correction would have been better -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 03:34, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:27, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:06, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:45, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:52, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The picture reminds me of Edward Hoppers painting NIghtthawks--Christof46 (talk) 14:18, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:28, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Paolobon140's remark. The encroaching tree creates tension that I think hurts the photo. If you had moved somewhat to your right (if possible) and created enough separation between the tree and the building, I would have likely supported. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:11, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Vanha voimalaitos.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 22:32:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vaajakoski old power plant
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by TeuvoSalmenjoki - nominated by Msaynevirta -- Msaynevirta (talk) 22:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Msaynevirta (talk) 22:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Has a lot of elements that by themselves would work but altogether overwhelm the viewer. Perhaps at least if you cropped in from the left a little ... Daniel Case (talk) 02:35, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good management of the light colour.--Ermell (talk) 08:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is techically very well taken, with good balance of colours and light. Did you use a tripod? But i agree there are too many object in it, starting with those trees which are more disturbing than pleasant in my taste. The reflection is too heavy, with hese kind of compositions based on such a heavy reflection i would rather try to avoid any object which is not the main subject, the buidling.Paolobon140 (talk) 18:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 03:35, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Oleg (talk) 12:02, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:07, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:47, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:White noise - Horn loudspeakers at Brastad soccer arena.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 18:18:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White noise - Horn loudspeakers at Brastad soccer arena
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Always wanting to explore things that are normally frowned upon, I think I've found a subject where an overcast sky actually adds to the composition. -- Cart (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cart (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Maybe a useful VI, but I don't get what you found compelling about the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – While those horns aren't anything super gorgeous, these ordinary infrastructure elements can definitely make for a somehow interesting composition. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose An interesting idea, but I think it might have worked better if you had had just the speakers ... the tower has different forms that sort of clash with the curvilinearity and gradients of the horns. Also, you need to rename it to eliminate the superfluous "r" in "loudspearkers", and there's a bit of CA on the rims, too. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed Title and CA fixed. Thanks for noticing that. --Cart (talk) 05:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Uhm, no. Sky is uniform grey and dull and I cannot see a subiect. And if there is a sublejct it is not enough WOW or interesting to me, IMO.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Any non-uniform sky would just make the whole thing messy. Of course the subject is the horns. As usual I make compos of everyday objects, for me their forms and colors are just as photographically interesting as art objects. I like all the shades of white in the image. --Cart (talk) 14:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I understand your point ov view, but im sure you have much more WOW pics in your archive. Why choose such a difficult subject? A question might be: would you ever print this pic and hang it on your living-room wall?:-)Paolobon140 (talk) 14:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I think it would make a rather cool canvas in a hallway or an office. I don't confine art to a living room and neither should Commons. Imagine this in the reception of a sound studio. :) It's true that I could do just easy pretty subject, but where is the fun and challange in that? The Wikimedia project needs good photos of all kinds of things not just pretty flowers, churches and birds on twigs. I chose dificult subjects because almost no-one else does. --Cart (talk) 15:00, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me, this is a balanced image with a refined background. It fits perfectly in the interior of offices of certain companies. In my opinion, Cart is looking for other ways that sometimes evoke resistance. I think that's courageous.--Famberhorst (talk) 08:05, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not very interesting subject, the white background is ugly in my view, and a bit depressing too -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not see any reason for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 22:43, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral a bit of CA but I like the composition, however, the overcast sky does not appease my sensory receptors imho. :p ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Eternal Procession.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 02:48:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Sigh. I have to agree with the criticism of the horizon. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:19, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good motive but unfortunately not very well implemented technically. The sky should be darker so that the noise is not so disturbing. Besides, the horizon is quite sloping.--Ermell (talk) 08:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per other --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:33, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 15:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I really can't see the reason for the tilted horizon. Also the merge of what I think are two photos, one of the rocks and one of the sky and lights, is not very well done. The sky is too noisy in comparison to the land. --Cart (talk) 19:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
@King of Hearts: - Any comment concerning merge? --Neptuul (talk) 20:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Image:20180819 Panorama ReutteBerge DSC00900 cut PtrQs.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 01:12:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mountain ranges east of Reutte/Tyrol in summer's early morning light.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by PtrQs - uploaded by PtrQs - nominated by PtrQs -- PtrQs (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- PtrQs (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Evocative and beautiful. You half expect to find some vertical lines of kanji characters somewhere on this "scroll". --Cart (talk) 09:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The crop is too tight for me at the bottom, I miss the valleys. --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Uoaei1, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but there were reasons to cut the lower 600px of the original stitch. Below the frame you see, the shadows drop and the contrast vanishes. So instead of graded silhouettes like in the peaks you only see areas with few contours. As this happens especially on the left side and there the edge of the effect looks rather sharp, I'd call it unbalanced. So I decided to crop it like this. --PtrQs (talk) 22:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose useless for encyclopaedia Pan Tau (talk) 18:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
"Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project."
FPs are not just for the encyclopedia, they are also for all the other WikiProjects (take a look at the list at the bottom of the main page) plus those we don't even know about yet, so ALL sorts of really good photos are welcome. --Cart (talk) 20:03, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
My rating is my personal opinion. So don't proselytize me. Pan Tau (talk) 21:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Ok then. Thanks for teaching me a new English word: "proselytize". I didn't know that one. :) --Cart (talk) 21:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful landscape. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Uoaei1. Doesn't really work for me structurally. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Uoaei1 & Pan Tau --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good for a web banner but format is absolutely a problem as a photograph.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Paolobon140, I've read that you are satisfied by 20x30 cm handouts. But in this format every picture of a full mountain range would present only some millimeters of rock and a real lot of sky above. So maybe you could spend some time and look up the definition of 'panorama'? --PtrQs (talk) 16:21, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, well, assuming that an Italian speaker like me must know what "panorama" means (and most probably a greek speaker even more) I perfectly understand that you might love this kind of format. Personally I do not appreciate this format unless is used as a web banner or printed and hanged on a wall. But still, even on a web banner or sticked on a wall i do not appreciate this photograph, I find it too panoramic, too large and not enough high. I gave my explanation which seems to be similar to others who wrote "Doesn't really work for me structurally" (i must imagine its more or less what i worte too). Techincally it is a well done work but still i dont feel to vote it as a Featured picture for the reasons i said above. I appreciate a lot the smothness of tones and the different tones. But i also find the mountain on the right too visible and dark, catching much of my attention, while in a panoramic picture i expect to let my eye go around without being captured by a single detail.Paolobon140 (talk) 16:51, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Adolfo Wildt (1868-1931) Carattere fiero-Anima gentile 3 (1912).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 19:25:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Adolfo Wildt (1868-1931) Carattere fiero-Anima gentile 3 (1912).jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Paolobon140 - uploaded by Paolobon140 - nominated by Paolobon140 -- One of the masteripeces of sculptor Adolfo Wildt; yellowish tone is typical of Wildt's way to treat marble, I chose to divide the pic in 2 area, keeping the lower one as negative space; vignetting is natural, and given by illumination on the scenePaolobon140 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paolobon140 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Do we really need all of the pedestal? It's dark and doesn't really add anything to the image. Daniel Case (talk) 05:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, in my opinion: the picture is evidently formed by 2 distinct parts: a bright golden one with the main subject at the top (eyes start looking at one object from the top, usually) and a black one at the bottom which creates a large negative space which emphasizes the top part by giving more strenghth to the sculpure and visibility. Tha lower part might even be seen as a kind of "bust" of the head, with shoulders and body. The sculpture itself is quite complicated to be framed becasue of its shape and this picture doesnt want to be a simple description of the sculpture, but wants to create a kind of atmosphere around the sculputure. No square composition was allowed here, so choice was one only. Vignetting and bottom black part area intended to focus atention on the sculpture. Paolobon140 (talk) 07:54, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A "heavy" compo, like something you'd see in a Batman or Marvel album, but such a compo needs to be flawless and the cut corner on the top is the pedestal really bugs me, even if you probably aren't responsible for how the sculpture was displayed. Also technical quality is not up to what might be expected from a static shot, lots of red CA, chromatic noise and a bit too short DoF. Camera settings might not have been optimal. --Cart (talk) 09:52, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment. I will not discuss about composition, that is the composition i chose becasue it was the one i liked the most and your taste is most respectful. Only thing id say is that the heavy composition fits the heavy expression of the face...For the quality i often have the sensation, here, that commenters are putting an over attention on the pixels. Digital photography produces large files which, when printed, become much smaller than the file itself. Many of the small details you can see at full size disappear in a normal format print. Just for information: one picture of the same set (different sculpure with different marble tones, same sculptor, but same camera settings, same place, same day and same hand of the photographer), is the cover of one quite good book by a well known editor. The editor didn't find any flaw in the file and printed it with a perfect result. When we had to print from films it was the opposite way and small flaws on the negative would look more evident in prints. A kind of photograph like this gives its best if printed at some 20x30 cm. Paolobon140 (talk) 11:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, we are much more fastidious here than most publication editors. If the technical level can be improved in post-processing or by re-shooting the photo, we would like it too be. We can overlook such things if the "wow" is so great that the situation/composition overrules the technical issues. Regarding the "heavy" compo, I never said that it was a negative thing, just commented on what kind of compo it was and as such I'd like it to be flawless for an FP. --Cart (talk) 12:06, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Btw, googling "Carattere fiero-Anima gentile" I see that the marble is a bit yellowish, but not as much as in this photo. This saturation makes it look almost waxy and not like marble. --Cart (talk) 12:50, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Yellow is much more stronger than you see in other pics; i think other pics are taken with those cameras that balance everything till it gets white. Wildt was famous for his yellow marbles, obtained by shining marble with urine and tobacco. This picture is very close to the original tone but the museum, in tht occasion, chose a yellowish illumination to enhance the golden tones of marble. I reproduced exactly what the human eye was seeing in that exposition. It was a choice by the light designer. In the book cover you will see a less yellow tone becasue that sculputure is less yellow itself and light was chosen whiter.Paolobon140 (talk) 13:50, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This is one of the cases in which our tastes differ. A photo that's utterly pitch black in the lower half doesn't work for me, or at least this one doesn't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition and the top of the face is not very sharp (the top is likely a bit out of focus). Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:05, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral for now, cropping half of the pedestal would probably garner my support though. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:13, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Baby Huwae, c 1963, Tati Photo Studio 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 18:37:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Baby Huwae, Indonesian film actress and singer
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tati Photo Studio, restored and uploaded by Crisco 1492, nominated by Yann (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 20:27, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I would vote to support, but are watermarks allowed in historical photos? I hope so and would like for it to remain in the photo, but I think it's important to resolve the question. Normally, no copyrights or watermarks are allowed for featured photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:41, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:15, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Gaura lindheimeri, prachtkaars. (actm) 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 17:54:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants Gaura lindheimeri, 'Whirling Butterflies' #Family Onagraceae.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Elegant small flower between the flower buds of the Gaura lindheimeri.
    All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In many shots like this I would complain about the bluish whitebalance, but with these flowers and setting I think it works for the photo in a melancholy way. --Cart (talk) 19:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart; the bluish tint nicely counterbalances the hot pink. Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment too noisy at the moment. Charles (talk) 23:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:24, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background is very distracting and the main subject gets lost in it. A shallower dof would be better.Paolobon140 (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice square. The temperature is a bit cold but the composition is working in my view because all the colorful parts of the background are well separated in space from the main subject. Flower popping from its texture. The DoF makes the object totally in focus, including the stem and the buds -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The plant is great but the background is so "busy" that I feel tension when looking at this photo. Maybe if you faded the background further, I might react differently. The bottom crop is a little close, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. Background slightly blurred. Thank you.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:52, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Thanks. That doesn't seem like a big change, but it feels different enough for me to relax. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Alpine House, Kew Gardens, 2018 edit.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 18:46:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

New version of recently defeatured image
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#United Kingdom
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Daniel Case - uploaded by Daniel Case - nominated by Daniel Case -- Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is actually the back half of an unintentional slow delist and replace. After my 2015 version was recently demoted due to the discovery that its margin of promotion had been due to one now-banned user !voting twice with one of his sock accounts, I looked at it and decided against renominating it as it was since a) I'm not totally sure as it was that I would have voted for it if someone else had nominated it and b) I have learned more about editing my images since then. I also realized that some of the oppose !votes in the original had had some points.

    So, instead, I dragged out the original raw file and started from scratch. The result is an image that I would definitely support if someone else nominated it ... less brightness on the building and the clouds and thus easier on the eyes, its perspective slightly corrected, and not cropped in as much at the left so we can see a bit more of its locational context. (I would also like to thank Cart for one last tweak she suggested).

    I see this as not just a worthy candidate but a testament to how regular participation in this forum can help us grow and improve at our art. Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yep. The Star Trek building is definitely better than before, so here is my vote. --Cart (talk) 18:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 19:03, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 19:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:41, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The lower part of the picture is quite messy. The guy on the left and the cut-off signs on the right do not belong in on the image, the lamppost on the left is not vertical. That' s no FP for me.--Ermell (talk) 21:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Ah, to live in a world where all lampposts really are vertical. I never assume that a lamppost is perfectly vertical IRL. --Cart (talk) 22:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the info. Of course I don't think that all the lampposts are vertical, but you can see here that the image is distorted, which is nothing unusual with the focal length used. But one could try to change that. Just because the building has no horizontals or verticals nobody is bothered by it.--Ermell (talk) 10:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ermell: I have cropped the image at bottom and left to eliminate those two things. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • That looks much better, but the guy with the camera doesn't make any sense at all.--Ermell (talk) 07:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
You know, I honestly didn't realize he was there until I started working on the image again, as I'd cropped him out of the first one. And I decided this time that, given that the first one had been criticized as a little tight (or at least I remember that it was), I would give it more space on the left since the heavy building was on the right. I agree it is a question of taste and might be the sort of thing I'd object to in other images (especially since he's shooting something outside the image). But judging by the !votes here, not many other people mind. Daniel Case (talk) 02:53, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But the guy is annoying! Charles (talk) 23:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, and I agree that this is a better composition than the 2015 version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Despite some unsharpness in the corners --Llez (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 20:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:08, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a messy composition, too many things, too many objects, too many clouds, too many colours and mainly, no depth.Paolobon140 (talk) 13:46, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice compo, great sky Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:50, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Bologoe asv2018-08 img04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 14:02:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

L-type steam locomotive in Bologoye
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An L-class steam locomotive in operation at Bologoye-2 railway station, Tver Oblast, Russia ------ all by A.Savin --A.Savin 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice old Soviet lady! The little platform in front is a bit disturbing as it partially hides the wheels. --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Peulle (talk) 16:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Definitely a QI if that were sought, but for me it has too many distracting elements—not just the platform, but the buildings, trees and tracks, for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Rich in detail. --Milseburg (talk) 18:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I'm with Daniel here. The light is also rather glary, making it unpleasant to look at. --Cart (talk) 19:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose platform. Charles (talk) 09:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor sublject and poor composition, the trains gets lost in the building in the back.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:27, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great colours, pleasant light and nice subject. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Building behind, distracting, and cut lines at the bottom -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel Case. --Karelj (talk) 22:46, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File:M81.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 07:15:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

M81 also known as Bode's Galaxy is around 12 million light years away. It has an irregular satellite galaxy known as Holmberg IX.

File:Young girl smiling with teeth in sunshine.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:32:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Young girl smiling with teeth in sunshine
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Evocative.--Peulle (talk) 11:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 19:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 19:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Good portrait, almost too detailed at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 18:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow, no depth, too much dof, dull light and a simple composition. This pic might have been taken enywhere in the wordl, nothing that adds that special feeling about a distant country. That prt of her right arm really look like a disturb and the tree above her hada shoud not be there. Paolobon140 (talk) 13:59, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • "...that special feeling about a distant country." There are no distant countries on Commons, we all depict what we have in "our own backyard" on equal terms, and the Wikimedia project is way past orientalism, thankfully. --Cart (talk) 16:17, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, i dont know what Orientalism is and actually im not much interested in knowing what it means as I have spent years all over in Asia. We are commenting on a picture that you have selected to be a Featured picture. Im an italian, and when i see a close portrait of some person who seems to live on the other side of the world, id like to see what is around that person, how she is dressed, what makes her look different from the people i see around in my country, how is the world around that person. I want to see something "special", "particular", "different", i want to see a small piece of Asia in a picture. If not we are obliged to judge your pic for what it is, a very close portrait of a smiling little kid. Your choise to shoot a close portait, cutting everything which is not the face of the model (you even cut her 2 arms), and then let's judge the portrait without talking about Orientalism. Close portraits have rules, and i think you didnt follow any of those rules for a good close portait. She might be african, esquimese, american, albanese, chinese, but it remains a dull close portrait. We can then comment on the techinque of your portrait and I find it quite a dull normal portrait with no depth that anybody with a mobile phone can take. What did your photographic art or skill add? For me you didnt add anything. Should i comment on the beauty of the subject? She is not a particulr beauty in my eyes, she has an average childish siling expression which is cute but can be seen on the face of any child around the world. Should i comment on the lighting you chose? There is no lighting, there is a frontal single light (the sun) that makes a heavy shadow under her chin. Should i comment on how good this close portrait is composed? I see one tree above her hair which shouldnt be there and a large spot on the right side of the photo, just near her hear. What elese should I say? When i see a close portrait [http://www.repubblica.it/speciali/arte/2016/01/15/foto/ragazza_afgana_steve_mccurry_foto_all_asta-131322463/1/#1 i would like to see a picture like this becasue the photographer chose the model and found the way to make thta model look extraordinry. Ew are selecting Featured pictures for Commons, why should i be contented with a simple portrait? Lets try to make something better, this is what i expect personally.Paolobon140 (talk) 17:22, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • That's not Cart's nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

File:The Bubble Nebula - NGC 7635 - Heic1608a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:11:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Bubble Nebula, also known as NGC 7635, is an emission nebula located 8,000 light-years away. This stunning new image was observed by the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope to celebrate its 26th year in space.
  • Better than normal. But this is FPC, not QIC. If photos by non-Commoners were eligible for QI, this would be a no-brainer QI. I'm quite unsure it's an FP, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Gallina de Guinea (Numida meleagris), parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-25, DD 48.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2018 at 19:47:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Helmeted guineafowl (Numida meleagris), Kruger National Park, South Africa.
+1 Daniel Case (talk) Symbol support vote.svg Support now. 23:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
+1 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Charles, Daniel, Martin: ✓ Done --Poco2 18:50, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 19:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support much better. Charles (talk) 22:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:00, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Lighting is a bit too harsh, I would've given an oppose but I wouldn't like to ruin your day if someone else supports. However, if another user comes along and agrees with me I might change my vote. Nice try though. :-) ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:20, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Cumbre dorsal - Teide.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 08:30:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cumbre Dorsal with Mount Teide, Tenerife
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 08:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 08:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely layers and a cloud plume in the right place. --Cart (talk) 10:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice shot. Charles (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 21:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 18:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It had the potentials for a good photo but in my opinion there is no subject: the picture is correctly divided in 4 areas: sky, the background mountain, the right part with clouds and a foreground with anther mountain. It is a kind of composition that might give great resutls if only one of the 4 areas contained somethng notable, but as you can see none of the 4 areas of the pic contain anything interesting to watch and contemplate. Actually one subject is missing, and the dull sky doesnt help with those few small clouds. It looks like an empty scene where no subject comes out to catch the eye of the observer.Paolobon140 (talk) 20:02, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:29, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 22:48, 19 November 2018 (UTC)



Tabella dei periodi di voto per la regola del quinto giorno (5 giorni dopo la candidatura)[edit]

Thu 15 Nov → Tue 20 Nov
Fri 16 Nov → Wed 21 Nov
Sat 17 Nov → Thu 22 Nov
Sun 18 Nov → Fri 23 Nov
Mon 19 Nov → Sat 24 Nov
Tue 20 Nov → Sun 25 Nov

Tabella dei periodi di voto (9 giorni dopo la candidatura)[edit]

Sun 11 Nov → Tue 20 Nov
Mon 12 Nov → Wed 21 Nov
Tue 13 Nov → Thu 22 Nov
Wed 14 Nov → Fri 23 Nov
Thu 15 Nov → Sat 24 Nov
Fri 16 Nov → Sun 25 Nov
Sat 17 Nov → Mon 26 Nov
Sun 18 Nov → Tue 27 Nov
Mon 19 Nov → Wed 28 Nov
Tue 20 Nov → Thu 29 Nov