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:Javier shows part of the grape harvest in his Lysekil vineyard 1 - cropped.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 00:39:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Javier shows part of the grape harvest in his Lysekil vineyard
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No, I haven't been out travelling I'm sorry to say. This is from the harvest in a vineyard/winery right up here in the cold north. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lužice, zatáčka.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 19:45:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Curve in Lužice, Prachatice District, South Bohemian Region, Czechia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Aktron - uploaded by Aktron - nominated by T.Bednarz -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - T.Bednarz, would you like to give an explanation of how you find this one of the best photos on Commons? I'm not seeing it, but I'd like to see an argument, if possible, before I vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not satisfied that the technical quality here is high enough to reach featured status. Also, while the composition is nice enough, I'm not really blown away - there's no big "wow" factor.--Peulle (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not bad as thumbnail but disappointing at full size. Not sharp and there's also chromatic aberration. It would be okay with a better quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Félix, Torralba de Ribota, Zaragoza, España, 2018-04-04, DD 51-53 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 18:06:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the church of St Felix, Torralba de Ribota, province of Zaragoza, Spain.

File:Juvenile Nubian ibex (50822).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 09:20:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two juvenile Nubian ibex kids in Mitzpe Ramon, Israel
  • @Ikan Kekek: It's small because as soon as I got closer, they ran off (I'm clumsier than they are in a rocky desert), and that's the longest focal length I had/have available to me (150mm, equivalent to 300mm full frame). — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, very small and the lighting not so good. A bit soft. 1/1600 sec/F5.6 not a good choice for a static scene. Charles (talk) 11:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • If it were a situation when I could've used a tripod vs. freehandling at 150mm (equivalent to 300mm full frame) on rocky ground, I'd agree re: shutter. Perhaps I could've brought it down a little bit from 1/1600 and still be safe, but it was just shortly before I left the desert and the only time I saw kids together like this, nevermind close enough to photograph, so wanted to be safe because there was no shortage of light and they were just so cute :). Maybe a noob move, meh. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Not all all 'Noob'. But only a few images aspire to FP! Charles (talk) 16:46, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me there's no to ways about it; it's not an FP for the reasons stated above.--Peulle (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support overall I was happy with the result of this one, though I understand why some would oppose given the size of it. I do wish I could've gotten closer without scaring them or for different conditions. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Maybe I'm too much of a softy, but although this photo is small, it's well composed and I find it touching. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support, lighting isn't all that special and a little bokeh would be good, but I guess under the circumstances presented above this was the best shot possible. Good composition as well. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Moderate support It's not the greatest it could be. But it doesn't have too many too obvious shortcomings for a picture by someone who doesn't usually take wildlife photos and just tried to make the best of a shot that presented itself and was unlikely to last. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Sidney Spit, Sidney Island, British Columbia, Canada 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 06:44:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sidney Spit - part of Gulf Islands National Park Reserve, Sidney Island, British Columbia, Canada
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by User:Podzemnik - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this very strong composition merits a feature because of the curves on land and the streaming clouds in the sky, though it also has nice details and a pleasant atmosphere. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - There is not really a subject ... sand? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 07:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A nice curve in the beach and a nice sky, but on the whole I think the bar is set quite high for FPs of nature shots like this one, so it would need to be even more extraordinary for me to go "wow". It looks nice, but also fairly ordinary.--Peulle (talk) 07:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I understand, but my contention is that the composition is far from ordinary. I'm not trying to convince you by saying that, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Very weak oppose It has the makings of an FP, but I'd crop in on the right and the bottom, and shoot it on a day when there are fewer clouds and more sun. Daniel Case (talk) 19:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I notice User:Podzemnik has yet to vote or comment. I'm tempted to withdraw now, but do you have something to say? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think your nomination stands on its own legs. While nice, it's not really necessary for the author to agree with the nom; if you think it's good enough, there's no shame in bringing it here, even if the author doesn't agree. :)--Peulle (talk) 20:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
My feeling is that if a photographer doesn't him-/herself think a photo merits support, I should withdraw it. After all, as the photographer, he would have the right to withdraw the nomination himself. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Not sure the photographer has the right (I mean per the guidelines) to withdraw your nomination :-) Certainly voting against and requesting insistently to drop it, but setting the template ? Now the picture is irrevocably shared, its destiny may be quite unpredictable, so it can be used in any article, blog, but also become the next POTY if a consensus decides the promotion :-) So much power in your hands, now :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:05, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
He does. See 6. under "General Rules" above: Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:15, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
All right yes. I had read this point but thought both could only withdraw their own nominations. It makes more sense now, thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Streitberg Freibad 7023683.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 06:27:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Outdoor pool in Streitberg
  • User:Ermell, what do you think? Is it oversaturated? I figured that that's how it actually looked, because of the light at that time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ikan and Cart are right, saturation was not added. I just changed the profile to Adobe strong. After bathing and just before sunset, the light and colours were essentially the same as they are shown here. Thanks for nominating Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 20:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You're welcome. I think it's an interesting shot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't know, only a bad perception. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looking at a lawn in a photo is usually a good way of judging if it is oversaturated. The grass here is almost dull (compaired to the church nom below) so I don't see any signs of oversaturation. --Cart (talk) 09:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You have seen this church: so, you know, saturation (in general) is not necessarily a problem for me. it's just a comment. What is your opinion, you voting for?--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • On this forum. we can make observations and comments without voting. --Cart (talk) 13:20, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. :) The combination of strong red and blue colours with intermittent whites, the composition with the mirror effect and the general curves of the subject are enough for me to overlook any smaller issues with depth, noise or saturation. I also think it's quite cool how the divider in the water is also red and white.--Peulle (talk) 14:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I like it, but I think it would be even stronger cropped to the slides. However, that might make it too small for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ermell (talk) 20:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lincoln Cathedral Chapter House.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 12:22:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lincoln Cathedral Chapter House

File:ET Amhara asv2018-02 img077 Lake Tana at Bahir Dar.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 11:48:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ethiopian Tej (honey wine)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Drinks
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Glass of unfiltered tej (traditional Ethiopian honey wine) in an eating establishment at Lake Tana near Bahir Dar, Ethiopia ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 11:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 11:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Probably testy, but nothing exceptional. Yann (talk) 14:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Yann. Tej is very good indeed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:15, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The image title is not an accurate description of what it shows. --Cart (talk) 10:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
    The title shows its correct location and a seril number for my convenience. As long as we have titles like File:15-09-26-RalfR-WLC-0107.jpg, it's OK this way and a rename is neither desirable nor necessary. --A.Savin 11:03, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Just because we have one user who can't name his photos according to the proposed Commons:File naming doesn't mean the rest of us have to follow. If the main subject in a photo is tej, I think it's within reason that it should be a part of the file name, especially since this photo is chosen to represent that particular category and articles. --Cart (talk) 11:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, I've already explained that I don't wish rename of this picture, as I wish order in my uploads and otherwise I would have to do much more renames, like e.g. this picture to "fried fish at Lake Tana" and so on (bottomless pit). There is somewhere consensus from older discussions, that the wish of the author is to be respected, unless the title is fully meaningless and/or misleading, which is obviously not applying here; so I would be grateful if you leave me alone with this stuff. --A.Savin 17:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This/My discussion was a suggestion, not an order. If you feel so strongly about this, I apologize for upsetting your feelings. --Cart (talk) 17:38, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The grass in the background, with an unidentifiable horizontal object, is not successful. And the top of the bottle, which is IMO the most interesting part of the image, is out of focus -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:47, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile. It was a nice idea that might well have worked with a different background and in focus. Daniel Case (talk) 15:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --A.Savin 17:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Privatrösterei Schröer, Kaffeebehälter -- 2018 -- 0529.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 10:31:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Coffee bins at Schröers Privatrösterei, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others_2
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I know it's an effect, but I feel like the DoF is a bit too shallow here; even the closest container is not entirely in focus.--Peulle (talk) 11:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Current DoF works for me. --Rbrechko (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Musée L during civil twilight (Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, DSCF4200).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 23:32:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Musée L in Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Belgium
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info "It has so many pretty lines everywhere! And I feel like it evokes a story with the lights and the things poking through the windows. :)" - User:Bubblenymph, by User:Trougnouf
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 23:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lighting does not appeal. Charles (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles --Milseburg (talk) 13:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles; just doesn't stand out for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool lines and soft light :) - Benh (talk) 21:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The lighting in this picture appeals. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The sky is very flat to me and the composition in general is good but not great, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark, although I'm sure the same image could be featured with a more appealing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 22:58:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bertha von Suttner in 1906
I chose it because it is used in a important number of articles and pages. Ezarateesteban 16:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That might make it a VI, but what's the argument for FP? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Good photo without scratches, artifacts and another issues Ezarateesteban 19:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That reads like an argument for QI, if the photographer were a Commons user. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know it but I like if anyone evaluate the quality of this picture Ezarateesteban 22:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak suppoert I took some time deciding this one. On the one hand, Bertha von Suttner is a very important historical figure, so the legitimacy of the nomination is beyond question. It's also a photo from 1906 (read that again, nineteen oh-freakin' six, it's over 100 years old!), so I think we can forgive the overall lack of sharpness. I just wish the resolution was higher, and I'm also not sure about the quality of the restoration. It looks OK compared to the original, but.. hmmmm..... Well, it's borderline, and I may be a bit taken with it since I basically live and breathe history. If anyone else out there want to have something to compare it to, in order to find the standard set for historical FPs, here they are.--Peulle (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment there's part of the border left at the bottom. I think the border should be either removed completely or not removed at all … --El Grafo (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done borderline removed Ezarateesteban 11:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Certainly VI and useful, not good enough for FP, even for a picture from 1906. --Yann (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Basilica Santa Maria della Salute Dorsoduro Venezia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 14:54:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Santa Maria della Salute in Venice
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and 7.--Peulle (talk) 11:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Really good at full size, and I'm sure you'll work on the perspective thing Peulle mentions. I might prefer for the building on the far right to be included in full, but that's hardly an important criterion for voting on this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Such fine detail, and relaxing cool colors. Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I do not really like the shift to the left --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 07:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The resolution is outstanding, but the perspective isn't.It´s too close to the building and the viewing angle is too steep upwards to be favorable enough fo a FP. --Milseburg (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Aerial photographs of The Fullerton Hotel of Singapore at night.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:04:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial photographs of The Fullerton Hotel of Singapore at night
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very attractive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for a tripod shoot with ISO 125 surprising noisy (look e.g. at the white fassade). Overall a good fotography that doesn't thrill me. Beside of this: this image was obviously not taken from a public approachable place so we have no panorama of freedom here and I question the rightfulness of this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Freedom of panorama in Singapore is ✓OK for 3D objects and all the buildings, see this category. The noise is normal for a night shot and the resolution is high enough, compare for example with this FP shot from the same roof -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    • I didn't say s.th. against the resolution. But the noise is not good, especially for such a camera like the 5D Mark IV. Read the definition of FoP carefully and you will see that this image doesn't fit in. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This is not a definition for FoP, but an explanation. The location where this picture was taken from the observation deck of the Marina Bay Sands Hotel. The access to this point causes costs, is private ground of the hotel and therefore not a public place in the common definition. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • The existance of a category in Commons is not a valid proof. FoP means in many countries that your place, where you have taken the image, hast to be public. For sure you're able to show me the law of Singapure where this point is not relevant. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Singapore Copyright Act says in its Section 64 : "The copyright in a building or a model of a building is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the building or model or by the inclusion of the building or model in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast". You may read Wikipedia to learn more about the freedom of panorama, or ask the Village pump. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Taxiarchos228: I think you are premising German FoP law here, which is indeed very restrictive. The relevant one, however, is COM:FOP#Singapore: there is no such limitation, that the camera location has to be as publicly accessible as the photographed building. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is no aerial photo (not taken from an aircraft), I'm going to remove these categories now. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. And i don't see any problem with noise. Nice quality IMO. -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition, noise is OK, and light is very well managed (that's the most important issue). Yann (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Peulle (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A lack of noise --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:51, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I find no reason to hold back. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Sweet mangosteen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sweet mangosteen
  • Concerning these raspberries and these blueberries I see a will for arrangement. This peaches are as boring as this candidate picture. I'm sorry, the image is a solide factual photography. But not outstanding in arrangement and has not an outstanding impact for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Mut (Maut, Mout).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 02:02:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Statue of Mut
  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by [[User:{{subst:Maksimsokolov}}|]] -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Possibly a QI, but not an FP because of distracting reflections on the left and a distracting message board on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:54, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. --Peulle (talk) 10:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Downtown Toronto in September 2018 (Early Sunday Morning, frontal view from a kayak).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 01:55:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kayak view of Toronto
  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by [[User:{{subst: Maksimsokolov}}|]] -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I have the sensation of being inundated by water, but I wasn't surprised when I saw that this is an iPhone pic - the quality is not good enough for FP and I think it would probably fail at QIC, too, though you could always try. Also, please try to find categories for your nominations. Look through the galleries at COM:FP and request help if you need it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose strong quality issues at the 100% view --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Looks good as a thumbnail, so with a proper camera, this could probably have been featured.--Peulle (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Nice view but a) we could do without the front of the kayak and b) we need a better camera. Daniel Case (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de la Virgen María, Breslavia, Polonia, 2017-12-20, DD 17-19 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 21:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Main nave of the Virgin Mary church, Wrocław, Poland.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Main nave of the Virgin Mary church, Wrocław, Poland. Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral IMO it could be FP, but there are two issues. At the left is more space than at the right. May it is correct. The other is the gap at the tile at the bottom. IMO the gap should horizontal. --XRay talk 10:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    XRay: I haven't undrestood your second comment but just uploaded a new version with a tilt correction and perspective/crop adjustments to improve symmetry Poco2 19:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    I just added a note. (In deutsch: Die Fuge der Fliesen am unteren Rand ist schief. In den Kirchen ist diese aber in der Regel gerade. Naja, von Ausnahmen abgesehen.) --XRay talk 04:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This is surely a good photo, but it doesn't feel quite like an FP to me in this rich category, partly because it lacks the pinpoint sharpness of some of the greatest FPs in this class and also partly because this interior itself is not as lovely as others, what with the not so interesting windows in the apse and also the grayish feel of the light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Brooms on an open market in Macedonia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 19:06:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brooms for sale on an open market in Macedonia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Yolanda - uploaded by Kiril Simeonovski - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Interesting idea, and good for you for nominating something different, but for a couple of reasons it doesn't work. First, even given the fast shutter speed and slow ISO, the highlights at the top are still almost searing, and second, there are more broomheads than the image needs. Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose more or less per Daniel: Good idea, but not quite an FP in composition, nor in execution, as there is noise and CA in some of the shadows. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Caldera de las Cañadas 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 15:27:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roques de García, Roque Cinchado, Mount Teide, and Torrotito (from left to right), Tenerife
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice and all, but I'm not sure I want to vote for it since it's quite similar to this picture; it's the same location and subject, just from a different position and with an additional rock. I'll think about it some more and get back to you.--Peulle (talk) 15:52, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Significantly different view, IMO, especially because of the effect of having that irregular standing rock in our faces. However, I don't know if we should support a third view including this rock if it's nominated. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I have no further panoramas of this side, this will be the last nomination from there (therefore there will be no "third view"). I nominated this panorama, for we have a lot of pictures of the "Roque Cinchado" (the rock in the background) on Commons, but as far as I can see none of the nearby and also intersting "Torrotito". --Llez (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Peulle's comment makes sense but this view is better than the previous one, I think. Maybe cutting the fence pillar on the left could even improve. Nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Fence partly cropped, partly cloned out --Llez (talk) 13:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:52, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the sky is replaced by a gradient? We see horizontal lines. This editing is valid?--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • +1 for that question. Even though normal clear blue skies can produce banding, especially when making panoramas where the info is sometimes compressed in the process, this one looks very uniform with the same color values across the horizontal plane. --Cart (talk) 12:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, it is also my experience. In this case I tried to improve with several methods, and it is interesting, that in all cases the banding was not visible in photoshop, but if you open it with another program (like "Windows Fotoanzeige") or if you upload it to commons, a slight banding is visible. I think it depends on the processing by the viewing-programs. --Llez (talk) 14:05, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Mount Stuart House horoscope room 2018-08-25.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 12:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

horoscope room

File:Large skipper (Ochlodes sylvanus) underside Sweden.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 11:14:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Large skipper (Ochlodes sylvanus) with flower beetle (Odedemera sp.) in Sweden

File:Nürnberg St. Lorenz Sakramentshaus 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 04:13:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sacrament house at St. Lorenz, Nuremberg
Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Daniel Case: Well, it is a so-called sacrament house, a tower-like tabernacle of more than 20m height, fitted to the pillar of the church. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
It's not so much that I don't know what it's a picture of, it's that there's so many competing verticals in the image as to sufficiently distract from the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 20:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very special work. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. High enzyclopedic value, very good technical work and nice to look at. What do you need more for a FP? The special ratio isn't a problem for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as per Wladyslaw. Yann (talk) 03:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Hannover, die Marktkirche vanaf de Osterstrasse Dm IMG 4453 2018-07-01 09.56.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 17:36:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Neumann Schuhe in Hannover
  • Thanks, yes I have already denoised the photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Please look at the pedestrian zone near to the person. There you can see a very noisy area. For me to noisy to be a FP. Very pitty because I like this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I see what Wladyslaw is talking about, but I think it's a relatively minor issue in context and also like the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dark and the composition doesn't work well for me. I'm maybe too classical in my tastes, but the combination of a shoe shop with a church looks a bit awkward to start with. I don't like the white building on the right because it has no charm and the harsh contrasts are not aesthetic. Also the signs on the left are not very elegant, so this shop is not attractive. But the main problem remains this street which is the way where the eyes want to go, while it is too dark -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile Morin. --The NMI User (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like Basile, I have problems with the composition. My issue is not so much the darkness as that the signs up front conflict with the steeple in the back for recognition as the subject of this image. Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support even there are a few technical issues I like this view very much. The contrast between classical and modern (and maybe not so successful) architecture on both sides of the street is interessting. Also the contrast between the neon signs and the church is not a conflict but exciting and good in photographically sense. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support interessting composition --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 08:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Amrumer Windmühle (2018).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 14:28:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amrum windmill near Nebel, historic building and landmark of the North Frisian Island of Amrum

File:Marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) female underside.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 11:03:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) female underside

File:Vézoles lake riverbank trunk.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 10:58:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vézoles lake
  • In Dali's paintings you often find such cut trunks with strong light and shadows like with these swans and elephants for example. There's something surrealist with these trees in the sand of a beach, as if they had grown up here. At least it's a surprising situation in a natural place. Some rocks, shells, or umbrellas would be more understandable, but these trunks having a sun bath in front of the sea remain mysterious enough to me to like it. Your feeling probably differs and is perfectly legitimate. Also the quality of this picture is excellent at full size, so good QI + wow factor = FP, but that's just my voice -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I understand how you could have been reminded of that painting. And definitely agreed that the technical quality of the photo is high, as usual for Christian. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 03:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The NMI User (talk) 09:54, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 14:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice touch. --Laitche (talk) 14:51, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Basile Morin: I'm sorry to end the mystery :) but I added to the description the probable reason for the presence of these trunks. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Interesting. I wondered if that could be Land art, but it seems to be the unintentional result of both human and natural factors -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:45, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the picture would be better with a tighter framing. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 13:15, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:2018L0765 - Saint-Malo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 07:50:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fort National on a tidal island a few hundred metres off the walled city of Saint-Malo.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I haven't, I do either color version or b&w. I haven't both version for any photo. --Myroslav Vydrak (talk) 07:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very well, then. I might like a brighter sky, but really, per Christian. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2018 at 15:46:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wemyss Bay railway station concourse
  • This photo, as with many I took that day, was taken with my Samyang 10mm ultra wide-angle lens. It has an angle-of-view of 109.6° which is as far as you can reasonably take a rectilinear lens. This photo was taken with the camera pointing slightly up, to bring in more ceiling and less boring concrete floor, and then corrected afterwards in Lightroom. Unlike with my stitched photos, I'm far more restricted about where to crop and the sharpness is not as good, though I think still quite acceptable. I tried to position the camera in the middle to get pleasing symmetrical results, but it isn't perfect. One problem is the sign, which you can see in File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 5.jpg (middle-left) and is bright red, white and yellow and very distracting if you saw that in the middle of the scene. I tried to position so it was edge-on and not catch the eye. It isn't the sort of sign I can just lift up and move out of the way, without getting arrested by the transport police :-). You can also see from that photo how the top of the ceiling in the photo has curved over towards me and is quite close. This will cause the wide-angle perspective distortion by magnifying, but I think here the straight lines of the roof don't look unpleasantly distorted. Other things like round windows and people tend to illustrate that distortion in a more uncomfortable manner. I agree it isn't a perfect photo and I'd have liked to have had the time to make a stitched panorama. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your rich explanation and, I understand what is your intention here, however, I think that this photo is not up to your previous work. I hope you can take my negative feedback as a stimulation to do better job (maybe in a combination of nodal ninja photos). Sincerely this place deserves a perfectionist work that you have accustomed us to appreciate and taste, with enormous size and majestic quality. Obviously my opinion about this photo is little shared, or simply people vote positively because we love you --Photographer 23:57, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
The Photographer, ha ha, I'm not sure about "love". I hope I've ruffled enough feathers with oppose votes and criticism that nobody should feel bad about giving me an oppose if warranted. I guess this is more similar to my fisheye photos than my stitched panorama photos. Or as a good photo of a great subject, rather than a great photo of a great subject, which would be ideal. I would love to go back and take a better shot but that's quite unlikely any time soon. I live 400 miles away, the weather is not always as good as this, and stations can be busy. -- Colin (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a very strong symmetrical view may be classic but looks over time boring. A little bit asymmety brings the image alive. The other reasons for this picture are self-evident. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 24.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2018 at 22:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exterior view of the Castle of Valençay, Indre, France

alternative[edit]

Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 31.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info So maybe this one is better? Tournasol7 (talk) 07:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Much better, IMO, but too different to be an alternate. You could consider nominating that photo separately. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree this version is too different to be presented as an alt, but it certainly has its chances as a new nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Bridge of Jacques-Gabriel in Blois 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2018 at 23:22:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bridge of Jacques-Gabriel in Blois, Loir-et-Cher, France
It's easy to forget that because, without checking the image's metadata after reading your comment, I would not have known that. It explains the pinkish sky, yes, but the image as a whole is still kind of cooler than most cityscape-at-dusk images. Daniel Case (talk) 18:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


Candidati per la rimozione dalla vetrina[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Javier shows part of the grape harvest in his Lysekil vineyard 1 - cropped.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 00:39:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Javier shows part of the grape harvest in his Lysekil vineyard
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No, I haven't been out travelling I'm sorry to say. This is from the harvest in a vineyard/winery right up here in the cold north. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lužice, zatáčka.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 19:45:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Curve in Lužice, Prachatice District, South Bohemian Region, Czechia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Aktron - uploaded by Aktron - nominated by T.Bednarz -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - T.Bednarz, would you like to give an explanation of how you find this one of the best photos on Commons? I'm not seeing it, but I'd like to see an argument, if possible, before I vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not satisfied that the technical quality here is high enough to reach featured status. Also, while the composition is nice enough, I'm not really blown away - there's no big "wow" factor.--Peulle (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not bad as thumbnail but disappointing at full size. Not sharp and there's also chromatic aberration. It would be okay with a better quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Félix, Torralba de Ribota, Zaragoza, España, 2018-04-04, DD 51-53 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 18:06:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the church of St Felix, Torralba de Ribota, province of Zaragoza, Spain.

File:Juvenile Nubian ibex (50822).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 09:20:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two juvenile Nubian ibex kids in Mitzpe Ramon, Israel
  • @Ikan Kekek: It's small because as soon as I got closer, they ran off (I'm clumsier than they are in a rocky desert), and that's the longest focal length I had/have available to me (150mm, equivalent to 300mm full frame). — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, very small and the lighting not so good. A bit soft. 1/1600 sec/F5.6 not a good choice for a static scene. Charles (talk) 11:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • If it were a situation when I could've used a tripod vs. freehandling at 150mm (equivalent to 300mm full frame) on rocky ground, I'd agree re: shutter. Perhaps I could've brought it down a little bit from 1/1600 and still be safe, but it was just shortly before I left the desert and the only time I saw kids together like this, nevermind close enough to photograph, so wanted to be safe because there was no shortage of light and they were just so cute :). Maybe a noob move, meh. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Not all all 'Noob'. But only a few images aspire to FP! Charles (talk) 16:46, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me there's no to ways about it; it's not an FP for the reasons stated above.--Peulle (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support overall I was happy with the result of this one, though I understand why some would oppose given the size of it. I do wish I could've gotten closer without scaring them or for different conditions. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Maybe I'm too much of a softy, but although this photo is small, it's well composed and I find it touching. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support, lighting isn't all that special and a little bokeh would be good, but I guess under the circumstances presented above this was the best shot possible. Good composition as well. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Moderate support It's not the greatest it could be. But it doesn't have too many too obvious shortcomings for a picture by someone who doesn't usually take wildlife photos and just tried to make the best of a shot that presented itself and was unlikely to last. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Sidney Spit, Sidney Island, British Columbia, Canada 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 06:44:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sidney Spit - part of Gulf Islands National Park Reserve, Sidney Island, British Columbia, Canada
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by User:Podzemnik - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this very strong composition merits a feature because of the curves on land and the streaming clouds in the sky, though it also has nice details and a pleasant atmosphere. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - There is not really a subject ... sand? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 07:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A nice curve in the beach and a nice sky, but on the whole I think the bar is set quite high for FPs of nature shots like this one, so it would need to be even more extraordinary for me to go "wow". It looks nice, but also fairly ordinary.--Peulle (talk) 07:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I understand, but my contention is that the composition is far from ordinary. I'm not trying to convince you by saying that, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Very weak oppose It has the makings of an FP, but I'd crop in on the right and the bottom, and shoot it on a day when there are fewer clouds and more sun. Daniel Case (talk) 19:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I notice User:Podzemnik has yet to vote or comment. I'm tempted to withdraw now, but do you have something to say? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think your nomination stands on its own legs. While nice, it's not really necessary for the author to agree with the nom; if you think it's good enough, there's no shame in bringing it here, even if the author doesn't agree. :)--Peulle (talk) 20:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
My feeling is that if a photographer doesn't him-/herself think a photo merits support, I should withdraw it. After all, as the photographer, he would have the right to withdraw the nomination himself. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Not sure the photographer has the right (I mean per the guidelines) to withdraw your nomination :-) Certainly voting against and requesting insistently to drop it, but setting the template ? Now the picture is irrevocably shared, its destiny may be quite unpredictable, so it can be used in any article, blog, but also become the next POTY if a consensus decides the promotion :-) So much power in your hands, now :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:05, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
He does. See 6. under "General Rules" above: Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:15, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
All right yes. I had read this point but thought both could only withdraw their own nominations. It makes more sense now, thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Streitberg Freibad 7023683.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 06:27:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Outdoor pool in Streitberg
  • User:Ermell, what do you think? Is it oversaturated? I figured that that's how it actually looked, because of the light at that time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ikan and Cart are right, saturation was not added. I just changed the profile to Adobe strong. After bathing and just before sunset, the light and colours were essentially the same as they are shown here. Thanks for nominating Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 20:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You're welcome. I think it's an interesting shot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't know, only a bad perception. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looking at a lawn in a photo is usually a good way of judging if it is oversaturated. The grass here is almost dull (compaired to the church nom below) so I don't see any signs of oversaturation. --Cart (talk) 09:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You have seen this church: so, you know, saturation (in general) is not necessarily a problem for me. it's just a comment. What is your opinion, you voting for?--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • On this forum. we can make observations and comments without voting. --Cart (talk) 13:20, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. :) The combination of strong red and blue colours with intermittent whites, the composition with the mirror effect and the general curves of the subject are enough for me to overlook any smaller issues with depth, noise or saturation. I also think it's quite cool how the divider in the water is also red and white.--Peulle (talk) 14:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I like it, but I think it would be even stronger cropped to the slides. However, that might make it too small for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ermell (talk) 20:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lincoln Cathedral Chapter House.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 12:22:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lincoln Cathedral Chapter House

File:ET Amhara asv2018-02 img077 Lake Tana at Bahir Dar.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 11:48:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ethiopian Tej (honey wine)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Drinks
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Glass of unfiltered tej (traditional Ethiopian honey wine) in an eating establishment at Lake Tana near Bahir Dar, Ethiopia ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 11:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 11:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Probably testy, but nothing exceptional. Yann (talk) 14:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Yann. Tej is very good indeed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:15, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The image title is not an accurate description of what it shows. --Cart (talk) 10:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
    The title shows its correct location and a seril number for my convenience. As long as we have titles like File:15-09-26-RalfR-WLC-0107.jpg, it's OK this way and a rename is neither desirable nor necessary. --A.Savin 11:03, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Just because we have one user who can't name his photos according to the proposed Commons:File naming doesn't mean the rest of us have to follow. If the main subject in a photo is tej, I think it's within reason that it should be a part of the file name, especially since this photo is chosen to represent that particular category and articles. --Cart (talk) 11:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, I've already explained that I don't wish rename of this picture, as I wish order in my uploads and otherwise I would have to do much more renames, like e.g. this picture to "fried fish at Lake Tana" and so on (bottomless pit). There is somewhere consensus from older discussions, that the wish of the author is to be respected, unless the title is fully meaningless and/or misleading, which is obviously not applying here; so I would be grateful if you leave me alone with this stuff. --A.Savin 17:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This/My discussion was a suggestion, not an order. If you feel so strongly about this, I apologize for upsetting your feelings. --Cart (talk) 17:38, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The grass in the background, with an unidentifiable horizontal object, is not successful. And the top of the bottle, which is IMO the most interesting part of the image, is out of focus -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:47, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile. It was a nice idea that might well have worked with a different background and in focus. Daniel Case (talk) 15:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --A.Savin 17:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Privatrösterei Schröer, Kaffeebehälter -- 2018 -- 0529.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 10:31:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Coffee bins at Schröers Privatrösterei, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others_2
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I know it's an effect, but I feel like the DoF is a bit too shallow here; even the closest container is not entirely in focus.--Peulle (talk) 11:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Current DoF works for me. --Rbrechko (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Musée L during civil twilight (Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, DSCF4200).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 23:32:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Musée L in Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Belgium
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info "It has so many pretty lines everywhere! And I feel like it evokes a story with the lights and the things poking through the windows. :)" - User:Bubblenymph, by User:Trougnouf
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 23:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lighting does not appeal. Charles (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles --Milseburg (talk) 13:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles; just doesn't stand out for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool lines and soft light :) - Benh (talk) 21:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The lighting in this picture appeals. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The sky is very flat to me and the composition in general is good but not great, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark, although I'm sure the same image could be featured with a more appealing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 22:58:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bertha von Suttner in 1906
I chose it because it is used in a important number of articles and pages. Ezarateesteban 16:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That might make it a VI, but what's the argument for FP? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Good photo without scratches, artifacts and another issues Ezarateesteban 19:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That reads like an argument for QI, if the photographer were a Commons user. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know it but I like if anyone evaluate the quality of this picture Ezarateesteban 22:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak suppoert I took some time deciding this one. On the one hand, Bertha von Suttner is a very important historical figure, so the legitimacy of the nomination is beyond question. It's also a photo from 1906 (read that again, nineteen oh-freakin' six, it's over 100 years old!), so I think we can forgive the overall lack of sharpness. I just wish the resolution was higher, and I'm also not sure about the quality of the restoration. It looks OK compared to the original, but.. hmmmm..... Well, it's borderline, and I may be a bit taken with it since I basically live and breathe history. If anyone else out there want to have something to compare it to, in order to find the standard set for historical FPs, here they are.--Peulle (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment there's part of the border left at the bottom. I think the border should be either removed completely or not removed at all … --El Grafo (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done borderline removed Ezarateesteban 11:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Certainly VI and useful, not good enough for FP, even for a picture from 1906. --Yann (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Basilica Santa Maria della Salute Dorsoduro Venezia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 14:54:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Santa Maria della Salute in Venice
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and 7.--Peulle (talk) 11:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Really good at full size, and I'm sure you'll work on the perspective thing Peulle mentions. I might prefer for the building on the far right to be included in full, but that's hardly an important criterion for voting on this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Such fine detail, and relaxing cool colors. Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I do not really like the shift to the left --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 07:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The resolution is outstanding, but the perspective isn't.It´s too close to the building and the viewing angle is too steep upwards to be favorable enough fo a FP. --Milseburg (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Aerial photographs of The Fullerton Hotel of Singapore at night.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:04:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial photographs of The Fullerton Hotel of Singapore at night
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very attractive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for a tripod shoot with ISO 125 surprising noisy (look e.g. at the white fassade). Overall a good fotography that doesn't thrill me. Beside of this: this image was obviously not taken from a public approachable place so we have no panorama of freedom here and I question the rightfulness of this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Freedom of panorama in Singapore is ✓OK for 3D objects and all the buildings, see this category. The noise is normal for a night shot and the resolution is high enough, compare for example with this FP shot from the same roof -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    • I didn't say s.th. against the resolution. But the noise is not good, especially for such a camera like the 5D Mark IV. Read the definition of FoP carefully and you will see that this image doesn't fit in. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This is not a definition for FoP, but an explanation. The location where this picture was taken from the observation deck of the Marina Bay Sands Hotel. The access to this point causes costs, is private ground of the hotel and therefore not a public place in the common definition. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • The existance of a category in Commons is not a valid proof. FoP means in many countries that your place, where you have taken the image, hast to be public. For sure you're able to show me the law of Singapure where this point is not relevant. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Singapore Copyright Act says in its Section 64 : "The copyright in a building or a model of a building is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the building or model or by the inclusion of the building or model in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast". You may read Wikipedia to learn more about the freedom of panorama, or ask the Village pump. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Taxiarchos228: I think you are premising German FoP law here, which is indeed very restrictive. The relevant one, however, is COM:FOP#Singapore: there is no such limitation, that the camera location has to be as publicly accessible as the photographed building. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is no aerial photo (not taken from an aircraft), I'm going to remove these categories now. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. And i don't see any problem with noise. Nice quality IMO. -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition, noise is OK, and light is very well managed (that's the most important issue). Yann (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Peulle (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A lack of noise --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:51, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I find no reason to hold back. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Sweet mangosteen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sweet mangosteen
  • Concerning these raspberries and these blueberries I see a will for arrangement. This peaches are as boring as this candidate picture. I'm sorry, the image is a solide factual photography. But not outstanding in arrangement and has not an outstanding impact for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Mut (Maut, Mout).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 02:02:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Statue of Mut
  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by [[User:{{subst:Maksimsokolov}}|]] -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Possibly a QI, but not an FP because of distracting reflections on the left and a distracting message board on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:54, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. --Peulle (talk) 10:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Downtown Toronto in September 2018 (Early Sunday Morning, frontal view from a kayak).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 01:55:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kayak view of Toronto
  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by [[User:{{subst: Maksimsokolov}}|]] -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I have the sensation of being inundated by water, but I wasn't surprised when I saw that this is an iPhone pic - the quality is not good enough for FP and I think it would probably fail at QIC, too, though you could always try. Also, please try to find categories for your nominations. Look through the galleries at COM:FP and request help if you need it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose strong quality issues at the 100% view --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Looks good as a thumbnail, so with a proper camera, this could probably have been featured.--Peulle (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Nice view but a) we could do without the front of the kayak and b) we need a better camera. Daniel Case (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de la Virgen María, Breslavia, Polonia, 2017-12-20, DD 17-19 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 21:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Main nave of the Virgin Mary church, Wrocław, Poland.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Main nave of the Virgin Mary church, Wrocław, Poland. Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral IMO it could be FP, but there are two issues. At the left is more space than at the right. May it is correct. The other is the gap at the tile at the bottom. IMO the gap should horizontal. --XRay talk 10:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    XRay: I haven't undrestood your second comment but just uploaded a new version with a tilt correction and perspective/crop adjustments to improve symmetry Poco2 19:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    I just added a note. (In deutsch: Die Fuge der Fliesen am unteren Rand ist schief. In den Kirchen ist diese aber in der Regel gerade. Naja, von Ausnahmen abgesehen.) --XRay talk 04:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This is surely a good photo, but it doesn't feel quite like an FP to me in this rich category, partly because it lacks the pinpoint sharpness of some of the greatest FPs in this class and also partly because this interior itself is not as lovely as others, what with the not so interesting windows in the apse and also the grayish feel of the light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Brooms on an open market in Macedonia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 19:06:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brooms for sale on an open market in Macedonia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Yolanda - uploaded by Kiril Simeonovski - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Interesting idea, and good for you for nominating something different, but for a couple of reasons it doesn't work. First, even given the fast shutter speed and slow ISO, the highlights at the top are still almost searing, and second, there are more broomheads than the image needs. Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose more or less per Daniel: Good idea, but not quite an FP in composition, nor in execution, as there is noise and CA in some of the shadows. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Caldera de las Cañadas 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 15:27:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roques de García, Roque Cinchado, Mount Teide, and Torrotito (from left to right), Tenerife
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice and all, but I'm not sure I want to vote for it since it's quite similar to this picture; it's the same location and subject, just from a different position and with an additional rock. I'll think about it some more and get back to you.--Peulle (talk) 15:52, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Significantly different view, IMO, especially because of the effect of having that irregular standing rock in our faces. However, I don't know if we should support a third view including this rock if it's nominated. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I have no further panoramas of this side, this will be the last nomination from there (therefore there will be no "third view"). I nominated this panorama, for we have a lot of pictures of the "Roque Cinchado" (the rock in the background) on Commons, but as far as I can see none of the nearby and also intersting "Torrotito". --Llez (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Peulle's comment makes sense but this view is better than the previous one, I think. Maybe cutting the fence pillar on the left could even improve. Nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Fence partly cropped, partly cloned out --Llez (talk) 13:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:52, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the sky is replaced by a gradient? We see horizontal lines. This editing is valid?--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • +1 for that question. Even though normal clear blue skies can produce banding, especially when making panoramas where the info is sometimes compressed in the process, this one looks very uniform with the same color values across the horizontal plane. --Cart (talk) 12:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, it is also my experience. In this case I tried to improve with several methods, and it is interesting, that in all cases the banding was not visible in photoshop, but if you open it with another program (like "Windows Fotoanzeige") or if you upload it to commons, a slight banding is visible. I think it depends on the processing by the viewing-programs. --Llez (talk) 14:05, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Mount Stuart House horoscope room 2018-08-25.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 12:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

horoscope room

File:Large skipper (Ochlodes sylvanus) underside Sweden.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 11:14:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Large skipper (Ochlodes sylvanus) with flower beetle (Odedemera sp.) in Sweden

File:Nürnberg St. Lorenz Sakramentshaus 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 04:13:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sacrament house at St. Lorenz, Nuremberg
Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Daniel Case: Well, it is a so-called sacrament house, a tower-like tabernacle of more than 20m height, fitted to the pillar of the church. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
It's not so much that I don't know what it's a picture of, it's that there's so many competing verticals in the image as to sufficiently distract from the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 20:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very special work. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. High enzyclopedic value, very good technical work and nice to look at. What do you need more for a FP? The special ratio isn't a problem for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as per Wladyslaw. Yann (talk) 03:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Hannover, die Marktkirche vanaf de Osterstrasse Dm IMG 4453 2018-07-01 09.56.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 17:36:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Neumann Schuhe in Hannover
  • Thanks, yes I have already denoised the photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Please look at the pedestrian zone near to the person. There you can see a very noisy area. For me to noisy to be a FP. Very pitty because I like this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I see what Wladyslaw is talking about, but I think it's a relatively minor issue in context and also like the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dark and the composition doesn't work well for me. I'm maybe too classical in my tastes, but the combination of a shoe shop with a church looks a bit awkward to start with. I don't like the white building on the right because it has no charm and the harsh contrasts are not aesthetic. Also the signs on the left are not very elegant, so this shop is not attractive. But the main problem remains this street which is the way where the eyes want to go, while it is too dark -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile Morin. --The NMI User (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like Basile, I have problems with the composition. My issue is not so much the darkness as that the signs up front conflict with the steeple in the back for recognition as the subject of this image. Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support even there are a few technical issues I like this view very much. The contrast between classical and modern (and maybe not so successful) architecture on both sides of the street is interessting. Also the contrast between the neon signs and the church is not a conflict but exciting and good in photographically sense. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support interessting composition --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 08:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Amrumer Windmühle (2018).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 14:28:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amrum windmill near Nebel, historic building and landmark of the North Frisian Island of Amrum

File:Marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) female underside.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 11:03:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) female underside

File:Vézoles lake riverbank trunk.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 10:58:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vézoles lake
  • In Dali's paintings you often find such cut trunks with strong light and shadows like with these swans and elephants for example. There's something surrealist with these trees in the sand of a beach, as if they had grown up here. At least it's a surprising situation in a natural place. Some rocks, shells, or umbrellas would be more understandable, but these trunks having a sun bath in front of the sea remain mysterious enough to me to like it. Your feeling probably differs and is perfectly legitimate. Also the quality of this picture is excellent at full size, so good QI + wow factor = FP, but that's just my voice -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I understand how you could have been reminded of that painting. And definitely agreed that the technical quality of the photo is high, as usual for Christian. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 03:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The NMI User (talk) 09:54, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 14:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice touch. --Laitche (talk) 14:51, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Basile Morin: I'm sorry to end the mystery :) but I added to the description the probable reason for the presence of these trunks. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Interesting. I wondered if that could be Land art, but it seems to be the unintentional result of both human and natural factors -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:45, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the picture would be better with a tighter framing. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 13:15, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:2018L0765 - Saint-Malo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 07:50:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fort National on a tidal island a few hundred metres off the walled city of Saint-Malo.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I haven't, I do either color version or b&w. I haven't both version for any photo. --Myroslav Vydrak (talk) 07:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very well, then. I might like a brighter sky, but really, per Christian. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2018 at 15:46:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wemyss Bay railway station concourse
  • This photo, as with many I took that day, was taken with my Samyang 10mm ultra wide-angle lens. It has an angle-of-view of 109.6° which is as far as you can reasonably take a rectilinear lens. This photo was taken with the camera pointing slightly up, to bring in more ceiling and less boring concrete floor, and then corrected afterwards in Lightroom. Unlike with my stitched photos, I'm far more restricted about where to crop and the sharpness is not as good, though I think still quite acceptable. I tried to position the camera in the middle to get pleasing symmetrical results, but it isn't perfect. One problem is the sign, which you can see in File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 5.jpg (middle-left) and is bright red, white and yellow and very distracting if you saw that in the middle of the scene. I tried to position so it was edge-on and not catch the eye. It isn't the sort of sign I can just lift up and move out of the way, without getting arrested by the transport police :-). You can also see from that photo how the top of the ceiling in the photo has curved over towards me and is quite close. This will cause the wide-angle perspective distortion by magnifying, but I think here the straight lines of the roof don't look unpleasantly distorted. Other things like round windows and people tend to illustrate that distortion in a more uncomfortable manner. I agree it isn't a perfect photo and I'd have liked to have had the time to make a stitched panorama. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your rich explanation and, I understand what is your intention here, however, I think that this photo is not up to your previous work. I hope you can take my negative feedback as a stimulation to do better job (maybe in a combination of nodal ninja photos). Sincerely this place deserves a perfectionist work that you have accustomed us to appreciate and taste, with enormous size and majestic quality. Obviously my opinion about this photo is little shared, or simply people vote positively because we love you --Photographer 23:57, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
The Photographer, ha ha, I'm not sure about "love". I hope I've ruffled enough feathers with oppose votes and criticism that nobody should feel bad about giving me an oppose if warranted. I guess this is more similar to my fisheye photos than my stitched panorama photos. Or as a good photo of a great subject, rather than a great photo of a great subject, which would be ideal. I would love to go back and take a better shot but that's quite unlikely any time soon. I live 400 miles away, the weather is not always as good as this, and stations can be busy. -- Colin (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a very strong symmetrical view may be classic but looks over time boring. A little bit asymmety brings the image alive. The other reasons for this picture are self-evident. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 24.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2018 at 22:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exterior view of the Castle of Valençay, Indre, France

alternative[edit]

Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 31.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info So maybe this one is better? Tournasol7 (talk) 07:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Much better, IMO, but too different to be an alternate. You could consider nominating that photo separately. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree this version is too different to be presented as an alt, but it certainly has its chances as a new nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Bridge of Jacques-Gabriel in Blois 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2018 at 23:22:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bridge of Jacques-Gabriel in Blois, Loir-et-Cher, France
It's easy to forget that because, without checking the image's metadata after reading your comment, I would not have known that. It explains the pinkish sky, yes, but the image as a whole is still kind of cooler than most cityscape-at-dusk images. Daniel Case (talk) 18:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 21 September 2018 (UTC)



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

Sun 16 Sep → Fri 21 Sep
Mon 17 Sep → Sat 22 Sep
Tue 18 Sep → Sun 23 Sep
Wed 19 Sep → Mon 24 Sep
Thu 20 Sep → Tue 25 Sep
Fri 21 Sep → Wed 26 Sep

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

Wed 12 Sep → Fri 21 Sep
Thu 13 Sep → Sat 22 Sep
Fri 14 Sep → Sun 23 Sep
Sat 15 Sep → Mon 24 Sep
Sun 16 Sep → Tue 25 Sep
Mon 17 Sep → Wed 26 Sep
Tue 18 Sep → Thu 27 Sep
Wed 19 Sep → Fri 28 Sep
Thu 20 Sep → Sat 29 Sep
Fri 21 Sep → Sun 30 Sep