Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/April 2015

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

File:San Bernardo alle Terme - ceiling.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2015 at 09:24:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

San Bernardo alle Terme - ceiling

✓ Done New version --LivioAndronico talk 16:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Friends will be friends - right till the end! --A.Savin 16:20, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Even the enemies Savin Clin --LivioAndronico talk 16:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Nothing sharp, too soft, some CA. No enemies here for me, just my opinion about a photograph. Not the best of "Commons", far from FP standards IMO, quality wise. Excellent point of view and nice symmetry though. Good idea, not good enough achievement.--Jebulon (talk) 17:20, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 19:56, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2015 at 14:07:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Gregory the Illuminator Cathedral. Yerevan, Armenia.
Good point. That chimney on the right looks ugly as well. Somebody really should be fired in this city. -- Pofka (talk) 10:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The communications mast is now blasted out: . --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:26, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I am opposed to this type of practices that falsify reality. --Halavar (talk) 17:46, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Halavar: +1. So you (we both) can withdraw the alt-version. My reworked version was only to show us the same image without the communications mast. Sorry. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:45, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It can stay. No problem. --Halavar (talk) 18:49, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

[edit]

Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2015 at 17:51:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Our Lady of the Rosary church in Kłodzko
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:42, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Agustín Salinas y Teruel - School Festival at Ipiranga - Google Art Project.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2015 at 11:28:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

School Festival at Ipiranga, by Agustín Salinas y Teruel
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2015 at 05:50:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Definitely much better now. I'll give a good  Neutral because it's still quite small and relatively usual in what it looks like. — Julian H.✈ 08:17, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:37, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2015 at 11:30:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Thanks for the nom. I think they may be a type of red snapper, but I was not sure enough of the species identification to add that to the page. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish

File:Haltern am See, Sythen, Werkzeughalle der Quarzwerke -- 2015 -- 4433.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2015 at 17:55:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Plastic pipes, tool shed of the Quarzwerke in Sythen, Haltern, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:43, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2015 at 13:31:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications

File:Pitt Rivers Museum Interior, Oxford, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2015 at 01:51:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pitt Rivers Museum
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:39, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2015 at 12:18:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:40, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2015 at 09:40:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Villanueva de la Concepción and El Torcal Massif
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /KTC (talk) 16:48, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2015 at 07:55:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lichtschraube rückwärts, ein Zufallsprodukt
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 3 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2015 at 05:59:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Solidago rugosa

✓ Done AC removed.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2015 at 18:35:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brasilia, capital of Brazil, as seen from Brasilia TV Tower: eastern part of Eixo Monumental (Monumental Axis), National Congress (two towers and two hemispheres) and ministries (in green on both sides) buildings.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 11:24, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2015 at 15:43:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Cup & Saucer Trail, Manitoulin Island, Canada.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 11:25, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2015 at 15:52:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An almost night view of the Acropolis of Athens

✓ Done cropped No raw for this set (and only) - Merphy's law :P --C messier (talk) 17:37, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose Looks very washed out as after too much highlight or shadow recovery. Some areas of the subject show almost no significant brightness changes. — Julian H.✈ 20:30, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Too big dynamic range to adequately capture with only one frame. Too dark foregorund and too many burned highlights. The illumination appers more white than what I can find from a Google image search for illuminated night shots. Also it is a bit too soft for my taste and there is a little fringing. For such a subject, shoot raw, try to combine several bracketed exposures to better catch the extreme dynamic range. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment It's actually four frames merged into one. And it has more DR than most of the other images in the category, with much less blown highlights. --C messier (talk) 21:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Comment That information is worth adding to the file page, which has an exif indicating it is a single 6 s exposure. It is surprising that the end result does not exhibit a larger dynamic range when that is the case. May I ask how you have combined the exposures and how large the EV difference was? Do you still have the source images? It is my experience that you need a separation of 2 EV for four exposures with my entry level and not terribly new DSLR. There may be another optimum for your camera, which I am not familiar with.-- Slaunger (talk) 21:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Combined as descripted here (although the brightest was the base, because otherwise, the stars appear blacker than the sky), it 6s, 2,5s, 1/1,3s and 1/5s with same f, ISO and exposure compasation, and I have kept the original images.--C messier (talk) 21:29, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • @C messier: Thanks for the information. If my math is correct that corresponds to steps of around 1.2 EV, 1.7 EV and 1.95 EV, which is a slightly odd spread of the exposures, especially the span from 2.5s to 6 s is a little low (1.2 EV), but it should be fairly OK, I guess. I do not know how well the GIMP method described works as compared to other methods. If you are interested in sharing your source images I could try and have a go at it using PTGui to make a 32 bit floating point "super raw" tif and postprocess that in lightroom as an alternative. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Slaunger: Were can I upload them? They are useless on their own to upload here. And if you can align the pictures, I have also a nearly identical set of exposures, but with raw with 6w, 1,6s and 1/4s. --C messier (talk) 21:47, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry, the dark grey light-polluted sky isn't good. Prefer your one with blue sky but neither are sharp enough for FP. -- Colin (talk) 19:34, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 11:26, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2015 at 15:21:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Decontamination during a Global Dragon training event
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 3 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 15:04, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2015 at 11:08:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /KTC (talk) 15:06, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2015 at 14:02:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Danish West Indian 10 daler gold coin (1904) depicting Christian IX of Denmark
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 15:09, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2015 at 13:12:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Henry Déziré, Tête de Bretonne au ruban rouge, Musées d'Art et d'Histoire de La Rochelle
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 15:07, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2015 at 20:18:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Megachile montenegrensis female 2.jpg
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 15:12, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2015 at 08:27:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Macro of a pencil
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /KTC (talk) 15:05, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2015 at 11:08:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of Paraíso ("Paradise") Beach in Villajoyosa (Valencian Community) at the Mediterranean Sea, Spain.
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 15:09, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2015 at 00:03:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southern sea lion

* Support Σπάρτακος (talk)

Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 20:17, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2015 at 16:01:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Altar of Santi Bonifacio e Alessio (Rome)
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 17:55, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2015 at 23:13:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aythya nyroca
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 17:56, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2015 at 09:09:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cu Đê River, Da Nang
  •  Oppose Lighting is not bad but not enough going on in the composition. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose An excellent composition and lighting somehow spoiled by poor image quality. Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Was it stitched in-camera on with PC? Are there raw source files or JPG? It is a very high-resolution image, so I'm happy to review after downsizing on my PC. I tried reducing the image to 6MP and it is wonderfully sharp and mostly noise-free at that size, except for bottom left. I think the scene and composition are good enough it is worth trying to improve the quality. Christopher if you have raw sources, I'd be happy to see if I can improve it (I wouldn't publish them without your permission -- I'd send any results back to you). Email me if you want to try this. -- Colin (talk) 11:12, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey Colin, thanks for your offer. To be honest, I'm quite amazed by the comments saying that my panoramics have a poor quality—if instead I'd provide an image at 50% of the size, probably no one would say a such thing and the resulting image would still contain 13 Mpx, way above the requirements for FP. Sounds like an easy fix, doesn't it?
As for the RAWs, I wouldn't mind sending them to you if I could but the stich is made of 8 images of 33.4 MB each, for a total over 250 MB, when my internet connection in Vietnam already struggled with uploading the mere 24 MB of this current image. Also, I did play around with the noise reduction/sharpening settings of Lightroom but I ended up preferring the original version and judged this noise fair enough for the resolution. Note that this has been taken at ISO 400 with a Fuji X100S, known to do pretty well with higher ISOs, but the light was low at that time and the original RAWs are quite dark, so that might explain it. Maybe I should have cranked the ISOs rather than boosting the luminosity in Lightroom?
Anyhow, these FP critics are truly getting more and more disappointing over time—I think I'll just reupload a smaller resolution to prove my point and stick to that with the future ones. That'll make my panoramics more FP-proof and easier to upload, double win!
Christopher Crouzet (talk) 12:03, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you have pushed the exposure/lighting which has exposed the noise too much. But I'm in no rush so I suggest we can just wait till you get better internet access and upload to DropBox or similar if you want to. I suspect even a 50% reduction wouldn't satisfy the pixel-peepers and it really does look like you've not optimised the noise reduction. Let me know if/when you are able to do this. -- Colin (talk) 23:42, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Colin: OK, I was unaware of that. But I still have an issue with the lighting. And it doesn't look like my !vote changed the outcome. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 18:06, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2015 at 04:57:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pancuran Tujuh, Purwokerto
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 18:05, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2015 at 13:44:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yellow letter box at Burg Ludwigstein, Hesse, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:25, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2015 at 21:46:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sandhill Cranes (Grus canadensis) in Ewing Bottoms, Brownstown, IN
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:24, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2015 at 14:45:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rainbow lorikeet (Trichoglossus moluccanus) at Colchester Zoo
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:23, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2015 at 11:10:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2015 at 09:54:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fabric of architectural elements, Berlin central station
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fontana del Quirinale (Rome) - Statue of Dioscuri.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2015 at 16:20:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Fontana del Quirinale (Rome) - Statue of Dioscuri
  • Are you micro managing the time I spend on Commons? I was busy setting up the Photo Challenge yesterday, among other things that are none of your business. Stop nominating images that aren't even QI and then you might get some supports from me. -- Colin (talk) 11:27, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
busy? You? Ridiculous.....5 edits. I don't care your opinion like the others.Is only that you spend your time ever only for my nomination....answer to this.Of your waste time I don't care --LivioAndronico talk 15:27, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you think your innumerate and bad-faith insults will stop me reviewing your images, you have underestimated me. If you don't care about my opinion, don't comment on it, or me. Your attitude towards oppose voters is rather likely to see you blocked at some point. -- Colin (talk) 16:38, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should stop people like you, with opposition vencative and meaningless. Fortunately others know you. Don't worry I'll never block for reply to you. However, it is useless, you're vindictive and I do not care about your opinion. You aren't an objective person but strongly venicative... is true You are trying to play God again.. However, from now on I'll not answer more to you. E 'useless and do not want to waste my time.--LivioAndronico talk 19:31, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:14, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2015 at 21:33:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A pupae of Agrotis ipsilon
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Apr 2015 at 19:17:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A typical country view of Alentejo, Portugal, with a solitary cork oak and the ondulated field.
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:14, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2015 at 15:24:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Meerkats at Tswalu in the Kalahari
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:12, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Riga Skyline Panorama, Latvia - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2015 at 18:59:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Riga Skyline Panorama (360).
  •  Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Pofka -- Pofka (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Pofka (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support. Thanks Pofka, that was on my 'maybe I'll nominate' list so it's a support from me. Diliff (talk) 19:33, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment. For the record, it has a slight issue with the straightness of the horizon (although I've already tried to fix it and had some trouble) and some minor stitching glitches on the water that I will try to fix. Diliff (talk) 19:50, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Lovely. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I was never a fan of this kind of panoramas, with extreme distortions and lighting contrasts. In my opinion nothing really interesting in the composition mitigates those flaws in the present case. Big is not necessarily beautiful. Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The interesting thing is that the entire 360 degree view is visible in a single image. It's an image that rewards you for looking for viewing it full screen and looking for details. Yes, you're right that it's impossible to get nice lighting in all directions but you have to accept the image for what it is and what its strengths and weaknesses are, I suppose. Diliff (talk) 11:23, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I agree with Alvesgaspar. 360° panorama looks so strange. I would crop it to get whole riversigth, would be better. And resize would benefit. --Mile (talk) 16:07, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I cannot even open it. I really adore most of Diliff's pictures, but I don't see the use of this one. Sorry. The size itself doesn't make it featurable in my eyes. --Code (talk) 13:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • You don't even see the use of it? I can understand if you don't think it's a very aesthetic view of Riga, but of course it has a use. I don't think there are few better ways to show what the city of Riga looks like (the architecture, the relative position of buildings and natural features etc) than a 360 degree view from a central vantage point above the city. I admit that 360 degree panoramas are sometimes awkward to view because the large size, cylindrical perspective (meaning horizontal straight lines become curved) or the aspect ratio, but if you can't open it, you could try a bit harder as there are plenty of options available (including downloading it and viewing it in an external image viewer if your browser won't do it). Diliff (talk) 14:08, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Also, it's interesting how times change... 8 years ago, an 360 degree image (inferior in resolution and in stitching quality) was given a very different reception. Diliff (talk) 14:14, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Diliff: Well, probably "use" is the wrong word here. I'm sorry, it's always a little bit hard to explain all these things in English, it's not my mother tongue. However, the picture may certainly be useful somehow as it shows a complete view of Riga. What I meant was that I don't understand the benefit of having a complete 360° view in just one picture. I tried to open the full size picture in Chrome and in Firefox and none of them worked. Maybe I could download it and try to open it in Photoshop but to be honest, that's not the user experience I'm searching for on Wikimedia Commons. Of course, the trouble with opening it is no reason to oppose here. It just makes me restrain from voting. I really hope that you don't understand me wrong, your pictures are great. It's just that this is not what I would support in getting featured. --Code (talk) 13:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Code, saying you can't open it is a really lazy comment. Of course you can open it. Look on the image description page and you will find a Flash viewer and a Non-Flash viewer for this image. The Flash viewer is more interactive but the quality at 100% isn't as good as the non-flash one. Both make it fun to explore a city 360-panorama. The question for you is "what makes you think opening the entire image in a browser window is a sensible way to view this 360-panorama". -- Colin (talk) 11:02, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Colin: As you might have noticed I restrained from voting because I couldn't handle opening that picture. So it would be nice if you could restrain from calling me lazy, too. Thank you. --Code (talk) 16:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Code, I'm glad you didn't have the nerve to put an oppose vote, but your words were a strong oppose. Your comments are a bit like someone wanting a refund on their train ticket to London because the journey didn't involve enough flying and didn't end up in Paris. Such pictures take a lot of work to prepare, so if you can't be bothered to find the two links that Wikimedia Commons provide just below the preview so that you can have great "experience" with them, then I'd call that lazy and a bit insulting when you comment negatively here as a result. -- Colin (talk) 16:35, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Colin: I'm not happy with most of your comments, too. But I still have to live with them. So you should accept mine as well. But anyways this discussion leads to nothing. Have a nice weekend. --Code (talk) 07:20, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:08, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2015 at 07:57:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

United States Coast Guards train at sea
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2015 at 05:15:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jumping Spider
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:06, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2015 at 08:12:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Basalt sea stack in a black lava beach under the mountain Reynisfjall near the village Vík í Mýrdal, southern Iceland. The three basalt see stacks in the background are the famous Reynisdrangar.
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 19:21, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2015 at 13:53:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Marly Palace in Peterhof, Russia
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 09:01, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pachygrapsus marmoratus 2009 G3.jpg (delist), not delisted

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2015 at 09:35:37
SHORT DESCRIPTION SHORT DESCRIPTION

See also

Result: 1 delist, 4 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. -- KTC (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2015 at 19:31:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Azerbaijani soldier with amputated legs during Karabakh War.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:57, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Venezuela - Caracas - Zamuro rey - Sarcoramphus papa.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2015 at 20:40:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 17:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2015 at 09:24:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Olokhan Musayev from Azerbaijan at 2008 Summer Paralympics
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 23:22, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2015 at 14:44:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amur leopard (Panthera pardus orientalis) at Colchester Zoo
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 23:21, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2015 at 17:05:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Clustered Bellflower (Campanula glomerata)
 Info This is not done with a macro-lens, not with a telezoom. DOF for macros depends on the projection scale only, not on the focus length. So with a smaller focus length, you would have to get closer, but the DOF is the same. --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:31, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment In that case stacking would be even easier. You would benefit a lot. --Mile (talk) 17:52, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:19, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2015 at 18:35:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gowron and Martok at Trek Fest 2014
  •  Info created by IowaPipe (on Flickr) - uploaded by Miyagawa - nominated by Miyagawa -- Miyagawa (talk) 18:35, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- What more could you want than two Star Trek actors who dress up as their characters some fifteen years after their show ended! Anyway, it is Robert O'Reilly as Gowron throwing sweets to the kids, while J.G. Hertzler stands behind him. You'll note that while Hertzler's make-up really matches the show, O'Reilly wears his quite lighter than on television. Miyagawa (talk) 18:35, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Legal oppose I believe the appearance of Klingons generally, to say nothing of specific characters, is covered by Paramount's copyrights for Star Trek, and thus this cannot be a free image. Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's the first I've ever heard about a make-up design being copyrighted. But if that was the case, then wouldn't every cosplay image also be copyrighted? Paramount has the copyright to the Klingon language, but I think it ends there. Miyagawa (talk) 17:00, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As a matter of fact, yes, copyright extends to the costumes worn in the movies and show (Paramount paid people to design them for that purpose, after all). And photographs whose primary subject is people in costumes and/or masks depicting characters in a copyrighted work, where such costunes were created for the work and are not either representations of historical or current attire or otherwise commonly worn for any purpose other than depicting those characters or others like them, regardless of context (i.e., if the photo were of Rainn Wilson and John Krasinski wearing dress shirts, slacks and ties passing out candy at a parade, this wouldn't be an issue), then they cannot be free images. At least that's how I read COM:COSTUME. The fact in this case, the two cosplayers are themselves the actors who played the characters in question makes this even more clearly a third-party copyright situation and thus ineligible for Commons.

Please remember when looking at images on Flickr that very few users over there are the masters of copyright law as applied to still images that we are over here. You can't take their word that it's CC. Daniel Case (talk) 17:04, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Daniel, would you please clarify, are you a lawyer? You haven't stated either that you are or aren't, and you seem to be giving advice on interpretation of a somewhat murky area of law. - Jmabel ! talk 03:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Am waiting for the legal question to be solved. --Tremonist (talk) 14:53, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose --What more would I expect? Well, let me guess… may be a red bucket with yellow dots? Or may be a higher f-number which would leave the face of the second character in focus too? Or may be even a closer shot of the main character at the very moment he throws the candys? But that last one might be based on too high expectations. Sting (talk) 23:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:16, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2015 at 14:12:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cygnus atratus
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 17:44, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2015 at 05:23:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oenothera biennis (common evening primrose).
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 17:45, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2015 at 18:23:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Top of an island (Bergholmen) within the Stockholm archipelago in the early morning sun
Thank you - also for the helpful comments.--CHK46 (talk) 16:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 17:42, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2015 at 12:40:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Navy quarterback lands a touchdown
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 17:43, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 13:51:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Basel - Stadtpanorama vom Münsterturm.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 15:18:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View over Basel and the Rhine knee from Basler Münster
  •  Info all by Wladyslaw. Info: High resolution city panoramic view of Basel, Switzerland (northbound). The picture is annotated. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 15:18, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 15:18, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral I'm surprised it doesn't have your trademark quality. Did you have to recover shadows? I love the "bended" pattern composition but the scene is like cut in two with that right part in the shade. Unfortunately. Why couldn't you go farther on the left? And I too think you should add color space to your images. - Benh (talk) 16:23, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • It isn't so much "add color space" as find out what software is removing this essential component from your JPGs. Your raw software will set it. I suspect GIMP, which I'm surprised to see used considering how professional your other equipment is. GIMP doesn't even support 16-bit TIFF yet. I have checked with EXIFTOOL and the colour space is 65535, which is "uncalibrated". It should be 1 for sRGB and other EXIF tags are required if AdobeRGB. So this file is just wrong. Photoshop complains (if you have it set to warn) that the file has no colour profile. The fact that the tag is present but not 1 makes me wonder if the colours are actually correct. I don't know GIMP but perhaps you've ticked a box to "strip out unnecessary EXIF data to save space" or similar option. -- Colin (talk) 17:49, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The weather situation was like you can see it on the picture. The quite shiny part on the left and the very dark clouded area on the right (maybe you dislike this two opposed parts). But in all parts the cityscape is visible very well. So why should this be an issue of the quality or GIMP? --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:21, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The issue with quality is that we can't trust the colours. Aren't they rather important? A proper colourspace is an essential part of the JPG specification and any software that allows it to be removed is faulty (sadly not uncommon among software not aimed at professional photography). The above JPG states the colourspace is "uncalibrated", which means every browser and image viewer is left to guess what colour to display. Some will guess sRGB, others (some Macs) will simply pass the numbers straight to your monitor which may be set to AdobeRGB, sRGB or some random variation. The fact that it isn't set to sRGB makes me rather suspicious the colour profile is actually something else, which has been ignored/stripped out by software. It might not be GIMP, it might be PtGui, though Dillif doesn't seem to have any problems. -- Colin (talk) 07:33, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I don't see a problem with the colors. Everything looks natural to me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:51, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well it would do, on your monitor. It's like you promise to pay me 100 for doing some job. Is that $100, £100 or €100? Nobody knows, and we can only guess. I don't see what the big problem with fixing this is. You've gone to all the trouble of buying the best camera and the best calibrated monitor but then fail to export your JPG with standard EXIF data needed to ensure everyone sees what you see. Just read the manual on your software and figure out what option you've chosen that removes this essential EXIF data from the image. -- Colin (talk) 09:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is not my first FP-candidate with the same workflow I do for nearly every image (RAW-image as basic, PTGui of stitching necessary, GIMP for final works) so I wonder why in this image there should be a problem and with other pictures there isn't. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I won't go through all ur noms, but I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time the issue is raised on one of them. I think Sting mentionned this a few years ago. Anyhow, it's an easy fix on ur side, and it would greatly improve reliability on the colours we see, even though I suspect most software revert to sRGB when no color profile is embedded. - Benh (talk) 11:15, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did, and several times. And I got tired trying to make understand stubborn contributors (no offense meant) about the importance of color profile (among other points).
This is not about “fixing a problem” but about not creating one, as an additional action was taken to delete the color profile. It's about preserving the integrity and thus the quality of an image. The way Internet browsers react is already difficult to manage, together with an infinity of computers/monitors configurations an you have a big mess. Posting an image without color profile is just adding one more clue.
So what's the point? It simply doesn't make sense to insist trying to give useful information imho.
There are sooo many voters here who find many images so lovely, judging them after they even didn't displayed them at full (100%) size (or, at least, their comments make us think that), so why change that perfect workflow which leaded to so many prized images (here, of course), isn't it? (generally speaking, not personally)
Sorry for the bitterness I may transmit through this comment. Just my 2 cents, as usual. Sting (talk) 19:57, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Only 1/2 cent more: “I'm sorry, but I don't see a problem with the colors. Everything looks natural to me.” And, sure, everybody here and elsewhere on the planet looks at your pictures through your monitor, right? Typical. Sting (talk) 00:00, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I use several different monitor to look at my image and in non of them I see a problem and no one could really explain that exactly should be the problem here because of the cut out color profile. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:39, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's already been explained: people might not see the colours you intend to present them. The difference might be subtle. Why? because the value of your colours doesn't have any reference, so software reading it can only guess and apply one by default (to simplify if I read value "green 60%", should I display 60% on a 0 to 300 scale _180_ or on a 0 to 200 scale _120_ ? Without the profile I can't tell). I also think that you did everything in sRGB, and if I were to write software, I would revert to sRGB by default, so it's possible (won't go as far as to say likely, but I mean it) that we see the right colours. Anyhow I personaly don't say I see the problem, but that you should prevent it by making sure your workflow doesn't strip away the color profile. It's probably something which takes you only a few minutes (shorter than arguing) and it's a big gain for everyone. - Benh (talk) 07:30, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I too did point you the issue a while ago. - Benh (talk) 14:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose JPG lacks colourspace information therefore colours are arbitrary. In particular, the degree of saturation and precise hue of each colour is uncertain. What shade of blue is that sky supposed to be. Or how vivid red is the tennis court in reality? Is that bright blue van in the middle really that colour? Without a colourspace, the red 255/0/0 pixel in a JPG is just an arbitrary number. Is it the most saturated red your monitor can display (many Macs will treat it this way) -- if so, then it will be radically different on a wide-gamut monitor compared to a standard-gamut monitor. Or the most red in the sRGB colourpsace (many applications will default to that, but perhaps your image was really AdobeRGB). Or will your colour-managed application simply pop-up a warning when you open the file (as Photoshop will do) saying "I have no clue what colours to display, could you guess for me". Wladyslaw, I don't see how you can claim ignorance of the problem, since if we have failed to explain it then a quick Google will turn up plenty websites that explain how this is simply an essential component of a well-formed JPG. Rather than repeating that it isn't a problem for you, perhaps you could make an effort to find out which part of your tool-chain is screwing up. Download EXIFTOOL or upload your images at each stage to Jeffrey Friedl's Exif tool and you should see where it is going wrong. It shouldn't be hard to fix, just the wrong option chosen somewhere. Oh, and seriously consider getting Adobe's "Creative Cloud Photography" program, your monitor will thank you for it :-). -- Colin (talk) 07:28, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Try it, there is no better one IMO if you want a distortionfree image of the main part. Wladyslaw (talk) 14:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral It's too dark on the right. Better weather needed! --Tremonist (talk) 14:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Unrealistic. Sorry -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 20:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I cannot say much about the colors since I am travelling and don't have a calibrated monitor with me right now. The scene is nice but I really miss a portion on the left (left bank and part of the bridge), plus the weather was not of help, either with some sunny areas and others darker, the result of weather and crop looks unbalanced to me, sorry. Poco2 18:08, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral If the photo should show the beauty of this city from a idealistic perspective (and this perspective is usually desired in presentations), it's technically not good. Then, the objections to the clouds/the weather are okay. But if the photo should show this city from a more realistic perspective, as seen there most days of the year (ie not always and everywhere in bright sunshine), then this photo is excellently made. --BlackIceNRW (talk) 12:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 4 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:16, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fernsehturm St. Chrischona - Dreibeinkonstruktion.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2015 at 10:09:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

tower base tripod construction of TV Tower St. Chrischona, Switzerland
  • A picture does not necessarily need to be beautiful here, that's right, but the impression of cold and partially even dirty concrete is not what I favour. The picture is technically good though. --Tremonist (talk) 12:38, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • FP doesn't need only pictures of churches and cute animals. Beside of this: the concrete is very well-kept and not dirty. Please concern: this building is exposed to wind and rain and stands on top of a mountain. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:47, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to mix up banality with relevance. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:07, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you think so. -- Fotoriety (talk) 01:41, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about converting into blach/white. But from my point of view this image is not abstract but a usual detail view of a very relevant part of this building. It's an architectual/ingenieering documentation and why not showing all colours? --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:06, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 5 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:20, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 10:16:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abandoned artillery observation bunkers
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 01:27:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset over the travertine pools of Pamukkale
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:18, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 16:59:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Singapore: Marina Bay and Skyline of Marina BAy Fiancial Centre
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:16, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2015 at 03:53:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Portrait of Jesus Christ after flagellation
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 21:20:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

British nuclear submarine HMS Vanguard arrives back at HM Naval Base Clyde, Faslane, Scotland following a patrol.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2015 at 21:58:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of the Assumption in Tarnobrzeg
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 19:59, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 00:38:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Assumption Church, Windsor, Ontario
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 20:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Barranco de Pecenescal - Fuerteventura.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2015 at 17:22:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the Barranco de Pecenescal, Fuerteventura
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 19:55, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:West end of Karang Bolong, Nusakembangan, Cilacap 2015-03-21.jpg

File:Black Madonna from Wrocław (Breslau) - bg.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2015 at 22:15:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Black Madonna from Wrocław (Breslau), Silesia

Alternative

[edit]

Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 19:54, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Haltern am See, Sythen, Werkzeughalle der Quarzwerke -- 2015 -- 4462.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2015 at 07:09:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Forgotten clamp at a post in the tool shed of the Quarzwerke in Sythen, Haltern, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 16:09, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 06:56:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Citrus swallowtail caterpillar (Papilio demodocus) at Stratford Butterfly Farm
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 20:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Park zamkowy w Pszczynie 03promykjck - 2.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2015 at 20:10:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Heritage castle park in Pszczyna in Upper Silesia, Poland. Heritage castle park in Pszczyna in Upper Silesia, Poland.

Alternative (The right thumbnail)

[edit]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 19:51, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2015 at 06:31:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Damage close-up of a pipe burst
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 20:02, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2015 at 15:44:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mali vs Ghana, exhibition game at Paris, 31st March 2015
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2015 at 23:23:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

w:Jahlil Okafor dunking in the w:2014 McDonald's All-American Boys Game
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 09:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haltern am See, Sythen, Werkzeughalle der Quarzwerke -- 2015 -- 4985.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2015 at 04:56:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Screws, tool shed of the Quarzwerke in Sythen, Haltern, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 09:54, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2015 at 12:28:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Georgian man with falcon.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:VanGogh-starry night ballance1.jpg, delisted and replaced

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2015 at 13:13:49
SHORT DESCRIPTION SHORT DESCRIPTION

Result: 7 delist and replace, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted and replaced. Yann (talk) 11:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2015 at 15:50:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beschadigde paddenstoel. Locatie, tuinreservaat Jonkervallei

✓ Done Small correction WB.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2015 at 15:54:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mechanical Calculator Brunsviga 15
 Info I'm just working on that and also on an alternative view from a 45° angle. Unfortunately, the shrouds are worn out and it will take some efforts to restore the surface. Getting all the dust out of the mechanic took me two hours. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Same light settings, same position, you can make an animated gif of it :) A shame, the shroud is so badly scratched. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 21:05, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done I removed the stain; it was a scratch in the canvas. Thanks for the hint. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:26, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2015 at 18:38:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thai Airways International Boeing 747-4D7 departing runway 26L at Munich Airport.
OK, thanks. Still doesn't change my !vote. Daniel Case (talk) 04:30, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:23, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Vincent van Gogh - Starry Night - Google Art Project.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2015 at 19:48:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Starry Night Over the Rhone, by Vincent van Gogh
@The Photographer: Next FP Nomination: File:Hans Holbein the Younger - The Ambassadors - Google Art Project.jpg. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:32, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If all art painting are FP then non of those pictures are really FP, because the art is invaluable --The_Photographer (talk) 14:41, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The point in these cases is not to judge the painting itself but the quality of its reproduction: resolution, contrast, brightness, color fidelity, etc. Imo
In this case I don't remember the real painting, so I won't vote. Sting (talk) 23:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We dont want change "original" colors and light --The_Photographer (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well I think it should be changed here for a good reproduction. — Julian H.✈ 16:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Colors and light are created in our brain, not from an untouchable reality. The range of light and colors, is built on the configuration of each mind. What I'm trying to say is that there is a correct representation of this work, however nobody can know more than the author. The senses are exposed and create an alternate reality that differs every human being in this world, realities, however, intersect never actually touch, there is no way I will be able to see how you see the world. A world that sometimes is a reflection of our own memories, experiences, ourselves. I'm not refuting your comment, simply a reflection. --The_Photographer (talk) 17:43, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's just that whether or not the light source is small and located above the painting is a rather objective thing. — Julian H.✈ 09:54, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:25, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2015 at 20:53:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of the Assumption in Tarnobrzeg, Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary sculpture
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 15:19:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bnei Hazir tomb and Tomb of Zechariah in Jerusalem.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:21, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 15:12:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bnei Hazir tomb and Tomb of Zechariah in Jerusalem.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:20, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 20:59:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Field with white flowers of a thick dense grass and a few young pines in Estonia
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 3 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Apr 2015 at 16:18:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chalkhill blue butterflies mating at Aston Rowant NNR, Oxfordshire
  • (ec) Yes, and that piece of information belongs to the file page, which shall accumulate all relevant information about the shot. I have added that information now, as well as a proper location category. It's part of the home work prior to nomination. -- Slaunger (talk) 11:14, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:31, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 06:55:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Classic Family Portrait of an Augsburgian industrialist family. I admire this picture for its technical perfection, its orchestration and of course the beauty of the mother. The picture is from 1859 and it is pretty outstanding in it's .
  •  Support Seewolf (talk) 17:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Technically, for its time, this appears to be a high quality photograph, although it really could do with some restoration to remove scratches, spots, etc. As a group portrait photograph it does not stand out to me as anything special wrt expression and composition, unless there is a point I am missing. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Great overall, but lacks a little resolution and is too dark below (problematic contrasts), the latter is most probably due to the original photo's appearance. --Tremonist (talk) 13:41, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 16:57:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grundarfjörður, Vesturland, Islandia
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 14:36:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Afghan boys patiently wait in Jaghori.
Addendum: First, if you want to demonstrate the varying degrees of fidgetiness of little boys, a video would be much more effective. Second, isn't this assumption a little sexist? Like little girls, or FTM adults of both sexes, aren't equally capable fo being fidgety and impatient? Daniel Case (talk) 15:52, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:27, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Joseph Mallord William Turner - Dort or Dordrecht- The Dort Packet-Boat from Rotterdam Becalmed - Google Art Project.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2015 at 16:37:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dort or Dordrecht: The Dort Packet-Boat from Rotterdam Becalmed, by Turner
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2015 at 06:17:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ragdoll, about three years old, color/pattern Seal Lynx Point.
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2015 at 19:52:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:30, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 07:31:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Water tank in a temple in Hyderabad, India
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 12:20, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2015 at 21:36:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eggs of Anticarsia gemmatalis
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:28, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 17:43:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 12:32, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2015 at 20:46:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama of Batumi, Georgia
  •  Info created by David Gaberle - uploaded and nominated by Jaqeli 20:46, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Jaqeli 20:46, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info --I uploaded an edited version: cleaned, denoised and a bit more contrasted. Sting (talk) 22:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --I like very much the composition and the mood: natural and calm foreground opposed to the modern and high skyscrapers at the sides. But why the hell did he used ISO 800 at 1/420 for this landscape? The filename as well as the description are also minimalistic and made me almost vote against it. Someone knowing this place would be very welcome to add information. Sting (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak  Support. Good composition and colors, albeit a bit washed out (and lighting could be at a better angle). I think the use of line in this image is excellent, especially with the curves on the park benches. The ISO 800 actually caused less deterioration of image quality than I thought. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:33, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because I denoised it. ;-) Sting (talk) 00:59, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Average composition, upper half all too blue. --Tremonist (talk) 12:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Tigth crop, crane in the middle.--Mile (talk) 14:27, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I think the composition could work in a non-backlit scenario, although it's very tight on both sides either way. As it is, the background seems too faint and the foreground too shadowed to really work for me. Several distracting objects don't help with the already complex composition. — Julian H.✈ 16:13, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The composition does not work for me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:19, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Apart from FOP concerns I'm not convinced either by the composition. The interesting elements are in the far left and right, the lighting is just okay but sharpness isn't, and especially the left side lacks contrast. The (drunk?) guy laying on the bench is not helping either IMHO Poco2 17:35, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Conflicted oppose I love photos like these in which 21st-century Earth actually does look like all those 1970s sci-fi paperback covers said it was going to (O Lujiazui! O Dubai!). I think the trees in the front, and the lighting and the clouds, work even better with that in mind. But ... all those technical flaws noted above, especially the tight crop at left, are valid criticisms. Daniel Case (talk) 04:05, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:13, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ripon Cathedral Organ, Nth Yorkshire, UK - Diliff.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2015 at 10:35:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ripon Cathedral Organ
  •  Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- . The image is quite dark but I think this reflects the ambience of the interior of the cathedral and the dark wood used in the organ case's construction. It was built in 1878, almost entirely from scratch by T. C. Lewis of Brixton in London. Diliff (talk) 10:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Diliff (talk) 10:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment It leans to the left, or, somethime is good to mention its off-centre shot to make that clear. --Mile (talk) 12:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Like Mile - Image is slightly tilted to the left. D kuba (talk) 12:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Tilted and too dark, sorry. --Tremonist (talk) 13:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The tilt has been corrected. Part of the problem is that I don't think the organ case is entirely symmetrical, so it looks like it is tilted when it's actually not. As for the darkness, the wood is genuinely dark. Dark wood when brightened looks a bit unrealistic, but I've brightened it up slightly. Your thoughts? Diliff (talk) 14:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Now, angle is ok, but you lighten image too much (colors was dark, but very good - captured the unique climate of interior of the church) - windows are overexposed now:/ D kuba (talk) 13:39, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:16, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral The windows are too bright and that becomes disturbing and the bottom crop is not convincing either, I created a note (feel free to remove it after having seen it) Poco2 17:18, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Nikhil (talk) 07:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Have been looking at this one for a while and actually wanted to oppose because the camera it's pointing up too high, and that gives me neck ache by just looking at it... But quality is just too good. Couldn't you step backward? Also agree about the unfortunate windows. - Benh (talk) 18:48, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, I could have stepped further back and usually I do that, but sometimes objects look more interesting from a more extreme angle and I thought this organ was one of those. I don't see the issue with the window though. It's overexposed because clear windows have no detail to show and appear bright and white in person, unlike coloured stained glass. I can reduce the exposure of them but dull grey windows generally look a bit fake and HDR'ish. Clear glass windows can only really look white (unless there is a deep blue sky outside). Diliff (talk) 12:19, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fair enough. And yes, I wouldn't darken windows either. They are what they are. One suggestion maybe : making the lines converging a little less? In any way I really wouldn't mind that this becomes FP. - Benh (talk) 14:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't think it will become a FP, but no problem. I took some nice photos of some cathedral organs in Picardie a few days ago - Laon and Amiens (which I see you visited with your fisheye lens a few years ago!) - which I'm hoping will be a bit more successful. Diliff (talk) 08:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose EV, but not one of your best ;o), let alone Commons. The extreme perspective and the crop at bottom do not work for me. You should try at COM:VI. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:14, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Pofka (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2015 at 13:24:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bohinj lake panorama
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 07:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 15:05:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Female African bush elephant (Loxodonta africana) with juvenile, Namibia
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 07:49, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2015 at 18:24:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grand Canal of Venice
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 07:44, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 16:43:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

19th century drawing of Naqsh-e Jahan Square, Isfahan; this drawing is the work of French architect, Xavier Pascal Coste, who traveled to Iran along with the French king's embassy to Persia in 1839.
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 07:43, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2015 at 19:57:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Escalators in Prague subway - line A
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 09:07, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2015 at 22:00:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Philadelphia Street Map, 1802.
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 07:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Maps
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 18:20:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Regent street, in Westminster city, London
  •  Info created, uploaded and nominated by Benh (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Before you assess, the road actually goes slightly downward from left to right, and I've checked this with this site. The London folks will probably confirm. It's also actually curved, though the projection amplifies the phenomenon. -- Benh (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very nicely executed. To cover such a huge field of view you have to introduce some extra geometrical distortions to capture it reasonably in a 2D projection. I think you have utilized very elegantly that the road curves already for this purpose. The projection amplifies the curvature of the road, but it gives you the benefit that locally in the image the proportions look farly OK everywhere. I am impressed by the DOF. The pavement close to you is sharp, which is tough to achieve without parallax errors and I suppose you have used a quite small aperture, like f/13 or so? Unfortunately, this interesting technical information, like exposure, ISO and number of images is not available from the EXIF or the file page. I would recommend filling in the {{Photo Information}} template as done, e.g., here to make this informtion available for the curious reader. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Slaunger, I try to focus on the hyperfocal point (hope it's the right name) to get as much sharp parts as possible. My exposure blending soft, enfuse strip away my EXIF data. I forgot to put them back with exiftool but as a compensation, I filled the data you asked for. Now you can tell I shot at f/8.0, which is the sweet spot for this lens but I probably could have stopped down a bit more. I had to downsample to keep the (extremely) stretched edges reasonably sharp, and as a side benefit, everything from the front sidewalk to the building is sharp. - Benh (talk) 20:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, I was five stops off in my guess, but then again I had not noticed you had downsampled . Thanks for adding the information I asked for. It is very instructive. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the review. I too like the empty street here. Was hard to achieve ; I didn't expect London to be this crowded (it's a league ahead of Paris for sure) so I had to be very patient, even at 7:30am. I certainly will check back the WB, you know the place more than I do, so it's good to have this kind of feedback. For the HDR issue, you are right. I only used two exposures, as the bright one was mostly white and I was afraid it affects the other area in an unpleasant way. I'll try to blend the three exposures also, just to check. - Benh (talk) 11:35, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Laitche (talk) 11:09, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Mile (talk) 11:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:26, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:46, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- KTC (talk) 23:42, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Perhaps contrast boosted a little too much. -- Colin (talk) 23:49, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Christian Ferrer 07:21, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment @Diliff: and @Colin: , I tried a quick (miss time) reprocessing to fix the issues you raise: here. This time, I used the three exposures, so I was able to pull out more detail from the shadow parts, without noise tradeoff (which I think would have been OK without the bright exposure anyways). I also tried to address the WB issue, which was more a saturation/vibrance one I think. Colin, for some reason (probably that my +3EV exposure is mainly white here), the output from my exposures blending is very washed out. It's a reason I have to go heavy on the contrast. Personally not very satisfied, but waiting for your feedbacks before tweaking it again and possibly uploading a new version. I can also go back at my 2 exposures version and tweak that one instead. @Slaunger: , this time, I added the EXIF back with exiftool. - Benh (talk) 08:34, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • If I understand from previous conversations with you, you don't use Lightroom? I think you'd have much better results from processing a 32bit HDR file in Lightroom than through exposure blending. Also, if your outputted blended image is lacking contrast, perhaps you need to adjust the tone curves rather than just bump the contrast in a linear manner. That way, you have more control over contrast adjustments and you don't darken the shadows too much in the process. I prefer the processing of the dropbox version. I think the highlights are slightly overexposed though, but shadow detail is much better. It could still probably be improved further with processing in Lightroom but if this isn't an option, I'd be happy to support the updated image. Diliff (talk) 12:22, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment I prefer the version you have here. I can warmly recommend the proposal by Diliff to make a 32 bit HDR file in stitching SW (such as PTGui) and then use lightroom for the tone mapping. It gives you many more options for controlling the exposure and colours accurately. It is like working with a "superraw". -- Slaunger (talk) 08:23, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Diliff and Slaunger Have tried. But 1. it's ressource demanding and I need to upgrade my memory or HD, and 2. the result doesn't please me. I like the fact enfuse gives you the choice with which parameter has more weight in the blending process. But it's also probably that I don't know how to use Photoshop's Fusion HDR Pro. - Benh (talk) 06:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • OK great thing I shall have done years ago : reading the manual. Will try to use enfuse with 32 bits depth tonight. BTW, if anyone has a HDR workflow recommendation, I'm curious to compare. - Benh (talk) 07:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Lightroom gives you so much more control though. You treat the 32 bit file exactly like you would process a RAW file, except that instead of a standard RAW file's 12 stops of dynamic range (roughly), you get a theoretically unlimited number of stops to work with. From that file high dynamic range file, you can apply gradient filters, adjustment brushes, tone mapping (with a lot more control than enfuse). You can essentially treat different parts of the image completely differently, 'painting' tone mapping across an image as required. The only limiting factor from my experience is that the overall tone mapping 'tonality' is a bit too micro-contrasty, as I've mentioned before. Apart from that one disadvantage, which you can minimise by decreasing the clarity slider, it's by far the most powerful HDR workflow tool. I thought I'd explained the workflow before. I'm happy to explain in more detail but if you haven't got Lightroom or a PC capable of running it properly, it's all academic I suppose. Diliff (talk) 16:27, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Balles2601 (talk) 22:21, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support A different but nice projection! It has WOW! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry. My brain does not accept this kind of projection (nothing new...). The light is not excellent. Be happy: this pic will stay visible here a little more !--Jebulon (talk) 22:09, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose "We are making us the world as it pleases us". Too distorted for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As you do too with your focus stacked images, dear Alchemist-hp. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I knew the nom would get such opposes, but it's good to take risks sometimes. If you're familiar with FPC, you may have noticed I tried a lot of very wide angle non conventional view, without getting it right. But I disagree with the fact a FP shouldn't be that distorted. We have many FP with more distortion, only that we don't necessarily notice it because of the nature of the subjects, or people did it better than I did. I planned the shot and got that bending on purpose, the result looks harmonious in my view. I'm fine with the fact you don't like the result but I hope you separate this from a non desired distortion. And again, the street is already curved. The projection only did exaggerate that. - Benh (talk) 10:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "exaggerate". You wrote it ! 😉--Jebulon (talk) 11:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure I get ur point (sivouplé, donné moi explications) but yes "exaggerate", like in "the street is already curved, hence the bending", and not as in "the street was straight, and the projection bended it dramatically". - Benh (talk) 11:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've carefully chosen this view (best compromise imo). But given that it's on a non promotion trend, I may consider tweaking the projection and a tighter framing (because I actually thought like you too at first about the sides). Will think about it. - Benh (talk) 06:56, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose Per Alchemist-hp e Jebulon --Σπάρτακος (talk) 12:11, 17 April 2015 (UTC) Striked --Cart (talk) 19:37, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 8 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2015 at 07:57:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

In a Roman Osteria
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 18:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2015 at 05:51:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flare of Sabah Oil and Gas Terminal in Kimanis, Malaysia
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:24, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2015 at 09:54:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A male junglefowl sitting on a tree and carking

* Weak oppose Nice photo but the head is blurry. A pity. --Laitche (talk) 12:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment For me blurry is something different than hitting the great feathers of the bird instead of the eyes which is only visible at 24MP of resolution. Lesson learned: The next time I'll upload lower resolution.--Xenon 77 (talk) 17:30, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Xenon 77: : I understand your frustration with this argument, but please do not downsample in the future just because of this review. @Laitche: : I think your review is a little unfair. The image resolution is very large. If you look at it at, e.g., approximately 6 Mpx resolution (three times the minimum requirement), I think it has very good pixel quality. -- Slaunger (talk) 17:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I knew it. I mean the DOF(f/4) issue exactly, but this was taken ISO640, if use around f/11, probably motion blur would happen I assume so I used the word "blurry". But I should have written it more politely and carefully, sorry. --Laitche (talk) 18:20, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 18:27, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2015 at 18:37:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the spire and cloister of the Salisbury Cathedral, located in the city of Salisbury, Wiltshire, England. The temple, an Anglican cathedral, is one of the leading examples of Early English architecture and was consecrated in 1258. Its 123 m (404 feet) spire is the tallest in the United Kingdom.

View of the spire and cloister of the Salisbury Cathedral, located in the city of Salisbury, Wiltshire, England. The temple, an Anglican cathedral, is one of the leading examples of Early English architecture and was consecrated in 1258. Its 123 m (404 feet) spire is the tallest in the United Kingdom.

Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:13, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2015 at 07:29:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Five views of a Strawberry Top Shell
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones,_shells_and_fossils
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Apr 2015 at 17:02:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Comestible rose in the Laquenexy orchard garden, Moselle, France. - possibly Rosa 'Abraham Darby'.

Restart the nomination due to a bug.  Info created, uploaded & nominated by M0tty -- M0tty (talk) 17:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Hans Holbein the Younger - The Ambassadors - Google Art Project.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2015 at 21:43:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Ambassadors, by Hans Holbein.

−

Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Wells Cathedral Organ from Inverted Arches, Somerset, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2015 at 10:00:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wells Cathedral Organ
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2015 at 07:14:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Barn in Arkengarthdale
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2015 at 08:30:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome of Church of St. george in Locorotondo
Better, indeed. If you apply a further tilt in cw direction (see that the windows are not yet perfectly parallel), then you have my support Poco2 09:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, I was asking for less that that :) You almost have it, don't desperate, in the current version you applied to much tilt, I added a note. Poco2 11:36, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Re-re-done Poco2 is becoming a birth --LivioAndronico talk 12:08, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

… because of the cut below. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
mmmm....ok thanks --LivioAndronico talk 22:10, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 16:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Haltern am See, Sythen, Werkzeughalle der Quarzwerke -- 2015 -- 5012.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2015 at 16:55:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bearings for transport in the tool shed of the Quarzwerke in Sythen, Haltern, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2015 at 10:59:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Intern of St. George in Locorotondo
  •  Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:19, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Is this a single exposure? If so, well done. Light and colours and overall quality is good. Exposure control could be better, and it is noticeable that there is a slight deviation from symmetry in the vantage point (follow the suspension chain of the chandelier). Neutral because church interior bar is very high. Still, definitely a shot to be proud of. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, you mean that sometimes you believe that if you would have to vote all nominations many of them you would oppose, but you just opt not to participate. And from now on you will refrain from abstaining and always vote if you think it is not a FP, as you just did in one of my nominations. I have no problem with that as long as you are consistent and don't focus on certain people. In regards to me, I rarely have time to vote over all open FPCs but I did it today (as you can see in my contributions), at least for those where I believe to have enough competence to judge whether it is a FP or not (illustrations or paintings are not the case). Poco2 10:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Clear canvassing. This silly egocentric behaviour by "Livioandronico2013" is just ridiculous. --A.Savin 22:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing ridiculous is that you are an administrator --LivioAndronico talk 23:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not a first time. And yes it gets ridiculous. Nothing seems to forbid that but just imagine that everyone behaves the same way... Would have been easy for me to ask a support vote in my last nom (it failed for a single support) and to get it. - Benh (talk) 04:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is ridiculous that people come here only and only to oppose only my photos, but this is not said and not stressed ... There are some people horrendous here ,but luckily they are only 4 --LivioAndronico talk 07:31, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not less ridiculous than if people come here only and only to support (you surely have been summoned here via e-mail, ComputerHotline?), despite the fact that the picture - while being more than sufficient for QI - obviously isn't amongst the finest of Commons. Thanks for further personal offenses Livioandronico2013, I rarely saw more childish behaviour. --A.Savin 09:13, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, I am horrendous because I voted against this picture. If we had been 6 people, than we would have 6 horrendous people in the project. You are allowing yourselft too much. And public canvassing on top of it. I just requested a disciplinary measure to this unacceptable behaviour. Poco2 10:24, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but I was in Castel Gandolfo to make my bad foto.No Poco2, sorry I expressed myself in the wrong place, I did not mean you, DXR or Benh (with DXR plus I a very good relationship), I spoke in general is a case then the opposition was 4, I did not realize, sorry.I spoke for example of those childish and vindictive administrator of A.Savin(block me,don't worry) that connects puts two negative votes only and only at 2 my photos and disappears, even a negative vote without even motivate !!!--LivioAndronico talk 14:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please, Livio, the world is better without offensive attacks. Clin If my vote stirs controversy, I remove it. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:25, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry,I understand 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk)--LivioAndronico talk 15:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@LivioAndronico: keep always smile. All opposes are for me suggestions to make my images in the future better. Take it easy, because we all are here a big "commons family". --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:04, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:25, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Butomus umbellatus - harilik luigelill Keilas.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2015 at 02:41:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Butomus umbellatus
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Steinen-Hofen - Evangelische Kirche(2015)5.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2015 at 04:31:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Protestant Church of Steinen-Hofen and rolling country of the Black Forrest
As I already mentioned in many of this cases: I don't understand your point. I never cut of the color space of the images. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:55, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It misses the "scale reference" for color. If you don't mind sharing details of your workflow, I'd be happy to help checking. - Benh (talk) 06:50, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:38, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:2014-12-18 Fortuna, Johannes Benk at Neue Burg, Vienna -hu- 6224.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2015 at 22:29:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fortuna, Johannes Benk at Neue Burg, Vienna
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Slaunger (talk) 19:52, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Christ Church Cathedral Interior 2, Oxford, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2015 at 14:55:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Christ Church Cathedral Interior
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Slaunger (talk) 20:03, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2015 at 04:54:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Float gauge, destroyed by a Joukowsky Pressure Shock
 Comment I could crop out the object from the background, but I fear, the object will lose depth without the shadow. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you shouldn't remove the shadow. As you say, they help give sense of volume of the subject. This is a reason I like proper studio shots like yours and Alchemist-hp's, and not all those with the background removed. Instead I would try to adjust your lighting setting so that the shadow doesn't come so close. Easy to say and it's just my two cents. - Benh (talk) 21:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Info The object is back in the damage evidence archive and I don't have a hand on it now. However, if it seems helpful, I can reprocess the image and brighten the shadow area. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 09:55, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done I applied brightening of foreground shadows --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 11:24, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's definitely an improvement. I'm in :  Support. Thanks for taking my suggestions into account - Benh (talk) 08:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Very good quality and high EV but not enough for me for the FP bar. I wonder why the shadow is in front of the object and would expect better lighting in the center of it since that should be the interesting area. Furthermore the subject is not really an eye-catcher. Poco2 08:31, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--Slaunger (talk) 19:55, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:NSB BM 69 Vieren - Ørneberget.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2015 at 19:08:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Slaunger (talk) 19:58, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2015 at 21:34:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Slaunger (talk) 19:45, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2015 at 12:45:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roskilde Station
  •  Info Roskilde station is the oldest railway station in Denmark for the first railway connection in Denmark between Roskilde and Copenhagen. The station was opened on June 26, 1847, while construction of the main building was still ongoing. In 1848 it was finished as well. In 1998 the railway station was resturated such that today the colors on the facade are identical to original building. The architectural elements are believed to have references to Villa Borghèse in Rome. Created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 12:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Slaunger (talk) 12:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Partially overexposed, partially blurred (slight DOF-problems). But an very interesting perspective, well resolved and a friendly overall view. --BlackIceNRW (talk) 13:10, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • @BlackIceNRW: : Thanks for your review. Regarding your assessment that it is 'partially overexposed', would you care to elaborate what you mean by that? If I look at the historgram of both the original raw, and the uploaded version, where shadows have been lifted, I see a histogram in Lightroom which is in fact very far from having any kind of clipping in the histogram. The histogram has a smooth tail going to zero at maximum brightness. -- Slaunger (talk) 15:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hello Slaunger, the mentioned program is a good tool, but I am relying at least on my eyes (as you surely too). The photo was taken on March 30th at 17:32 at sunset. The light comes from the top right. Some small areas that are illuminated with this "hard" light, are displayed in a blinding light, that I find slightly overexposed. For example, the side door of the rather dark car on the right hand side or the woman with the bag in the front. Her face and hair seem to merge themselves. But I judge here at the border of Perfectionism, possibly even of the Grotesque. Overall, the picture looks realy good for me, but under the bottom line it is not perfect for me. The selected time of day and the associated lighting conditions could be better. The same picture at a different time of day ... and the picture will get my voice. Nevertheless: For these lighting conditions really a good picture! --BlackIceNRW (talk) 19:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • @BlackIceNRW: Thank you for taking your time to elaborate. Yes, I do understand the point about a perceived-by-eye overexposure not seen in a histogram, and I understand the lightening details you mention with the woman and the car. I just wanted to check it was not an issue with your viewing equipment. One thing I do not quite understand though is your mentioning of hard light at 17:32 at sunset (it is actually 17:12 as is evident on the clock, but that is a detail, my camera clock is apparently not entirely correctly set). I think that this time of day at this time of year is very good for photography at this latitude. The light is getting soft and pleasant, but not yet 'reddish', and the shadows are still so short that neighbouring tall obstructions do not cast shadows on the main subject. But still, there are a lot of shadows on the building, and I have had to lift the shadows quite a bit to soften up the dynamic range. Maybe it is these shadows, that you refer to as being the root cause of the 'hard lightening'? (I have no objection to your vote, just curious to understand your observations). -- Slaunger (talk) 19:48, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Slaunger: The issue with the shadow is undoubtedly significant. As an example, the above mentioned woman: Here, I believe that through the interplay of blur in the shadow area (caused by the movement of the woman and the glaring light) and "hard" light from the right side, the result does not look perfect. Maybe also the exposure time with 1/320 sec was a little too long to make a better capture of the woman. But I do not want to lose in detail here. Looking at the whole picture, the exposure time is certainly well chosen. Ultimately, I still believe that the light conditions and slight problems with the depth of field (largely regardless of lighting) are the main reasons for my inner skepticism in the detailed view. But I'm sure, with a view of the whole picture you can argue about it and other friends of photography see this different anyway. --BlackIceNRW (talk) 08:01, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support The framing is tight, and there's some softness issue on the borders (strange?). Some chroma noise, probably as a result of strong shadows recovery, and strange haloing around the bench on the left... but I like the lighting a lot, and enough to support it. - Benh (talk) 18:34, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Benh: Thanks for your (always) useful review. I have uploaded a new version, which tries to address some of the issues you raise. You are correct shadows have been lifted quite dramatically, and this has introduced some chroma noise. I have increase chroma NR from 25 to 33 in Lightroom, as I found it did no noticeable harm to the detail level. I have also worked on the weird bench halo you mention, and finally I have decreased exposure by 0,11 EV, as there were a few burned spots. -- Slaunger (talk) 18:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • As far as I know and as of 2015, Canon DSLRs suck (sorry) with dynamic range. Recovering dark areas is often not a good idea. But Lightroom seems to be a bit clever. The amount of NR looks to be related to how much an area was brightened up. If anyone can confirm or not... So yes, in my opinion, you did well to increase chroma NR in this case. - Benh (talk) 20:10, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm sorry, but after scrutinizing, I barely see any difference, excepted the decrease of exposure. Do I miss something ? - Benh (talk) 20:42, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Benh: : That's OK. The 0.1 EV change is subtle, but visible. You have to look carefully to see any difference due to the increased chroma NR, and the repair on the bench halo is not a removal of the halo, but it is less prominent now. But the new verions is actualy different (promise). -- Slaunger (talk) 20:49, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Correct remarks for DoF by BlackIceNRW but good enough. --Mile (talk) 11:39, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Nice image, some minor technical problems though. --Tremonist (talk) 13:35, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Code (talk) 16:33, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Always Clin--Lmbuga (talk) 16:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Christian Ferrer 18:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Hubertl (talk) 19:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Pofka (talk) 21:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry, but I do not think that the image stands out from normal photos of comparable buildings. The light is okay, but not special. The field curvature issues have already been mentioned and are quite significant. You probably couldn't do much about the plants, but the lamppost that almost leaves the image is a bit distracting to me. Overall a nice QI, but no FP for me. --DXR (talk) 10:25, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Agree with DXR and in addition I have to say that the lack of sharpness on the left is also an issue Poco2 08:05, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 21:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Worcester College Chapel, Oxford, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2015 at 14:52:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Worcester College Chapel
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Slaunger (talk) 20:02, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2015 at 13:37:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Woman aircraft worker, Vega Aircraft Corporation, Burbank, California, June 1942
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:28, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Haltern am See, Sythen, Werkzeughalle der Quarzwerke -- 2015 -- 5003-7.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2015 at 16:44:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pulleys in the tool shed of the Quarzwerke in Sythen, Haltern, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 09:27, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2015 at 22:15:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

George Sand by Nadar
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:08, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2015 at 08:19:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oil painting "Dorf in den Berner Alpen" by Adolf Mosengel (1837-1885)
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 08:10, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Butterfly Knapweed Fritillary - Melitaea phoebe.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2015 at 17:49:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Melitaea phoebe
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:53, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2015 at 19:07:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Front view of the Indiana Statehouse, the state capitol building of the U.S. state of Indiana. The building, built in 1888, houses the Indiana General Assembly, the office of the Governor of Indiana, the Supreme Court of Indiana, and other state officials. The building it is located in Indianapolis, the state capital.
I actually like those other two a little bit more, if you'd been able to get the treetops in. It's really a matter of taste. Sometimes the perfect angle you'd like is just impossible. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Very much so. Many buildings (particularly in London) don't give you the ability to step back and photograph from an ideal angle, you typically end up with light poles, street signs, awkward angles and lots of perspective distortion. It is a matter of taste but I don't think Poco's alternative images show the building better. This one seems to be the least obstructed view of the building. Diliff (talk) 07:08, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Laitche: I have reduced the CN in a preventive way but withouth really seeing it. If it is still there in the current version, could you please add a note? There was also a bit of Moiré, I reduced it. Poco2 12:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:49, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2015 at 08:39:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral of Santa Maria Assunta (Nepi)
Thanks for your opinion Laitche, however, in the medieval Catholic churches is an effect due to have that within you see that served to illuminate the statue of the Madonna (being in the Middle Ages without electricity). However, the window is very small compared to the pictures and do not think it's so annoying, こんにちは.--LivioAndronico talk 13:13, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Besides, Baresi F described this as soft cause by NR, but I can't believe that photos need NR which is taken with ISO 100, so I think it's unsharp compared with current church interior FPs. --Laitche (talk) 14:15, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Having the church different illuminations even at 100 ISO is created a bit of noise which must be reduced in PP. However before you oppose to one thing and then you come out the other, better let it go that is better, thanks anyway --LivioAndronico talk 14:32, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There can be many reasons why it has NR at ISO 100. Livio may have increased the shadows brightness which would introduce noise even at ISO 100. It is a scene with a lot of dynamic range, and it is probably as good as it can be with a single exposure. Nothing could have saved the white window, cameras simply don't have enough dynamic range capabilities in their sensors to capture bright sunlight detail at the same time as a dark interior detail. Diliff (talk) 15:10, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've considered the technical limit of single exposure by 24Mpx with APS-C, and I think this shot is insufficient luminous at this scene + this sensor for a FP bar. And after I read your comment of supporting vote, I think it's not good thing that an adjustment the FP standard by each individual, but it's OK for now. --Laitche (talk) 16:20, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I haven't adjust the FP standard for each individual - that's an assumption you've made. I've opposed many of Livio's church interiors before. I simply wanted to point out that he has improved his photography (composition, processing, and overall image sharpness) and this image has reached the minimum standard for me to support it. Diliff (talk) 16:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know... because I don't have much clue about what your workflow looks like. I've sorted out that Wladyslaw had an issue with his Gimp (probably his settings), but you don't seem to use it. If I had to bet on your case, it would be on Paint.net. - Benh (talk) 21:45, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • And when you don't know something, check Wikipedia (you know, that little encyclopedia we are all contributing to somehow ;-) ) Color space. There's even an Italian version. - Benh (talk) 21:48, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would be unsatisfied to leave this issue pending. Can you tell us more about your workflow? From the moment you take the picture to the moment you upload it to Wikipedia. - Benh (talk) 22:00, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • after taking the photo I drive, dinner (I joke ).... still nothing that, I adjusted the perspective, cut, added a bit of sharpness and a slight NR. Then a bit of contrast, raised a little brightness and added a few of color ... end--LivioAndronico talk 22:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was more asking how you import the photo in your computer. How exactly do you open it? Photoshop? ACR? Lightroom? Something else? How is it saved at the end? Can you check ur exif at each stage of your workflow to find out the faulty link? - Benh (talk) 06:44, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I open the nef with camera raw and later with photoshop,and save in jpg...not very complicated --LivioAndronico talk 07:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This photo has been through "paint.net 4.0.5", it says so in the EXIF. I can't trust the colours. -- Colin (talk) 11:53, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
From exif : Software used Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)--LivioAndronico talk 14:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See "Creator Tool" tag. This has definitely been touched by Paint.NET which imo shouldn't go near any FP photographs. Sure, Photoshop has also been used, but Photoshop CC does not remove colourspace tags. -- Colin (talk) 15:38, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ops....I really sorry,I had done something without remembering, the fact remains that I was wrong and I apologize. --LivioAndronico talk 16:06, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • What do you have to use Paint.net for when you have a Photoshop? Can't you just reprocess and skip Paint.net? I'm concerned that not so many look to care about colors accuracy... - Benh (talk) 08:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support nice real view, nice light. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support — Julian H.✈ 15:49, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Christian Ferrer 16:36, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support You are getting my support (for the first time, I guess) here. The execution is not really at FP level: some areas are gone due to overexposure, the picture is overall too dark, I miss contrast, detail is not the best, the bottom crop can be improved, it doesn't look as real as it should (this is IMHO an issue in your processing) but the motif in this case and the effect of the lighting surpasses the mentioned problems. I suggest you to keep on working in your photographic skills, development and -if possible- equipment and go back to this place in one year, and then ask us to replace this FP by an even better one. If you don't do it, it could be me who shows up over there :) Poco2 09:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:45, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2015 at 14:10:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
✓ Done Thank you for that hint --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 09:34, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Eurovision Song Contest 1962 - Ronnie Carroll-edit.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2015 at 22:40:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ronny Caroll in Eurovision
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2015 at 10:06:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leccinum versipelle
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:46, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2015 at 20:58:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lenin Peak (7134 m)
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:40, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2015 at 17:16:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

High resolution microscopy image of the actin cytoskeleton
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Slaunger (talk) 06:18, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2015 at 14:05:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Scarlet peacock (Anartia amathea) male underside, Asa Wright nature Centre, Trinidad
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:47, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2015 at 10:57:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

High resolution panorama of atrium of Oberhausen Castle ("Schloss Oberhausen"), Germany

--Tuxyso (talk) 20:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Normally, I'd recommend the JavaScript or Flash zoom viewers but they seem to be broken at present (for me, anyway). I don't think it is reasonable to expect a browser to display an image that would be 5.4m wide at 100dpi. It is a lousy way to view such an image. The zoom viewers provide a better experience. Please don't judge our images on the limitations of MediaWiki or your decision to use a web browser to review the 100% image. You wouldn't use a web browser to read a book. MediaWiki has a self-imposed restriction on its ability to downsize, but 7000px wide version. -- Colin (talk) 20:58, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2015 at 07:56:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"U.S. Army soldiers on Bougainville (one of the Solomon Islands) in World War II." This photo was taken in March 1944.
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:43, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2015 at 15:44:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Seed pods of Stachys macrantha 'Superba' Location, Garden reservation Jonker Valley.
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Merton College Chapel Organ, Oxford, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2015 at 21:23:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Merton College Organ
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 06:22, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:New College Chapel Interior 2, Oxford, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2015 at 21:28:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

New College Reredos
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 06:22, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2015 at 18:08:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Supertree Grove in Singapore
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 06:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wall April 2015-2.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2015 at 15:56:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Support Both  Neutral but prefer this one. --Laitche (talk) 21:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC) --Laitche (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry, but I am struggling with the notion of minimalism in FPC. I don't mean this as an attack on anybody, but I personally feel that this is a kind of get-out-of-jail concept that makes an image untouchable to a set of expectations we would otherwise have, such as having a lot of EV, being an appealing and accurate representation of the motive, having nice light etc. When I look at the image, I feel that it is a good supporting photo for an article, giving people a better understanding of the facade details, but this is not something that gives me a wow effect or makes me think that the image is outstanding. Such photos might appeal to many, but I am not sure whether this is just because they are unusual and obviously different from boring standard images many creators now think should be FP. I am not denying that my oppose might be based on personal preference (I usually feel that images of entire works of architecture are superior), but at the end of the day, such preferences make our votes. BTW: The WB also looks too cold to me. --DXR (talk) 10:15, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Thank you for bringing this issue to the discussion, DXR. It is a matter of fact that the so-called "artsy images" were never concensually regarded as truly useful for the project (except the reproductions of notable artists) and have usually a hard time in FPC. However we should keep in mind that Commons repository is intended to much more than just illustrating Wikipedia articles. While WP:FPC is focused on the encyclopaedic use and value of the pictures in Wikipedia, that is not the case with Commons, as our FP are used to many purposes outside Wikimedia. I always said, and that is written in my profile of Meet our Photographers (here), that I consider Photography as a means to interpret reality and to transmit such interpretation to others. That is precisely what I'm doing here with the photos of the Centro Cultural de Belém, to which a minimalistic view seems to apply perfectly. Are these images useful, besides being beautiful (for me)? I believe so. Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Alvesgaspar for your measured response. I think that the point I was trying to make is slightly different, though. I do not want to challenge the value of images like this one, in fact I do think it has EV. I just think that it is quite difficult to assess whether it is outstanding or "the best of commons", because there is little material to measure it against here. In this way, the vote becomes more of a "like vs. don't like" than I personally would like to see in this forum. I agree that WP:FP is more EV-driven, but at the same time COM:FP still is very much biased in the direction of EV on a spectrum between pure documentation and abstract art, at least if we look at what is presented here most of the time. --DXR (talk) 09:21, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral --Tremonist (talk) 12:23, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Photographing a detail of a building, particularly one of architectural merit, is as important as photographing the whole facade or interior. Having looked at other images of this building, I see it lends itself to a minimalist approach. Here we can concentrate on the coloured bricks, the little dark squares and the squares-within-squares window. No other distractions. And symmetry. I can certainly see this photo appearing in a book that discusses the building or its architect, so for me it is plenty enough educational-value (as opposed to encyclopaedic value, where it is unlikely such small details would merit inclusion). -- Colin (talk) 17:25, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wall April 2015-2a.jpg

[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:41, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2015 at 12:01:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Via triumphalis of St. Benedict
✓ Done --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2015 at 19:23:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Neo-Byzantine Dome in Christian IX's Chapel, Roskilde Cathedral
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2015 at 16:10:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tiradentes quatered, by Pedro Américo.
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Webysther 20131026172834 - Rocha com algas e ouriço-do-mar.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2015 at 20:04:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rock with sea urchin, red algae, green and yellow at beach in Espírito Santo, Brazil
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2015 at 03:40:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2015 at 19:56:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

13 Bolesława Chrobrego Square in Kłodzko
Slaunger, Laitche & Jebulon - Capture a photo directly ahead is impossible, because there is a tree. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But I don't mind change my vote to neutral. --Laitche (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:19, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Chamaeleo chamaeleon - Common Chameleon - Bukalemun.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2015 at 17:42:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:17, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2015 at 09:36:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Douglas DC-3 of BOAC at Gibraltar, silhouetted by searchlights on the Rock.jpg
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:47, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2015 at 06:00:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:49, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2015 at 08:51:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Thanks! --Kadellar (talk) 12:36, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:48, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2015 at 10:39:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hill fort of Baroña, Pre-Roman Galicia (Spain).
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/April_2015&oldid=162483305"