Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2018

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

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2018 at 17:01:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination I also had my concerns regarding the cars in the background, but I wasn't sure if it's really that much destracting. --Granada (talk) 06:03, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 18:31, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2018 at 21:13:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • That's really weird, the walls are absolutely straight but if you observe the horizontal joints, you see that it's the roof which isn't straight (horizontal). Between the photographer and the building might be a slight angle, too which would increase the effect. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:27, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Ikan.--Peulle (talk) 11:59, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose nice stuff, but you will have to change colors (temp) --Mile (talk) 08:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I think the white balance is wrong. Unless you are unfortunate enough to have a building lit by sodium lamps, then the white balance of the snow or fascia boards and sofits should be neutral. Also I wonder if you have rendered this brighter than it was. On the JPG, with Camera Raw, if fix the white balance, reduce the exposure by -1 or -1.5 stops and increase contrast +25, perhaps add a little clarity, then I get an image that looks like it was taken at 1am. The centre portion then becomes a welcoming oasis of fairy lights and is a lovely contrast with the very ordinary urban building and scene. Perhaps still not quite enough wow for FP, but an interesting photo. -- Colin (talk) 16:15, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I sort of like the symmetry and while I think Colin's suggestion is worth taking, I am opposing on principle because of my frequently-stated position that pictures of Christmas lighting displays do not qualify for FOP in countries that do not grant that exception broadly (or at all) to sculptural works (and even this seemingly random assortment of lights is still a work), and apparently per this DR Canada only grants that exception to permanently installed works, which this is not. Daniel Case (talk) 17:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  I withdraw my nomination Thanks Basile Morin , I applied a perspective fix and yes thanks Mile and Colin I applied a selective white balance and the exposure and contrast fixed commented by Colin and finally Daniel Case IMHO the main subject here is the House and the street and not the non professional light, however, you could nominate it to deletion if you think. Thanks everybody --The Photographer 17:55, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 18:32, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Benasque - Aigualluts - Pico de la Mina 02.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2018 at 09:21:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Summit Pico de la Mina (2708 m), as seen from Forau de Aigualluts. Huesca, Aragon, Spain
  •  Comment Hi Ralf, thanks for your comment but regarding the shadows please keep in mind that this B&W is not the conversion of this colour image but a different, independent shot, this is why the shadows are different. You're right, I pulled the blue channel down to get more contrast (about the green I'm not sure). I understand that this is a normal procedure for developing B&W images as it's the same effect as if I put a yellow filter on an analogue camera. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 13:20, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Spain
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2018 at 16:00:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
With the crop you suggest, parts of the snake are out of focus. Without the crop, it's kind of nice with the snake in his habitat.
My eyes don't move well around this composition. That's my main concern. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:16, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 18:17, 1 January 2018 (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 1 Jan 2018 at 16:03:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
You're so welcome, Ikan! I didn't realize there were so many dust spots. Thanks for helping to improve this picture! Merry Christmas and all the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 07:52, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to be of help. I'll be working on Christmas afternoon, giving cheer to some folks at a nursing home by playing a lot of tunes for them. After doing that for a few hours and sometimes snapping a few cellphone photos on the way there or back, it's great to see beautiful photos on this site. I've learned a lot from spending time here this past year, looking at so many beauties and reading what you all have to say about them. I'm glad I can give something back. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 18:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2018 at 17:32:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Homless selling flowers in São Paulo downtown
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 18:19, 1 January 2018 (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 1 Jan 2018 at 08:56:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Königsberg castle seen from the south
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 13:24, 1 January 2018 (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 5 Jan 2018 at 04:02:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bridge to the Blumeninsel (Wörther See) in Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 13:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2018 at 20:29:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flughafen Madrid-Barajas, Eingangsbereich, links die Sicherheitskontrolle
Die Säulen sind nicht symmetrisch, siehe hier. --Ralf Roleček 20:17, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The supports are NOT symmetrical in this case, see here. --Ralf Roleček 21:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Right, there is the posibility from other points. But my photo show no symmetric supports. Symmetry is not a criterion to FP. But i knew, symmetric photos are very popular here. --Ralf Roleček 22:33, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Benh. I looked at other photos. There is symmetry here but not in this photo, which is a mistake and quite a big one. The claim "Symmetry is not a criterion to FP" is simply nonsense. The FP criteria are not defined or limited to some handful of agreed-upon features. While the building is amazing enough this image will likely pass, I am also confident that practically anyone else with a DSLR could improve on it by simply taking more care where to stand and how to point their camera. -- Colin (talk) 15:27, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 21:46, 1 January 2018 (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 Jan 2018 at 06:53:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eureka Tower (top), Melbourne 2017-10-30
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 13:26, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Australia
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2018 at 03:31:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Immerged tree in the Mekong with boat passing behind
  • ✓ Done The decision to shrink the resolution of this file was motivated by the comment of Smial in this discussion. I uploaded too versions of this tree : one shot with my tripod, and this one shot handheld with a moving boat. The tripod version was uploaded in full resolution, while this file nominated with boat was shrunk due to the different settings, in order to increase the visual sharpness at full size, and to improve the speed of downloading. I'm not sure there's a big difference between both, but now the full resolution for this one is online too. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:04, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Basile I think you misunderstand Smial's comment. The resolution requirement for QI is low, and historically some bird photographers uploaded small images that were heavily downsized. So Smial's point is that if those got accepted for QI at 3MP then why are we complaining about issues only visible at 100% on a 27MP image -- that just punishes photographers from uploading full-size images and we all lose. Btw, that bird is a great image, and anyone opposing it at QI needs to reorient their priorities for at QI. -- Colin (talk) 15:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Colin, Smial wrote : "in the past we have accepted images of this kind, which were downscaled to 3 Mpixels or even less to get better visual sharpness". Then, from that comment, I understand the images have been downscaled to improve visual sharpness. Maybe your interpretation is different, but Smial said what he said. Nevertheless, your idea is valid, and I understand it well, too. However I believe that reducing the size can be a clever thing to do, in some cases, above all when the subject is really blurry at 1:1. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes for bird-in-flight photography the long telephoto required can mean the image isn't great at pixel level so some downsizing may be appropriate if the image is really soft [and sometimes such images are also quite heavily cropped]. Also at least one past FP bird photographer downsized in order to retain commercial value in his full-size images, which wasn't encouraged but grumblingly accepted because the photos were very good. There are a few other situations where I think downsizing is reasonable. For example, very high ISO images taken at a concert that have thus lost much pixel-level detail. Or stitched photos where perspective distortions have stretched some portions of the frame, magnifying pixel-level issues. But generally we wouldn't expect anyone to downsize a daylight standard..wide-angle photo or a studio photo, because there's really not any excuse other than poor technique or bad equipment. It is a vicious-circle if people start routinely downsizing images to improve sharpness, then reviewers get unrealistic expectations of sharpness, which encourages further downsizing... -- Colin (talk) 08:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 03:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2018 at 13:10:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Indian roller (Coracias benghalensis benghalensis)
The posterization still there. My recommendation is to separate the bird and the background in two layers, applying Gaussian blur to the background only and being very careful not to create a shaded edge. Look in the history of this file how @Biopics: applied this technique. --The Photographer 16:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Charlesjsharp I uploaded a new version with the noise reduction on the background, however I rollback this version, if you are agree you can let this version on top. --The Photographer 01:13, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
thank you; your version good. Charles (talk) 10:59, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 21:47, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Merisk - Eurasian oystercatcher - Haematopus ostralegus (1) copy.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2018 at 18:08:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eurasian oystercatcher
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 21:49, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2018 at 14:21:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Papilio machaon mating
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 21:48, 1 January 2018 (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 5 Jan 2018 at 23:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

10-peso banknote of Spanish Cuba
 Comment Good remark Ikan Kekek. That New York printer was a very powerful company that had the monopoly for all US banknotes and had been printing those of Spanish Cuba for several decades already (see example from 1872). After the US invasion of 1898, Cuban currency production ceased but the American Bank Note Company still printed a series of banknotes for the "National Bank of Cuba", a private, US-owned institution, in 1905 (example). These banknotes were never circulated and the US dollar remained the only legal currency in the island until 1934. Thanks everyone for your support! --Hispalois (talk) 18:03, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 18:56, 2 January 2018 (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 2 Jan 2018 at 15:55:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rosa 'Sheila's Perfume' in Dunedin Botanic Garden, Dunedin, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 18:57, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rakvere ordulinnus - Rakvere castle.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2018 at 12:28:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rakvere castle
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 22:01, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2018 at 09:22:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Autumn daffodil flower (Sternbergia lutea)
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 22:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2018 at 17:53:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral-Basilica of Mary, Queen of the World, Montreal, Canada.
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 21:59, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Orisol - Ermita de Santikurutz 02.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2018 at 09:57:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santikurutz Chapel (Holy Cross) on the way up to the summit of Orisol. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 22:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2018 at 14:10:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Comment The image has been QI'd with the exact same arguments as from Martin and I like the image for those very same reasons. --Granada (talk) 22:26, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Peulle. Looks like overdone NR (and selective on top of that, it would explain the "yellow text on blue shorts"). - Benh (talk) 18:02, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment Uploaded a new version! --Granada (talk) 18:10, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Unless cache issue, I don't see much (any?) improvement. - Benh (talk) 18:53, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I've reduced sharpening to nearly zero. Now it's a cropped sooc-jpeg. --Granada (talk) 19:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Distracting backgroud. Moreover blurry a little bit. — Draceane talkcontrib. 21:55, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - One thing that bugs me enough for me not to vote to support is the way the white patch on the uniform of the otherwise red-shirted man visible over the shoulder of the woman in the yellow and blue uniform seems to stand out in disproportion to its importance. The moment you've captured is exciting, and I'm willing to overlook a bit of distraction from the presence of part of a player who's partly cropped out on the right side, because that's simply normal on soccer fields during games, but there are a few relatively small things in the background that stand out and bug me. Another one is that piece of green between the legs of the player on the right, and there's also a little bit of white on the right leg of the white and red uniformed man in the middle between the two others. These little things bug me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment Thank you for your comment. I would have loved to see this level of arguing in the discussion of this image: File:London Bees v Millwall Lionesses, 15 April 2017 (062) (cropped).jpg (there's not even a ball near her ...) and in general when looking at the images here: Commons:Featured_pictures/Sports#Team_sports. There are not a lot of images in total and a lot of them where you could argue with a distracting background, blurriness, being downscaled to hide blurriness and other things. My point is not to remove those images from FP but to review sports images under different aspects than landscape photography. (Yes, I usually know not to disturb, sorry about that) --Granada (talk) 07:30, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're not disturbing; you're expressing a perfectly reasonable opinion and we're having a discussion. I notice I didn't vote on the picture you linked, and I think that's probably because, although I like the composition, there are similar kinds of small things that would have bugged me at about 300% of full screen size. It's possible that my standards for sports photography are unreasonably high, but I don't think I can make myself feel wowed or make myself unbugged by the kinds of small things I mentioned above. As a general point, I'm absolutely in full agreement with you that any kind of action shot has to be judged differently than a shot of a more or less static view, and I absolutely won't vote to oppose a feature for this photo, but I thought I'd let you know why I haven't felt able to support it, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:02, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Don't be discouraged - standards are high here. Most of my FP noms are declined.--Peulle (talk) 01:29, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 CommentJust seen this nomination and for what it is worth, I'd have supported. Granada is right that many existing sports photo FPs have same "flaws" as have been pointed out here. I think there is a bit too much noise reduction applied and don't understand why the new version was uploaded with "less sharpening" when sharpening wasn't the issue (though sharpening without a mask may increase noise in out-of-focus areas, which would encourage you to add more NR to combat it). But this is a 15MP image taken at 300mm f/2.8 and I don't think there are many folk on Commons who could take a better one -- the DoF here is tiny and quite a challenge to get the people sharp. Most commercial sport photos we see are <2MP. Looking at this full screen, the players pop out in 3D, which is great. -- Colin (talk) 15:56, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment@Colin: Withdrew my withdrawal
 CommentThe D850 was still quite new to me on that day and I shot in jpeg with the in-camera noise reduction set to standard and no in-camera sharpening at all so I can't do anything about the NR. But all in all I am quite satisfied with this setting because when shooting RAW (e.g. during the hymn ceremonies for taking portrait shots) and working with them in post I often end up with just about the same amount of NR. The original version was sharpened with around 93% of masking in Lightroom, but that still exposed some weird "wobbly blur" around the number 19 of Julia Tabotta which I did not notice at first. --Granada (talk) 16:26, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 22:47, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2018 at 19:49:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gaztelugatxe in The Basque Country early morning.
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 22:46, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2018 at 23:32:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
The man is watching the road before crossing it and IMHO I do not think they are in the shade, they just have a dark skin tone. --The Photographer 18:06, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the shadows of the bicycle wheels, and the brightness of the sky, the sun looks to be in the top right of the picture, so most of their faces and bodies are in shadow. -- Colin (talk) 19:53, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Colin: I can see, you are right and I tried mitigate this problem raising the shadows. Maybe less DoF should work better too. --The Photographer 18:51, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral For me ride the man left more or less out of the picture.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:48, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry, why has this to be shot at ISO 1600 which produces noise that was reduced in post leading to less sharpness in the details? Next the car to the left is very much disturbing the view, the man on his bike has no lead room to the left (his front view) and finally the sun stood in the "wrong" direction as pointed out by Colin. And it somewhat looks like it's been downscaled. --Granada (talk) 17:57, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It was taken from a car, answering your question about the ISO. --The Photographer 18:01, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 08:22, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2018 at 07:55:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Forcella del Pana (Seceda) over the Lüsner Berge with the Plose to the Zillertal Alps
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 13:41, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Loojang 05.05.2017 - Sunset 05.05.2017 copy.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2018 at 13:23:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 13:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2018 at 14:26:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

In the Gostynin-Wloclawek nature reserve several white-tailed eagles overwinter; this is a natural habitat for these gigantic birds. The number of eagles in this habitat is high enough to observe occasional aggressive wranglings over some prey.

* Support --Ximonic (talk) 22:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 22:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2018 at 05:02:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mekong pirogue at sunset in the 4000 islands
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Laos
  •  Info Mekong pirogue at sunset with two men working at a power line to connect a partially submerged shelter in the 4000 islands (Si Phan Don) near Don Puay, Laos. The purpose is to create a stand to sell drinks there in a few days, when the level of the river will have lowered. Created, uploaded and nominated by me -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:02, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:02, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very pretty, but I don't know what "immerged" means. Dictionary definitions I looked up seem to mean "plunged into a fluid", but as opposed to "emerged" or "immersed" (neither of which I think you mean), it's not a word I've ever heard anyone say or even read in print. I think you mean "partially submerged". Also, that looks more like some kind of shelter than a hut to me, I guess more or less what's called a "pondok" in Malay - a shelter used for work (for example, in Malaysia, traditionally, there were pondok in rice fields, where farmers would stay during harvest time to scare off the birds and other pests that were eating the rice plants). Is its purpose for fishermen/-women to be protected from the sun while fishing? Something else? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Ikan. The expected word was probably "flooded" (or submerged ?) Sorry, English is not my mother tongue. In French we say "immergé" and I found this translation here. Thus, description has been altered on the file. I also agree with "shelter". Do not hesitate to fix it when necessarry, I will appreciate. Cheers -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:53, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have a good level of French for conversation and reading when I'm in practice, but I'm unfamiliar with the word "immergé". However, "flooded" would be inondé, to my knowledge. I think "partially submerged" is what you want, because the condition is normal for this shelter, right? And it's only partially submerged, not completely under water. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:38, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:52, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Colin for your suggestion, but your crop is too tight in my opinion. We need a margin under the pirogue to feel the space. Also, the two long electrical wires are important elements that I don't want to cut, because one is linked to the shelter, and the other one is linked to the boat. My image tells a story. If a wire was hidden, it would affect the content and I find it more interesting to imagine the distance of the boat through this submerged line to follow intuitively, than to miss it after it quickly disappears under water. A single wire would seem too unsignificant, alone. But I already made a cut from my original file to adjust the margins bottom-right, and this version displays the scenery with the best crop I could find -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 06:33, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Laos
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2018 at 15:00:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Le Stryge" chimera overlooking Paris
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 15:43, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2018 at 07:28:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Matador in the Plaza de toros
 Comment and  Question You are right, I reduced the halo and uploaded a new version of the image in Wikimedia Commons. But how do I change the version on this page? Do I need to re-upload the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates? --Ввласенко (talk) 11:32, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. You don't need to do anything. This page, and the nomination page, shows the image as it is on the file page, but the system is sometimes veeeery slow to update the transcluded image. Sometimes the change can be seen directly, sometimes it takes hours. You also need to refresh your cache (F5) It's like the Wikimedia servers run on transistors instead of chips... --cart-Talk 13:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! But, sorry, - to refresh your cache (F5) - wthat you mean? --Ввласенко (talk) 14:14, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It means to close and open your web browser. F5 is commonly used as a reload key in many web browsers and other applications. (клавиша F5 выполняет функцию обновления во многих браузерах и программах.) --cart-Talk 15:13, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! --Ввласенко (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment He was one of the three young matadors who were on the arena in Seville, May 5, 2013. They were not well known yet, I did not remember their names, sorry. Undoubtedly, he was the best as the matador and as the actor. I hope to show others photos too. --Ввласенко (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 16:53, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Älvdalens Camping - Grillplats.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2018 at 14:07:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Camping site near Älvdalen, Sweden
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 17:58, 5 January 2018 (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 13 Jan 2018 at 08:17:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Epitaph for Balthasar von Pibriach at the parish church Saint Martin, Himmelberg, Carinthia, Austria
✓ Done @Uoaei1: Thanks for your comment. The verticals should be upright now. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:44, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 03:55, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2018 at 22:26:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Camellia japonica
 Support now. -- Colin (talk) 17:29, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Colin: You last nom makes my point. I like the petals much more there. Here we have less contrast, and the image is not very "punchy". @PumpkinSky: I like that you listened to (my) complaints but sometimes it's good to stick to your original ideas, no matter the votes. It the suggestion had been a clear improvement like "Way too many noise, please apply NR", it would have been something else ;) And I was the only opposer! - Benh (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Benh: I thought it was worth a try. Trying different things is how we learn. Thanks for participating in the nomination. I've been looking at Colin's recent nomination and am thinking about what I think of it ;-) PumpkinSky talk 19:01, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just so readers can follow this, my "last nom" is this one and it was prompted by looking at the category when assessing this nomination. Wrt comparing this nom and mine, one is an artistic presentation and one is a specimen presentation. In the former, I think technical issues are less important and in the latter technical issues (and quality of subject) need to be close to perfect. -- Colin (talk) 20:34, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@PumpkinSky: Well, if you don't want to crop out the two buds then don't do any cropping, because I think it looks best centered. Daniel Case (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 03:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Order_:_Ericales
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2018 at 13:28:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:13, 5 January 2018 (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 10 Jan 2018 at 08:52:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

USB powered mini-fan with LED during fuction.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 13:15, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2018 at 08:04:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exterior of the Pula Arena, an amphitheatre located in Pula, Croatia.
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 13:14, 6 January 2018 (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 6 Jan 2018 at 15:05:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 18:02, 6 January 2018 (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 14 Jan 2018 at 11:36:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Treskavec Monastery's yard, Macedonia
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 04:11, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2018 at 08:41:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Woman laughing during the new year celebration in Laos
  •  Comment It is rare to catch a hearty, natural, good laugh in a closeup photo since most people just freeze up or strike a pose as soon as you point a camera in their direction. She looks joyful and nice but the hair caught in the processing is a bit of a bother though. It is fixable and I will support if that is fixed. Btw, the lines of her lips are exquisite! --cart-Talk 11:08, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry, I agree with Charles that it is unflattering. Not that one is required to take a flattering photo on Commons, though. The focal length is wide-angle which creates a big head vs small body for the closeup viewpoint here, and makes her head appear much further forward of her body. That focal length is fine for a group photo or environmental photo but not a close portrait like this. -- Colin (talk) 12:31, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The photographer is not a close as you are here. I'm not going to debate lenses as the image speaks for itself. You are too close to the subject for comfort and the result is not pleasing. And I'm not really impressed that you think it would have merit to shoot her with a fisheye so "she would look so funny". If you use a lens like this, close up, you get an in-your-face rounded big head, small body look as we see here. I'm not interested in laughing at her so one shouldn't photograph someone that way to generate laughs, unless you want to mock them. -- Colin (talk) 14:58, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Mock them ? Because shot at 24x1,6= 38mm (equivalent full frame) ? Wow -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, even on full frame, if you stick a 35mm wide angle close up to someone's face, they will look unpleasantly distorted. It is simply a fact of subject-camera distance. Anyway, I've better things to do on a Friday evening than arguing about elementary portraiture on the internet, so unwatching. -- Colin (talk) 17:49, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"I've better things to do on a Friday..." We can see that, gentleman. But my portrait is a crop of a picture shot horizontally, then probably the same distance than the photograph above shot at 16mm. No problem, we can disagree. So enjoy the week-end ǃ Have fun ː-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:48, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:21, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 12:37:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

American Fascism
  •  Comment We certainly need political photos here too, without them there would be no photos for articles on some of the most important events in history. We should also be able to feature them if they are legendary, excellent, of historical importance, whatever. Example. What is crucial though is to describe them in a neutral way. I'm not objecting to the photos per se, just keep the tone they are presented in factual per wiki guidelines. --cart-Talk 18:14, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree, though neutral policy applies to the description on the file page. On talk pages (like this) I think we are allowed to state personal opinions and views, in moderation and within the context of the photo. -- Colin (talk) 18:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - I don't understand the debate about the political content of a photo. Why on Earth wouldn't a sticker, regardless of what it says, be a reasonable subject for a photo, within the bounds of the taste of any viewer to consider? I also don't believe in being overly influenced by a photo's title. Regardless of the title, this is a photo of an urban scene that looks like a corner in Manhattan's Soho. It includes the referenced sticker, the red shoes that are mentioned in parentheses in the longer title, the police/fire call box and several other elements. As for the motif, I think it's interesting, but I don't think the photo is executed in a compelling way. If it were a bit sharper, the verticals were corrected and the blown-out light on the building were successfully dialed down in a realistic-looking way, I think it might be a worthy FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Let me be clear about the context here: my mother and I were walking around Manhattan with a pair of little red shoes we had purchased in Chinatown in 2005, and at one point she put them on top of this fire box and I took a picture. It wasn't until later that day that my brother-in-law looked at the picture and noticed the "fascism" sticker. The sticker was not part of the intended photo at all, but it happened to be there by surprise. No political comment was intended when the picture was taken. That others feel the picture has an overbearing political commentary, which I do not deny the picture conveys, are not commenting on the picture, which I believe is interesting: it has an a-HA moment in it, a record of a street scene in Manhattan in 2005. I did not place the sticker nor intend for it to be in the photo. But isn't it interesting that it is there? Or so I thought. This nomination looks like it has pretty well been torpedoed.  I withdraw my nomination KDS4444 (talk) 03:34, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 10:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kungstorget 8 Lysekil 4 - bw.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2018 at 22:55:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stairs at Kungstorget 8 in lysekil
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 10:26, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Along the River 7-119-3.jpg, delisted

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2018 at 15:02:43
City landscape painting Current

City landscape painting Proposed

  •  Info I'm proposing the current image file to be superseded by File:Along the River During the Qingming Festival (Qing Court Version).jpg. The new image file is larger in size as well as clearer and higher in quality, in which smaller details are better discernible. It maintains the colors as given by the museum source. There's no digital manipulation of the source files in the new image file, besides stitching several image files together (of which the image files fit next to each other as is) and resizing into a smaller size (so that it met the upper upload limit). Uploaded by me; stitched and resized by me, from the source files by the National Palace Museum.
(Original nomination)

Result: 9 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. PumpkinSky talk 12:38, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Loojang 08.01.2017 - Sunset 08.01.2017 4.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2018 at 17:05:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: the quality is far below FP level.--Peulle (talk) 14:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 14:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:20180105 Men's handball Austria - Czechia Pavel Horák 850 9028.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 17:34:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Men's handball Austria Czechia 2018-01-05, picture shows Pavel Horák (CZE), Mykola Bilyk (AUT), Romas Kirveliavicius (AUT)
 Comment Thank you very much for your comment on the cropping (btw: it's handball). It's a compromise between keeping the aspect ratio at 2:3 and not cutting off really important body parts. I tried to extract the czech forward only but then much of the excitement suffers from lastly not knowing how high he was jumping. The amount of excitement is the main reason why I nominated this and the main subject is not that much distracted from the spectators as in this other image: [1] --Granada (talk) 08:44, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's team handball, which I don't really recognize as a form of handball, but that's what they call it. We New Yorkers have a very different view of what handball is, as apparently do people in L.A. You can see an example here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:28, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK maybe not NR, but something with either it, or the sharpening renders oil painting a little, and I personally don't like it - Benh (talk) 23:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 CommentThis is what all my Nikon DSLRs render to moving facial skin at higher ISOs and 1/1000s of shutter speed and it's not further noise reduced in LR. This was the problem with the D3, the D4 and is with my D850 now. This is from the beginning of the second half where I still had the camera set to RAW (took the important images during the half-time interviews for TV) and the outcome after adding not too much NR. I personally prefer to keep the details in favour to NR, but my Nikons don't render details very well under the given circumstances. Shooting non-moving objects under the same circumstances works way better and I do really like that luma noise of the D850 (this is ISO 7200, not downsampled): File:20171028_OEHB_AUT-SRB_Patrekur_Jóhannesson_850_3154.jpg. --Granada (talk) 08:44, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nominationThis will never get enough votes. --Granada (talk) 12:52, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 15:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 08:16:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Metal bench at castle Damtschach, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 15:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Norderney, Weststrand -- 2016 -- 5285 -- 2.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2018 at 15:43:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset at beach “Weststrand” of Norderney, Lower Saxony, Germany
  • Hi XRay, thanks for your notification. As I see your image with my eyes, there are three main problems : 1) the sky is burnt, 2) the sea is blurry and 3) nothing is sharp. So let's start with the first problem. The sky is burnt, that means if you reduce the exposure of your photo from your RAW file, and even if you reduce a lot, you'll certainly still have a big white area in the middle of these clouds, like a hole, which is there because the contrasts are too high, unfortunately. This is not a beautiful sky. A beautiful sky has nice shades and the intensity of the lights are soft and subtle. I'm sorry this sky here looks violent, despite of its soft tones, it's like broken because too contrasted. It's white white white white, and then a little bit of gray (+ pink). I don't find this aesthetical. Really too hard white. The second problem is the sea. As much I like your sea in this other version File:Norderney,_Weststrand_--_2016_--_5265_--_2.jpg shot at 1/30s, as much I can't see theses waves here without thinking that the subject is blurry, and a problem. In my opinion, a long exposure is nice when the subject is static, or when a special effect is expected, like for example in this waterfalls File:Seljalandsfoss,_Suðurland,_Islandia,_2014-08-16,_DD_201-203_HDR.JPG = okay, in that case, moving water can be a featured thing. But in this image, it gives the feeling that the camera moved and missed the target, sorry ! To finish, the third problem. There's no spot in this photo where the eyes can stop and breath. Because nothing is sharp. Only the 4 wooden pillars are slightly in focus, but they are so dark, so violently black, without texture, without depth, that they can't host us. Where can my eyes be hosted in this picture for more than 1 second ? Which part of that lanscape can I contemplate safely by catching the presented elements ? Nowhere, I'm afraid. Just a feeling, a mood ? There should be something real, I think, something physical, to make it interesting. Photography requires observation. If the potential observation is absent, like in this vague image, then we miss the whole. However, because my appreciation is negative, I have to say something positive. I've spent a long time observing your Featured Pictures, XRay, and find them rather excellent in general. Even this one File:Santorin_(GR),_Exomytis,_Vlychada_Beach_--_2017_--_2999_(bw).jpg quite similar is very good for me, and for good reasons. So it's a special failure here, a bit strange but that I try to explain with my subjectivity. Nevertheless, I respect your work for all the other creations, and wish you more success in your next shots -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your really long answer. It helps to understand your review. I can follow some of your arguments, but there are different opinions. We have to learn every day and I'll do this experiment, reading books and talking with other photographers. So your answer will help. For example the exposure time is a feature. It's long enough to show smooth water and to preserve the structure. I can agree with your contra, the different opinion. Thank you. --XRay talk 14:39, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your crop suggestion. IMO the resolution would be too small. I think I'll respect the ideas with my next visit at the sea. --XRay talk 17:51, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 18:28, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2018 at 21:43:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the archaeological site of Los Paredones, Nazca District, Ica Region, Peru.
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:43, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 08:27:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pine tree over a hill in Salinas de Medinaceli, Soria, Spain.
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:53, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2018 at 15:58:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination Paris 16 (talk) 20:33, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:54, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2018 at 18:32:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Caïn venant de tuer son frère Abel by Henri Vidal, Tuilleries Garden
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:42, 7 January 2018 (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 7 Jan 2018 at 21:53:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

North window on rear of farmhouse at Kelvin A. Lewis farm in Creeds
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 22:57, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#United_States
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2018 at 21:04:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Icelandic sheep, Grábrók craters, Vesturland, Iceland.
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 11:35, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2018 at 06:48:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trzebieszowice, Church of St. Andrew
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 12:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Nine steps stair in Lysekil - bw.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2018 at 22:53:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nine steps stair in Lysekil
  • That's ok. You don't nominate something like that (or this) without being prepared for a lot of "Huh??? wtf?". ;) But trying out new things and maybe plant seeds to new ideas, is what I like to do from time to time. --cart-Talk 12:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak  Support I had placed the diagonal line at the bottom right to the upper left corner exactly in the corners.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:16, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 06:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Architectural elements
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2018 at 23:40:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Detail of head of a young female Gallotia galloti palmae in La Palma, Canary Islands.
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: of the technical issues outlined by the reviewers.--Peulle (talk) 14:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 19:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2018 at 14:27:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Oppose It's a very nice ceiling, but I personally cannot let the underexposure pass (and this is no artistic choice). Picture with that many whites don't show histograms with a peak in the middle, and the fresco is really dark. - Benh (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Very weak oppose due to the blown areas on the chandeliers. If different exposures had been combined, this might not have happened. Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Daniel Case I don't think it is reasonable to expect point-sources of light to not be blown. This is a photo of the ceiling and artwork, not the chandeliers. Actually, the image was fairly well exposed for the chandeliers, but has become worse in the latest version with brightness increased -- quite a bit of detail in the glass has gone. -- Colin (talk) 08:58, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Colin: I perhaps should have added that the chandeliers looking all frosted, as if they had washed and left out to dry during the cold snap we are currently having in the Northeast/Midwest US, seemed to be a result of the selective brightening you uncovered. But the greater point to me—and I think to you as well—is that it was avoidable. Daniel Case (talk) 17:57, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum: This has been improved, but I'm still not quite at supporting. Daniel Case (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I see the point that Daniel Case is making, but for me the good qualities of the image outweigh that one minor issue. I especially like the composition. --Pine✉ 05:04, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment @Colin: @Daniel Case: @Benh: Here is in my opinion the most correct version of this photo. The yellow light is inside and the blue light outside. The fresco should not be brightened up as Colin has already mentioned because the viewer sees it like this in reality. I also reduced the highlights of the light bulbs a bit, although I don't find it too annoying.--Ermell (talk) 09:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • To me, you lost contrast and I think if the painting is there, it's because one should look at it. It's a bit sad if it's dark on the photo, and I didn't think the whole picture would be so hard to expose correctly. Anyways, I guess it's hard to satisfy everyone ;) - Benh (talk) 19:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 19:36, 8 January 2018 (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 12 Jan 2018 at 07:50:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Autumn in the Bruderwald in Bamberg
  • Ikan, we all have different ways of viewing and relating to pictures. I often use artsy-fartsy language with metaphors and parables, you like to mention how your father taught you how to look at art and Daniel likes songs and memes. We use whatever tools are available and comfortable when we try to express our emotional perception of photos. --cart-Talk 08:52, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: And to answer your question, no, a photo doesn't have to be great to be used in a meme. But I think it helps a lot. People are more likely to find a memetic use for a great photo than an ordinary one, I think, and this one looks exactly like the sort of of image religious people would find appealing as a backdrop for a Bible verse (probably because we all think "God's projections" when we see misty crepuscular rays, and start hearing some celestial choir going "aaaaaaahhhhh" when we see them). Daniel Case (talk) 16:07, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 15:11, 8 January 2018 (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 11 Jan 2018 at 06:09:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 15:08, 8 January 2018 (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 8 Jan 2018 at 17:04:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ypsilon bridge in pink
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 19:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2018 at 06:03:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 03:15, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2018 at 17:17:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2018 at 18:07:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rose, Sheila's Perfume
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Rosaceae
  •  Info created by T.Kiya - uploaded by Tm - nominated by me. -- Colin (talk) 18:07, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support There are other ways of photographing a flower than sticking it in the centre of the frame with leaves all around. And one doesn't have to have the flower sharp from front to back with fancy focus stacking. Here we have an good quality specimen flower with the focus on the centre of the petals. There's enough in focus to see the veins on the petals but enough sharpness variation that it looks 3D and gentle rather than the sort of technical computer-generated image one gets from focus stacking. This rose also has rather nice colour variation. Technically the red channel is blown (in the white areas, not the red/orange areas, and this issue is not uncommon in flower photos) but having fine colour detail over every part of the flower isn't the point of this photo. -- Colin (talk) 18:07, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Yup (although the crop might be tight) - Benh (talk) 19:12, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose While I see Colin's point and to some extent agree with it, this is going too far in the other direction, IMO. Almost nothing is sharp.--Peulle (talk) 19:22, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Peulle, I'll repeat the point I made at this nomination. This image here is an artistic presentation, while that photo was a specimen presentation. In the former, I think technical issues are less important and in the latter technical issues need to be close to perfect. Both need high quality specimens, unless "ugly" or "decay" is your subject. In the former, there needs to be something creative that appeals to the eye (such as tight crop, shallow focus, angle-of-view) while the latter is often photographically sterile and the only beauty comes from nature. -- Colin (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I don't have a problem understanding your point of view. I just don't agree with it.--Peulle (talk) 23:02, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:34, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2018 at 07:45:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

South African ostrich
 Comment In the corner was the darkest part and under processing (lighten up) the grain become more noticeable. But I decided not to blur.--Ввласенко (talk) 15:58, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose Well it's distracting. I'm sorry, but I have to consider the photo not outstanding because of that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:43, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment and  Question I listened to the remarks, reduced the graininess in the dark corner and uploaded a new version of the image to Wikimedia Commons. But how do I change the version on this page? Do I need to re-upload the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates? --Ввласенко (talk) 08:11, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
By uploading a new version of the image it automatically becomes the actual version, i.e. you don't need to change anything here. What you see is the most recent version you created. --AWeith (talk) 13:57, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! --Ввласенко (talk) 14:18, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:06, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Linnutee - Milky Way (9) copy.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2018 at 12:28:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Milky Way
I'm quit sure they are airplanes (especially as one of the air traffic corridors crosses that part of Western Estonia) and in my oppinion they add to the image and should not be removed. Kruusamägi (talk) 19:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think of that possibility. I'll have another look at the photo now that I know this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:25, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the location and the direction of the view the one in the right might be Kuressaare (biggest town in Saaremaa island; the nearbly small glows might be from villages in the southern coast of Saaremaa). This light in the left might be from a ferry. The glow above that might be from Ruhnu island. Kruusamägi (talk) 14:23, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 14:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2018 at 05:11:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bronx River waterfall
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 14:01, 9 January 2018 (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 17 Jan 2018 at 16:49:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Buildings on the coast of Don Det island
Hmmm. Same spot but very different angles. Let me think on this some. PumpkinSky talk 04:08, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  I withdraw my nomination The sun was not "just in front", but rather on front-left (~40-50° anticlockwise). First version is darker that it should be, another too bright. Both due to postprocessing. I don't like the bushes, but I restore it in another version. But I have no time now. I will upload another version in the evening. Overall I do not like that picture that much and I hesitated to submit it as FPC. I withdraw -- Jakubhal 06:46, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I've made such mistake. Mostly because I focused too much on the look of the sky. The original was a little brighter and current version is close to the original. -- Jakubhal 18:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jakubhal 18:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2018 at 10:37:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rakaposhi peak of Pakistan
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: this photo is well below the required minimum size of 2 megapixels. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:34, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
  •  Comment Hi new user! The above comment means that if you upload the original hi-rez version of the photo on the files page (look near the bottom of the page where it says "Upload a new version of this file") we can go ahead with this nomination. It would also help if you added the EXIF for the photo. --cart-Talk 11:40, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 10:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 15:04:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The three iconic churches in Mahone Bay,Nova Scotia at sunset.
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: of the overprocessing noted Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Daniel Case (talk) 16:58, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 10:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2018 at 05:08:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Children playing at sunset on a Mekong bank in Si Phan Don, Laos

Weak  Support. Beautiful scene. could have been sharper. and less noise.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 10:23, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Laos
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2018 at 12:57:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

When several white-tailed eagles use to go hunting on the same clearing it often comes to some wild-looking tussle. Usually they attack each other with their talons rather than the beaks leading to a very short but intense dispute. However, sometimes things may become worse with loads of feathers flying.
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2018 at 20:59:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2018 at 22:13:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jefferson Memorial
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:09, 11 January 2018 (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 10 Jan 2018 at 18:46:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Larus michahellis
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:07, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 00:08:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abandoned farmhouse in Creeds, Virginia
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 10:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#United_States
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2018 at 09:20:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Despite all warnings on fine particulate matter it is still use in Germany to celebrate the onset of the new year with fireworks on New Year's Eve, even in villages as small as the Swabian village Eberhardzell.
  • I'm leaving a better "vote" on the alt to favor it. "No vote = Neutral" and "Neutral > oppose" therefore "No vote > oppose". Not supporting it for the reasons I already mentioned though. - Benh (talk) 20:04, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alt

[edit]

Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Germany
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 05:38:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Submerged Albizia Saman (rain tree) in the Mekong, near the island of Don Loppadi, Laos, during the dry season (when the river is low), in the afternoon at 4:00 pm
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:42, 11 January 2018 (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 11 Jan 2018 at 09:57:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Paddyfield pipit (Anthus rufulus rufulus)
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:44, 11 January 2018 (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 20 Jan 2018 at 11:58:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leyland Cypress
  •  I withdraw my nomination Clearly not making it. 21:36, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:38, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:20170624 Schneeberglandrallye DSC 7444.jpg, kept

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2018 at 15:31:16
Schneeberglandrallye 2017

  • I don't think a person can do that unilaterally, even if it's their own picture. And how do we know that Granada's account hasn't been somehow hacked or misused for a prank while unprotected? This is very strange behavior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:08, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment That was me in person, my account is not compromised at all. Not wanting to see this image anymore on pages together with other featured sports pictures is the consequence of the frustration gained by being unable to take good pictures under not perfect conditions. --Granada (talk) 09:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - I'm sorry about your frustration, but don't take it out on a photo that we voted to feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment All good photographers need a lot of luck in their tool bag, it is part of the trade. If all of us nominating photos here removed photos every time we got frustrated over not getting a good shot, there would be very, very few photos in the FP category. . --cart-Talk 11:03, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
+1 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:27, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
+1 You took an awesome picture, that's all that matters. Be proud of it, it deserves the "star"! --El Grafo (talk) 12:23, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 1 delist, 9 keep, 0 neutral => /not delisted. PumpkinSky talk 11:44, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2018 at 12:57:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Male adonis blue butterfly (Polyommatus bellargus)
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:14, 12 January 2018 (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 16 Jan 2018 at 09:15:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grey clouds over the luminous paddy fields of Don Det
✓ Done CAs corrected ̟and birds deleted. I keep the actual format for now, above all because I like the traditional ratio of 3/2 in photo, but your idea is interesting. Thanks ǃ -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:43, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - I like this almost-sun shower - the light on the paddy and the dark clouds in the sky. And based on my experience in Malaysia, when the sky looks like this, you'd better run inside before the rains come! Maybe it's not like that in Laos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:53, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • A crop from this photo looks great (in small size), then I think you're right concerning the focal length. But this will be for the next shots, maybe, with another lens and captor. Thank you, Benh ǃ -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 15:35, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Laos
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2018 at 09:37:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Road bridge of the „Loiblpass Strasse B91“ across the Ferlach reservoir of the river Drava in Unterschlossberg (submontane the castle Hollenburg), municipality Köttmannsdorf, district Klagenfurt Land, Carinthia, Austria, EU
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2018 at 10:33:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two French bulldogs swimming in life jackets
  • This breed needs to have it because of their constitution. They really like being in the water and cooling off on hot days, so owners have to make sure they don't drown accidentally. In Sweden, most boat owners also put life jackets on their dogs because it is easier to hoist them onboard again if the dog decides to jump in the water for a swim. --cart-Talk 11:11, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • That little bay is very popular with dog owners since it is wide, shallow and relatively sheltered. If you are there with a camera at almost any time of the day you are sure to get happy dog photos. The brown dog was an enthusiastic swimmer and would probably have ended up on the other side of the fjord if it hadn't been on a leash. The black one just stayed close to the larger one. --cart-Talk 22:55, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:21, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)

File:Young Girl in Plaza - Guanajuato - Mexico (38435617064).jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2018 at 05:58:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Girl in Guanajuato
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2018 at 17:25:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Italy
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2018 at 21:31:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roermond, Natalinitower and cathedrale
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2018 at 15:06:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fortified parish church Saint James the Greater and former rectory in Tiffen, Steindorf, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:23, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Münster, Torminbrücke -- 2018 -- 0446.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2018 at 06:42:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tormin bridge in Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Danke. Endlich Vollformat. Ich bin noch in der Kennenlernphase - und trotzdem muss die Kamera in Kürze schon zum Service. Danach dürfte es dann richtig losgehen. :-) --XRay talk 08:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2018 at 23:08:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Decrepit mailbox at abandoned farmhouse
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 12:13, 13 January 2018 (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 22 Jan 2018 at 08:32:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Parish church Saint John the Baptist, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 14:49, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2018 at 11:55:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White Pine in blizzard
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 15:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2018 at 09:52:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the Tara Cathedrals (left) and the the Tara salt flat in the Atacama Desert, northern Chile.
File:Piedras Rojas, salar de Aguas Calientes, Chile, 2016-02-08, DD 69.JPG
File:Valle Arcoiris, Río Grande, Chile, 2016-02-05, DD 16-18 PAN.JPG
File:Catedrales de Tara, Chile, 2016-02-07, DD 57-60 PAN.JPG
File:Laguna Cañapa, Bolivia, 2016-02-03, DD 70-74 PAN.JPG
File:Laguna Colorada, Bolivia, 2016-02-02, DD 71-73 PAN.JPG
Poco2 15:43, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:39, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Kuldnokk - Common Starling - Sturnus Vulgaris.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2018 at 22:03:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Common starling
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Niidurüdi - Calidris alpina schinzii.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2018 at 22:03:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Calidris alpina schinzii
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2018 at 21:16:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fliesensaal im Schloß Caputh
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 03:31, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, Wildpark -- 2018 -- 0388.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2018 at 06:38:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Game reserve in Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:39, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aftermath of January 2018 North American blizzard 16.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2018 at 15:11:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fallen log in blizzard
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2018 at 11:47:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View to Bzerpy cornice and Pseashkho pass from peak Tabunnaya. The territory of Caucasian Biosphere Reserve.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 13:52, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2018 at 16:56:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2018 at 19:18:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Snow and Ice coating on Vihorlat in November
That's definitely a better one. PumpkinSky talk 04:00, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
+1 Daniel Case (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 04:43:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oak tree at the gazebo of the peninsula, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 11:46, 15 January 2018 (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 15 Jan 2018 at 03:11:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Woman of Bolivarian Armed Forces in a presidential meeting
@Colin: , what do you think that should be changed?. I could add references from ONU, OEA or Admitiría sites to support the description, it was done using Google translator and maybe I'm putting something wrong in double seance that I can't see. Thanks --The Photographer 17:30, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The description should stick to what is in the photo. So describe neutrally who this person is, and their role there, and what the event is. The commentary about the country in general, or how the government uses meetings for propaganda, are not aspects of the photo, but just your own editorial, so can't be included on Commons. The symbolism of the red chairs might be relevant if you are quite sure they chose red chairs because of the socialist colour rather than just because they happened to have red chairs. I don't really understand "the red platform was armed in front of the Chiquinquirá Basilica". Commons is not Wikipedia, so even if you have sources, we really need to just stick to describing the picture. -- Colin (talk) 17:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the Spanish, a more correct translation would be "the red platform beleaguered the front of the Chiquinquirá Basilica", but such language is not neutral so please change that too. --cart-Talk 18:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I have reverted comments about crisis in Venezuela and I would also like to apologize, recently some close relatives have died as a result of the crisis in Venezuela and it is difficult for me to edit without thinking about it, I am not trying to justify myself --The Photographer 18:43, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. I understand why this must be hard for you and this is one of the reasons, on Wikipedia, they don't want you to write articles about subjects close you. As a photographer you don't have that luxury but you have to try to stay cool. The important thing is to get the photo out there. Now we can get on with the voting.--cart-Talk 18:50, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 11:42, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Galtür - Tschafein 01.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 05:43:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bus stop and Paznaun valley road at Tschafein, hamlet of Galtür, Paznaun, Tyrol, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 13:37, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2018 at 05:37:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:35, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#European larch (Larix decidua)
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 11:45:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /cart-Talk 13:36, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2018 at 07:59:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view on the western part of the Seiser Alm
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:39, 15 January 2018 (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 19 Jan 2018 at 11:29:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wooden fence on a Mekong bank, around a small cultivated island
The woman is unraveling a tuft of thread and the man is spading. Now specified in the description -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't notice the cat before. Nice touch! PumpkinSky talk 03:42, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, thanks ǃ -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:33, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No crocs nor sharks :-) It's a protection to prevent intruders from cultivating the same land. This small area certainly doesn't belong to anyone officially, or the official owner just doesn't care. Since this tiny island is totally submerged during the monsoon, the first locals who decide to settle there after the recession of the Mekong need to give a clear signal to the neighborhood that the domain is not available anymore -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:40, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Laos

File:Bilbao - Parque Etxebarria - Noria BT 01.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2018 at 19:48:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Detail of the Ferris wheel in the Etxebarria Park. Bilbao, Biscay, Basque Country, Spain
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:56, 15 January 2018 (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 15 Jan 2018 at 17:36:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view over the Rhine Gore from the lookout-tower Siebenburgenblick
✓ Done It´s Greywacke --Milseburg (talk) 13:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:58, 15 January 2018 (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 15 Jan 2018 at 20:31:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Peggys Cove Lighthouse, NS
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:57, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2018 at 08:30:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Villa Wörth on Johannaweg #5, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 11:43, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2018 at 20:50:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Evergreen oak (Quercus ilex), Piedra del Tormo, Fombuena, Province of Zaragoza, Spain.


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:42, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2018 at 14:43:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Strullendorf hydropower plant on the upstream side
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 03:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2018 at 07:13:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Predil with Cinque Punte in the background, Tarvisio, Italy
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 03:09, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2018 at 11:38:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cable reels on freight car in Bamberg cargo railway station.
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:41, 16 January 2018 (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 16 Jan 2018 at 21:44:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Christmas lights in Dyker Heights, Brooklyn
  • @Daniel Case: I opened discussions in several fora about this and haven't seen much of an argument that the lighting arrangements themselves are copyrightable. As someone else put it, they are typically just following the form of the structures that are already there. Toys, characters, sculptures, etc. sure, but they aren't here. Aside from that, if it's an FoP issue, it should be deleted, and if it's deleted the FPC fails regardless of supports/opposes. On the other hand, opposes here don't actually do anything to resolve the FoP matter. Or am I misunderstanding your intention? — Rhododendrites talk |  04:44, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites: I saw one of your discussions. "[J]ust following the form of the structures that are already there" is not by itself enough, IMO, to keep a Christmas lighting display under the threshoold of originality for purposes of U.S. copyright law. Someone putting up those lights still has choices as to what color to use, what type of lights, and how to space them. I consider those creative choices analogous to the ones that sculptors are presumed to have made regarding how their work will look from certain angles, in certain light, and in context to their surroundings that render all photographs of those sculptures derivative works, at least in the U.S.

Technically, yes, a DR would be the better way to deal with this, but when I do so I would like to include all the relevant images, and there are a lot of them. For now it's just easier to bring this up everytime someone nominates an image of Christmas lighting or someone in costume as a copyrighted character. Daniel Case (talk) 05:55, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Basile Morin: Thanks. To be clear, though, my response to Daniel's vote above is less about arguing whether or not there is an FoP problem here, and more that I would like to see Daniel support or oppose based on the merits of the photo, and to use proper channels to deal with a FoP issue (even leaving a comment here about a DR, if it comes to that). I don't like the idea of saying a whole category of images cannot go through FPC because someday there could be a DR and maybe the community will support deleting it. — Rhododendrites talk |  14:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Eiffel was a special 100th anniversary display, undoubtedly professionally done. Can anyone show us one single documented case of a Christmas display in America actually being copyrighted? PumpkinSky talk 19:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Basile Morin That's in France. I was asking about America, where this FPC was taken. PumpkinSky talk 12:00, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:29, 17 January 2018 (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 17 Jan 2018 at 01:40:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Quebec city, Canada
I have the same impression like you but it's not a striched image. I will upload the RAW file Daniel Case will find the raw file in the file description :P. --The Photographer 15:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 04:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2018 at 09:36:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

High altar (Altar of the Holy Helpers) at the parish church Freistadt, Upper Austria. Anonymous master of the Danube school (Lienhard Krapfenbacher?), around 1520.
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 11:51, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Austria
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2018 at 21:46:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden Euonymus after blizzard
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 10:08, 17 January 2018 (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 17 Jan 2018 at 10:32:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Riocreuxia torulosa
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 11:52, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2018 at 15:30:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Adult male sable antelope (Hippotragus niger)
 Support Dear Charles it is absolutely possible and please, take a look to the note "black shadow", It's a total black shadow that loss completely details aforementioned by dear King and you could up the shadows in lightroom to fix it, however, do it selective and careful because the result could be unnatural. Also you could simply buy a cheap anti hars contrast lens. A hug --The Photographer 01:07, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't know the difference and looked at w:Antler. "Antlers are extensions of an animal's skull found in members of the deer family. They are true bone and are a single structure.[...]In contrast, horns, found on pronghorn, sheep, goats, bison, cattle, and many other bovine, are two-part structures. An interior of bone (also an extension of the skull) is covered by an exterior sheath grown by specialized hair follicles, the same material as human fingernails and toenails." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 10:07, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2018 at 13:34:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Emerald Tree snake or Corallus Caninus in the Baltimore National Aquarium

 I withdraw my nomination --Price Zero|talk 04:30, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 19:17, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bergtocht van Sarner Alp (1853 meter) via Präzer Höhi (2119 meter) naar Tguma (2163 meter) 002.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2018 at 18:59:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 19:20, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2018 at 08:02:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 14:58, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Adolph Tidemand & Hans Gude - Bridal Procession on the Hardangerfjord - Google Art Project.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2018 at 20:14:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bridal journey in Hardanger
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 20:35, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media#Landscape
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2018 at 14:54:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Long stack of pink white and blue silage bales
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •  Info In a way this nom is related to the discussion at a delist request a bit further down the page. After the first failed nom of these bales, I took some comments made by Poco and Martin to heart and decided to re-shoot. I waited for the perfect day with lots of sun, right time of day (angle of light), no wind, tripod, best camera, everything for making perfect photos. Right. Still Mother Nature had a surprise waiting for me when I got back home and looked at the photos... The "Poco version" was shot across a field and got the most of it (pixel peeping required). This is the "Martin version", shot at shorter distance so not affected. :-) All by me, -- cart-Talk 14:54, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- cart-Talk 14:54, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Darn, Mother Nature can be a mean old *bleep* sometimes. I like the "Poco version" a lot, but yeah, the more hot air you get between you and the subject, the more pronounced the heat haze :-/ Anyway, this one's good in its own right, smells like summer for me. --El Grafo (talk) 15:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I'm talking about the other photo that cart linked above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:38, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Enthusiastic support as I had liked the first nomination. This one really works ... perhaps we could tell people that it's a giant marshmallow farm? Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose It is a good quality image, but I do struggle to find any wow. Maybe related to the thing, that my father is also a farmer or to the thing, that I'd like to see more space around all of this (foreground is ok but the upper part - meh). Kruusamägi (talk) 21:29, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  weak support I kind of wish we had the light from this photo in the other composition. :) Something about the crop on the right is unsettling, like I wish that either the rear bales were fully in frame or even more cut off. Alternatively, is this perspective corrected? It seems like the left side should be moving back towards the back of the shot a bit more, rather than the tops and bottoms having roughly straight lines across the frame. Regardless, it's an interesting, visually pleasing subject, and otherwise technically nicely done. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  23:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Rhododendrites: Well, you saw what happened to the light at the other photo, so a no-go, sorry. (There is this too, but it also suffers from heat haze and so far I've not heard anyone say that the haze is a cool feature.) :) Both sides are a bit cropped since there was so much junk on the farm around the bales and such things had been commented on in the previous nom. With this crop, a small perspective correction was made since it fitted better with the framing. I can of course provide the whole original photo if need be. --cart-Talk 23:45, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 20:36, 17 January 2018 (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 21 Jan 2018 at 13:29:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

male common tiger butterfly (Danaus genutia genutia)
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 21:27, 17 January 2018 (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 17 Jan 2018 at 21:36:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

* Support HalfGig talk 21:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 12:42, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2018 at 14:10:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eutropis macularia (bronze grass skink) eating a frog
I think the snake is taking care of the crop just fine ... . Daniel Case (talk) 21:02, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
One of those hand-in-mouth moments we all dread. Charles (talk) 09:59, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done New upload with changed crop, thanks Charles for the suggestion, though it's different from your note, that I find too extreme. I want to reveal the shapes of the two animals, and cutting that much would hide the bodies, that I find interesting here. Concerning the frog, unfortunately I was unable to identify the species. Any clue welcome ! -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:57, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
New crop is good. Charles (talk) 09:58, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 21:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Scincidae_(Skinks)

File:Janaki Temple--IMG 7555-Pano.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2018 at 09:04:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The temple is popularly known as the Nau Lakha Mandir (meaning Nine Lakhs). The cost for the construction of the temple was about the same amount of money: Rupees Nine Lakhs or Nine Hundred Thousands and hence the name. Queen Vrisha Bhanu – of Tikamgarh, India built the temple in 1910 AD. In 1657, a golden statue of the Goddess Sita was found at the very spot, and Sita is said to have lived there.
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 13:13, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2018 at 06:47:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Evolution of a tornado
  • Unwarned customers will pay 49,99 $ for the wage and material on the website, while they will only pay for the material when informed that the licence is free. This relative wage is lol for me -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - I judge it as wanting formally, to my eyes. However, it's certainly interesting. I'm going to cross out my oppose vote because of that, but not because of your point about techniques: Each photo has to stand on its own as a work of art, information or both, and I think it's also fair to judge whether a particular method is more successful in one situation, rather than another. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment This is a completely fake scenery, that gives the illusion of a tornadoe with 7 centers. We can't devine it's a photomontage without reading the description, contrary to a traditional motion picture where the subjects are usually well delimited and can be isolated on the surface. Then a valid reason to oppose this FPC is simply this scenery doesn't exist, and is certainly impossible. Although it gives the false impression of an incredible phenomena, completely transcendent. How was the sky really, now we know there was 8 pictures inside ? Amazing what we can do on Photoshop. So can we compose a completely unreal landscape, with a bit of blue sky there, some shadows here, a big cloud in the center, and then allege the creation is natural ? Sorry an artificial landscape doesn't match for me with the word of natural. That's my main reason to oppose and even if not share by everyone, I hope this idea is acceptable here -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:16, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • You do comment in bad faith. Not all photos needs to be realistic, and here the photographer doesn't try to deceive anyone (or, unintentionally, only the ones who don't read captions and are allergic to novelty or different approaches) - Benh (talk) 21:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I agree with both Colin and Basile and I end up at the side of 'oppose'. Yes, it's a spectacular photo and the technique is well-established and all but I think it goes a bit too far in merging these photos. If only some element in the pic made it very clear (without reading the description) that it was made up from separate images, it would be fine. It would have been easy to keep say the ground from each individual photo, the resulting photo would have had sharp lines at the bottom separating the shots. That would give you a hint of what's going on, but here every effort has been made to blend these pics as seamlessly as possible and the photo can be misinterpreted. In the examples given above, the whisky shot (pardon the pun) is not a photo-merge as stated on the file's page (trick not merge, there is a difference), we are pretty sure we only have one sun and one moon here on Earth and it is clear to most people that the jump from the cliff is not made by a string of cloned women. --cart-Talk 10:34, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm. The image is titled "Evolution of a Tornado", and I'd expect any usage of it to be similarly captioned. I didn't need to be a meteorologist to work out this was one tornado, photographed multiple times. Is it a requirement to know exactly what you are seeing without a caption? Would you know what this photo is without some help? What about this photo which most certainly "doesn't exist, and is certainly impossible". Do some viewers might think this is a clever group of seven athletes? I think the allegation that the photographer "allege[s] the creation is natural" is dishonest and unfair, Basile, as is the claim it is "completely fake". A complete fake would be where someone replaces the sky in a photo, or superimposes a big moon from another shot. This is no more fake that long exposure photography or flash photography have the ability to create images our eyes would never see. All photography plays with time, shortening it, lengthening it, or slicing it up. The actual scene here, photographed 8 times, is real, and combined into one image. "Natural" would deny any form of photography or manipulation of light that wasn't available to the human eye unaided. Natural is this and unnatural is this. Natural would disallow star trails and most of our deep space images. -- Colin (talk) 12:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Impressive image. The fact the the image is not "real" and have been processed does not change this. I assume almost all FP's are processed. The fact that the image does not contain a disclaimer or explanation does not exclude the image from being FP'ed. --Pugilist (talk) 13:03, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Colin convinced me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:47, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion
  •  Question As this picture is computer-generated, why not nominating it in this particular section Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Computer-generated ? Same as this File:Photomontage_(Forggensee_Panorama)_-2.jpg was naturaly not added in the FP category Objects#boats. There are 7 tornadoes shown here, and the composition is based on 8 photos. How was the last one used for ? Strange blue sky, over something heavy, which may come from a completely different picture, just fanciful, and pasted over to create an attractive visual effect. But we will probably never know, and may not learn so much about the topic as long as what we see is digitally-manipulated with mysterious original photos. Description says "This prolific supercell went on to produce at least 12 tornadoes and at times had two and even three tornadoes on the ground at once". Seems that the montage was made to give the illusion of seven tordadoes on the ground at once. Making like a fake, since it's said three is possible. Who is not an expert and has never seen a tordano in his garden can very well misinterprete the image, as long as it's not sorted among the other computer-generated works -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:09, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a photo montage like the example you give. (Btw, one can actually generate a multi-exposure image with some Nikon cameras and in the film days it was done by exposing the film more than once). Many of the images at FP are "computer-generated" from multiple photos, including many of mine. As for your comment that the blue sky "may come from a completely different picture" -- you are now actively accusing the photographer of dishonesty. Please stop. -- Colin (talk) 16:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Not your first unpleasant comment at my destination, gentleman Colin. See also on this discussion. Then please keep in mind two things ː 1) English is not my mother tongue and I make an extra effort to communicate with everyone here, 2) All your crits come nearly always from your own contradictions. Example on this thread when you start saying my claim for fake is dishonest and unfair, nice, nice. Or three days ago, when you had "better things to do on a Friday evening than arguing about elementary portraiture on the internet", wow, so respectuous, this, sir, sure ǃ I applaud with two hands and take the example right now, perfect teacher ː-) Then please be coherent and polite, sir. My question is legitimate, and as far this picture is a photo-montage, we can suppose anything about the provemance of the 8 images for 7 tornadoes. As I wrote ː "we will probably never know" (and that's certainly truer than the idea that everyone is fair and measured with their manipulations), this means we have no clue to know, and I'm not accusing anyone of dishonesty, just speculating and guessing, as anyone is free to do, and contrary to you, clearly, but here by quote. Thus, please give an end to your innuendo. That's a strange picture that doesn't look like real. It's more "graphic design and photomontage" than "photography", sorry. If we don't agree, that's no problem for me, but that's my feeling, and this feeling is valid. As well my question above is valid too, and my oppose vote valid also. You shows strange manners to disqualify people as soon as they simply give their opinions, sir. I don't know the user who uploaded that file, but what I can see on his profile is that person made only a single edit here, only one upload and nothing more. Image used for a commercial site ː self promotion ? Image rights free here and sold away ː logics ? Excuse, excuse, oh, one more question, one more doubt, and I had to stop, oops -- Basile Morin (talk) 18:12, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Basile, rather than accept that both the title and description explain the photographic effect here, you accuse the photographer of fakery and claim he is alleging this is a natural scene. You suggest the blue sky may have come from another photo. Your speculation, as you call it, is in bad faith. Your whole theme is to discredit this image, and the photographer behind it. I don't find that acceptable. Weingart appears to be open about which of his images are composites and even gives tutorials on how to create some effects. The result is no more "fake" than my own File:Big Ben at sunset - 2014-10-27 17-30.jpg which does not really have lines of colour along Westminster bridge. That's a composite of five 13 second exposures, each of which contains an image that the human eye could not perceive.
  • Now you accuse the photographer of "self promotion" yet the file description page contains no links to their commercial web page nor any mention that the photographer is professional. The image was actually uploaded as part of the "Wiki Science Competition 2017 in the United States". Yes, the problem here, Basile, is you "don't know the photographer" and on the internet that makes you brave enough to insult and discredit him and his work. -- Colin (talk) 22:12, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Basile, if you don't like the image, that's fine, but why on earth are you making this about the photographer, including making many bizarre and incorrect assumptions? The uploader is a photographer who indeed sells his work. There is only one upload because he decide to donate this photo specifically for the Wiki Loves Science initiative. He didn't even include a link to his website, nevermind try to promote his sales. It is a good thing when someone decides the share their photos with Commons, and we should be reinforcing it, not assuming the worst. Again, I have no problem with your objection to featuring the photo, but why not let it just be about the photo? (For the record, I do not know the uploader either. I came across the image because I'm involved with Wiki Loves Science as a volunteer). — Rhododendrites talk |  23:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't like the picture, but I respect the artist. I understand the purpose, just it doesn't work for me, as Ikan, Cart and Daniel Case explained more diplomatically. It's a good computer-generated work, IMO, and the illusion of a 7 tordanoes hurrican is excellent. Like a good fake, really well done, that's my impression. Congrats for the manipulation, the artist is skilled and I respect the work for its quality on the technical aspect. So why I don't like the picture ? No wow, very artificial, too complicated, and misleading appearance. My apologies for my speculations concerning the scope, they were perhaps wrong, but they could have been right, since they were just speculations. A question is not a charge, that's just a question which needs answers. Same when I ask "What is still natural in this imaginary scenary ?", I'm not saying the artist is a crook, I'm just guessing it's very far from something natural. That's all the difference -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have not shown any respect for this artist. Read Just asking questions. Negative speculation in bad faith is just a rhetorical device to damage. Accusing the guy of self promotion, even when several editors point out that you couldn't be more wrong, is not made acceptable by sticking a "?" on the end of the sentence. -- Colin (talk) 08:40, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please vote only on the merits of the photo. Votes should not be used as a way of "getting back" at users or something like that. If you have a problem with someone, please take it to COM:AN where such issues are handled. --cart-Talk 23:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • COM:AN is for situations where administrative action (e.g. a block) is required. This is just someone insulting a photographer in order to justify their oppose vote. Many of the admin curators on this site don't think highly of photographers either, so going there would be about as helpful as asking Trump to help settle the gender pay dispute at the BBC. -- Colin (talk) 08:40, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Per Colin. --Harlock81 (talk) 00:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Llez (talk) 11:32, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment By a strange coincidence, Jason Weingart has 24 storm photos published in today's Guardian newspaper. The image here was donated to Commons as part of the "Wiki Science Competition 2017 in the United States". -- Colin (talk) 12:10, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  SupportThis is my image. The reason I didn't simply run 8 images across with no blending is because it's been done, countless times. I try to be different when I can, which is tough anymore because of the amount of work out there. The reason 8 images were used for 7 stages of the tornado is because I wanted to include the updraft (the main part of the storm) which had become obscured by low level clouds by the time tornadogenesis started occurring. Certainly wasn't trying to be deceptive. I think the title "Evolution of a Tornado" is description enough. I also have the timelapse the image came from posted on all of my outlets, not hard to find with some minor searching. Beyond actually putting all of the stages together to one image, what you see is pretty true to life, even that blue sky that hung around for a bit. The entire reason I gave away my rights was I thought it would be cool to compete in a science-centered photo contest. I have added a note to my site saying the image is available for free through Wikimedia Commons. Thank you all for the kind words and the nomination. I am honored. No matter what your feelings are about the image or me, it got folks talking and that is what good art does. I take that as a huge compliment. JasonWeingart (talk) 05:18, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Jason, welcome here ǃ Very nice to meet you on Commons, and your explanations are so instructive. Also that video showing where the images come from (between 0:43 and 1:16 as it seems) helps a lot to understand how the whole was mixed together. Maybe a link to this film would be great in the description. But you're definitely an excellent photographer and camera operator. So, first of all, don't be upset if what I'm saying is not to promote your composition here (which looks different from a traditional single shot), as you may have many other supporters in this area who may be so enthusiastic and think differently. Also, most of us are not only votants but also creative photographers who regularly struggle with strong oppositions for submitted works, see for example those interesting pictures somewhat exceptional but however not promoted Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Melon_leaping_on_Awaji_Island_(10504964235).jpg or Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Loojang_05.05.2017_-_Sunset_05.05.2017_copy.jpg Secondly, one of the main reasons I'm not fan of this present piece is that it doesn't ressemble to your other works (from your website). Nearly all of your other creations seem to come from one single shot, whereas this special one is a photoshop montage (technically good). Actually, that's the reason why I suggest above to sort it among the many other (excellent) computer-generated creations. You say you tried to invent something new by merging these pictures, because slicing the image has already been done countless times. This originality is definitely respectable and innovative. Though, is this attempt a success ? In my view, it's impossible to look at this montage without interpreting a supernatural supercomplex tornado. Even if I know it's an educative picture showing the evolution, I think it just feeds an unreal representation of something natural. And that's my main problem with this particular creation. Not sure I would have opposed one of your other "simple shot" beautiful photographs. On the video, it seems that the blue sky is far away from the dense part of the dark cloud. Also I tried to slice this picture in seven vertical frames, to observe the first slice, then it's hard to believe that tornado here on the left is located so close to the luminous area. Saying this just from the video I observed, so this is more a question to you than a statement. Is this first frame sliced on the left really realistic on a scientifical aspect ? But apart from the blue sky, which is another concern, this represention close to "true life" with 7 merged tornadoes on the same visual is still too far from a traditional "natural phenomena picture", usually shot in just one push of the shutter button. Playing with time is not playing with space, then the statement "yes all the featured pictures are digitally-manipulated" is inexact. There's a limit to such manipulations before considering the picture is similarly designed. That's mainly a photoshop creation with big parts assembled, combine and merged, so what you finally see is definitely not "true life". It's more an idea. Anyway, thanks Jason for taking some of your time to talk with us ! Hope to meet you more often here. See some of the great creations we already have on Commons:Featured_pictures/Natural_phenomena -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Basile, we get that you prefer a simple one-frame image, or a video. There are other forms of photography, which are perfectly respectable and reasonable ways of viewing the world. Good enough even to be entered to a science competition rather than a "Photoshop fakes" competition. Many photos of natural phenomena are the result of processing multiple shots, whether that is focus stacked macro, exposure blended starry sky + landscape, tone mapped sunsets, long exposure light painting, star trails, pretty much all astronomy photos, and on and on. The first time one sees a light painting photo, one may not appreciate that the image was never all there. So this presentation is novel to you and you find it illusory. We got that two days ago. Can we now move on? All photos play with time: it is the defining feature of a photograph vs any other form of visual art. -- Colin (talk) 09:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 13:12, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena

File:Buiobuione - India - Jaipur - Galtaji Temple - monkey.tif, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2018 at 16:30:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Macaca mulatta, India
It's a tiff file, hence the huge size. Resolution is only normal. The sharpness is poor as well as the graininess problem. Charles (talk) 12:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
6,000 × 4,000 is much better than the average resolution for a subject of this kind - and the absolute max res the 80D offers --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Lovely! I agree with Martin, quality looks fine. -- B2Belgium (talk) 09:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  reluctant oppose This is certainly not a bad picture, much better than anything I have ever been able to achieve in this direction. The noise is acceptable for me at sizes suitable for normal viewing, but its over-all quality is nothing to be excited about. The subject is cute, but it has tough competition in that department and, as already mentioned above, it doesn't really manage to stand out there. The composition is a bit too centred for my taste, a tighter crop on the left and more en:lead room on the right would be more pleasing imho. The dark eyes and lack of a en:Catch light make it appear a bit less … well … lively than other pictures we've seen here before. You could certainly argue that these are just minor details, but I think these details are what separates a very good from a oh my Bob, this is awesome picture. --El Grafo (talk) 16:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Thank you all for your opinions and dedicated time to view my picture - Buiobuione 14:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment but please sign it -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:39, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2018 at 21:57:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A shell of Fusiturris similis (Bivona Ant. in Bivona And., 1838)
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:46, 18 January 2018 (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 22 Jan 2018 at 19:12:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Circular paraboloid generated by '"`UNIQ--postMath-00000001-QINU`"'.
  • I don't find it odd at all that such mathematical objects are made for educational purposes. We 'apes' still learn things faster if we can combine theoretical knowledge with a tactile experience. --cart-Talk 15:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not the making of the object that's odd... it's that the fact that we try to photograph the said tactile object with an intense studio setup (rather than, say, generating a perfect rendering of it) that strikes me as being somewhat whimsical. dllu (t,c) 21:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:48, 18 January 2018 (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 21 Jan 2018 at 13:44:04 (UTC)

  • First bud
    First bud
  • Bud opening
    Bud opening
  • Just before blooming
    Just before blooming
  • The ditch was not uniform in color and I liked that the different color schemes matched the different plants, giving each photo a softer look than a very contrasting unform green or something like that. The focus is just on the plants and not on the background. These plants are really big so they are all focus stacked and the background was about a meter or so behind each plant, so not so "shallow" DoF. Just covering the middle plant required eight photos to get the entire plant sharp. The scale here is a bit different than 4 cm butterflies. :) Are you suggesting I should only nominate one of them and skip the set thing? --cart-Talk 14:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I only looked at the First bud which is not in focus, but the others are nice and sharp if over-exposed. I just don't think they work brilliantly as a set, perhaps the different sizes is a problem too. Charles (talk) 15:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • No problem, Ikan. :) These set noms are always a bit tricky to handle IMO. If you want to get hold of the nom page, you have to first click on 'edit' and after that just cancel your editing whitout doing any editing. That will set you on the set nom page. On that subject, I was looking for somewhere to add the category for this nom, couldn't find it though. AFAIK promoted set noms also show up in the 'normal' FP categories. --cart-Talk 15:29, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:45, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Apiaceae_(Carrot_family)
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2018 at 02:44:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 10:14, 19 January 2018 (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 28 Jan 2018 at 01:54:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dead banana plants in snow
As a general observation: I do think that for images that aren't of an obviously "wow" subject, the nominator really does have to explain in their nomination why they are going wow. Because if they can't explain it to us, why should we work at it? And when we have to work at it, we get the sort of bias where we assume there is greatness among our friends nominations and try to invent greatness in a photo that really isn't great. Why this is among the finest of all images on commons? Is just a snap of some dead banana plants, and not some photographic work of art. -- Colin (talk) 09:11, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment @Colin: Opposers really should be able to state the reasons for their oppositions without such condescension and arrogance but we all know you're fully incapable of that. PumpkinSky talk 12:04, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Pumpkin, friendly warning: the last person who couldn't handle his greatness being brought down to earth by an oppose or two at FPC without making personal attacks, was recently blocked indefinitely. I see some dead banana leaves and a JPG with the correct exposure and focus sharpness I'd expect from >£4000 worth of camera equipment. I don't see great art or great technique. Please tell us: what is "finest" about this. What should make us go "wow!". -- Colin (talk) 12:39, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Colin: Good one Colin, threaten me. Go right ahead. For the record, I don't mind the opposes one bit, it's the appalling way you treat people I won't put up with. You're the one making personal attacks. Why can't you just say something like "I see correct exposure and focus sharpness but I don't see great art or great technique." There's no need for hurling insults and condescension at people the way you do. You're the one who needs to come off his high and mighty greatness. PumpkinSky talk 13:05, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
            • Pumkpin, you have done nothing but throw insults at me, and now you terminate your nomination early. The image, the nomination text, the other reviews, the procedures here at FPC, the systemic bias as FPC... these things are all up for discussion and disagreement. There are some who think all self nominations are arrogant. There are some who think FPC is a gentleman's club where we mutually support each other's images for promotion. You still haven't explained why you think this is among the finest images on Commons, nor what makes you go wow when you see it. You think a red-link newbie could get away with nominating an ordinary static photo of a dead plant without being drowned in "no wow" oppose votes? -- Colin (talk) 14:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info The comment above is certainly scornful. "Point camera at dead leaves. Press shutter button." As if it was rubish. It's totally disrespectful. That's not food waste, that's not garbage. This is a natural object with tones, texture and temperature. The so-called "friendly warning" above is not friendly at all. Talking about blocking in the actual situation is even absurd. And if there were masters for nominations here, more skillful and more visionary than others, we wouldn't meet such lamentable fiascos like this one Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Rose,_Sheila's_Perfume,_バラ,_シーラズ_パヒューム,_(14525862372).jpg. Ridiculous -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Colin: All you've done is throw insults at me and many others. At that, I'm bowing out of this conversation because it will no doubt prove fruitless. PumpkinSky talk 14:37, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Guys, FPC is to choose images "highlighted as some of the finest on Commons". I don't sugar the pill but my complaint about the image is not "scornful", unlike Basile's "lamentable fiasco" language. There is no display of brilliance here from anyone other than some Nikon engineers. Absolutely no indication the photographer did any more than point their camera dead centre at the dead plant and press the shutter. This is the uncomfortable fact of this nomination and PumpkinSky has been asked to suggest otherwise and refused to do so. Basile: see this definition. Photographing a "natural object with tones, texture and temperature" does not guarantee one an FPC. Photographing something non-beautiful, whether a dead plant or food waste, and expecting "wow" is rather more challenging than photographing a pretty flower. There is no "composition" here other than "arrange viewfinder/zoom such that most of the subject is in the frame". Come on guys, show a bit more respect for FPC. Finest. Finest. Finest. The most juvenile thing one can do, when wanting to attack another reviewer, is to point at one of that's reviewer's nominations and insult it as being even worse. So well done Basile, for descending to that level. Good evening. -- Colin (talk) 16:19, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @PumpkinSky: I agree with you and appreciate the way you manage everything here . Now you withdrew already, but want to say I find similarities with this photograph and some of your successful Featured Pictures :
Keep on the good job ! -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 16:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2018 at 14:52:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kitchen garden on a Mekong bank

 I withdraw my nomination Per King of Hearts, and lack of supports -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:23, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2018 at 01:29:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 02:43, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2018 at 21:23:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wrecked car at Tuntorp, Brastad
  •  Comment Sorry I’ve been away for a while. I don’t think it will matter for this nom, but per Colin's request on another nom, I can at least explain why I took the step to nominate this. Mile’s suggestion with that angle is good but that angle would unfortunately have yielded a very busy background with a railway crossing, an ugly parking lot with cars and an industrial building. This angle gives a clean and calm background and the car's color matches the surroundings, which is pleasant. There is also a nice diagonal line across the photo: lamp – tree branches – hood of the car – shadows in the grass. I also like the juxtaposition of the 'give way' sign and the wreck since that sign is a sort of 'Hey watch out!' sign. Finally, I looked through the 'Damaged automobiles' and 'Crashed vehicles' categories and there is only a handful of photos depicting wrecks in snow, I thought that added a twist to it. So there is a little more thought to this nom than Dllu suggests, but wow is always a gut-feeling. I may not always start every nom with a rationell since it's interesting to see if the photo can stand on its own, but there is always a thought behind why I nominate pics here. --cart-Talk 14:47, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 11:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2018 at 14:05:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Painting by Martinus Rørbye
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:05, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media#Portrait

File:Münster, Westdeutsche Lotterie -- 2018 -- 0417.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2018 at 08:25:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Facade of an office building of the Westdeutsche Lotterie, Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:04, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Germany
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2018 at 12:58:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kačina castle, Czech Republic
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:06, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2018 at 08:25:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ely State Theater, 234 E Sheridan St, Ely, Minnesota, USA. Viewed from the north.
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:05, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#United States
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2018 at 00:11:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Seattle Great Wheel, Seattle, Washington, USA
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 11:20, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Seattle
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2018 at 15:42:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kifli made with spelt flour
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Food
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2018 at 03:25:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sand Hickory buds


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 11:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2018 at 22:09:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Little boy with deciduous teeth and stains of mud and marker on his forehead, laughing in the countryside of Don Det, Laos
  • This picture was shot in a public space. As far as I know, not consent is required for an action related to a picture of a person in a public space in Laos, like in China, see Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements. Only consent is necessary for a commercially use, and there is a Personality Rights template associated to this file, which may be helpful and clear enough as it is. Moreover, I always have the implicit consent of all the people taken in picture that I publish. I'm not a paparazzi. I respect all the people I shoot (even those who laugh and make me laugh because they laugh). This joyful smile was not extracted through money, threat, nor pressure. No, no, it really just comes from the heart. And IMHO parents should be more grateful than rancorous with such a valuable image of their child, all the more so as I nearly always make prints (professionaly made) offered to the family. But anyone here could process differently, I don't mind, that's not the matter. There are hundreds of FPs of people on Commons, see for example this File:Young_Ashaninka_girl_in_an_Apiwtxa_village,_Acre_state,_Brazil.jpg very close to my style, and I assume everybody here is acting like I act. Then, honestly, I don't really understand these insistent questions related to copyrighting aspects. Here this is the FP area, not the OTRS department. So the pictures should be judged for their technical and aesthetical characteristics only. Dealing with other concerns is just out of the subject, I think, and may negatively influence the present votes -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:28, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Basile We have internationally a wide range of attitudes towards photographing strangers, and particularly children. Street photography has a long tradition but this ranges from those who take candids by force, walking down the street snapping away, or those who ask for permission with a smile and a nod, or those who think it rude not to first develop a rapor with the subject before even considering taking a photo, to those who would not take any image without permission and consent in writing. In the UK, as a middle-aged man, if I tried to take a photo of a stranger's child, even in a public space where it is legal, I would be in quite serious risk of being physically attacked as some kind of paedophile and having the police called to arrest me. Common policy (COM:IDENT) is pretty much to be permissive about what is acceptable here, within the constraints of law. It is therefore not a guide to "finest" opinions about best practice wrt photographing people. There is a big difference between getting consent to take a photograph for personal use and having consent to publish it widely such as on Commons or Wikipedia. While your offer of a photo in exchange is a nice gesture, I suspect those involved did not know their image might end up in a Wikipedia article with thousands of hits per day. In practice, the "personality rights" that the Commons template mentions only really exist in the US, and there is no such protection in the UK for example, other than basic human right law. It can only be enforced by the subject, and I don't realistically think a boy from a village in Laos is in a position to sue any big corporation using this photo without permission. There is a gaping chasm between what is so awful that Commons agrees to delete it and what allows everyone to feel as warm as the sun in this photo. I think it is therefore fair for reviewers to raise questions about the provenance and ethics of an image, and to oppose if they wish even if no law has been broken or policy infringed. -- Colin (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes I think so. He was the youngest among 2 other boys (1), (2) and a girl (3), who seem to have had fun together with a blue marker and the fresh mud of the paddy fields. Though I was not there when this happened, and just found the result "creative". It inspires me the decorative marks some tribes enjoy to make on their face and parts of their body with natural products like colorful pigments -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination, per Daniel Case -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2018 at 11:54:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A picture of 1 Million colours
  •  Comment As for "none are fully satisfactory" -- satisfaction is subjective, but have you seen this? images with every colour. Many of the entries in the link have all 16,777,216 colours. As a bonus, all StackOverflow user contributions are licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 so feel free to copy your favourite one over to Commons. dllu (t,c) 02:26, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • dllu, thanks for the link. There are indeed many beautiful ways to present the colours, whether 32,767 or 16,777,216. By "satisfactory" I meant a definitive or standard representation that had high educational value. A rainbow can display the pure spectrum of colour, and we can show 256 shades of red, green or blue pure colours, but there isn't any standard way I know of to describe the mix in a 2D form. -- Colin (talk) 11:04, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 17:18, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2018 at 13:11:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the town of Dobrota, a location of about 8,000 inhabitants in the Bay of Kotor, Montenegro.
  • Don't know what you are talking about, but guess you refer to the low clouds. No. The light just renders uniform and dull on the subject itself. But anyways, we're mostly fighting about words. - Benh (talk) 04:52, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 17:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2018 at 05:40:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2018 at 03:38:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Villa Fichteneck in Maria Wörth, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:04, 22 January 2018 (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 26 Jan 2018 at 06:07:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Total solar eclipse of August 2017
There's a hint of of those flares/prominences in the picture I took; in some of the other ones from that sequence you can see a bit more. They were there (although of course you couldn't see them with the unaided eye). Daniel Case (talk) 15:37, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, you can clearly see the pink tint in the area of the flares in Daniel's photo. I think that settles that the flares were not colored in an artificial way. --cart-Talk 15:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2018 at 20:04:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 21:40, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, Wildpark -- 2018 -- 0380.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2018 at 17:45:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Game reserve in Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 21:41, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2018 at 18:41:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Granite stairs in Stångehuvud reserve
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 21:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Virginia Beach City Hall 2.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2018 at 03:22:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Virginia Beach City Hall
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 11:33, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2018 at 15:40:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Asian Pear in blizzard

* Support Per Johann. In addition, the main branches are on the rule of thirds line and very sharp. This almost looks like it was taken looking up to the sky but I'm pretty sure it was taken looking into the fallen snow. HalfGig talk 18:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 13:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2018 at 08:48:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Parish church Saint Mary Magdalene, Ruden, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:10, 23 January 2018 (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 27 Jan 2018 at 07:56:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Friedhofskapelle aus Herrenbreitungen im Freilandmuseum Kloster Veßra
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 13:11, 23 January 2018 (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 27 Jan 2018 at 20:18:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Les Aresquiers, Frontignan
No I have not, I have some variant compositions taken with the same lens but nothing significant. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:00, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 22:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/France
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2018 at 16:08:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 22:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2018 at 16:58:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hall of the German Parliament
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 22:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2018 at 00:47:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maroon Bells area of Colorado
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 07:38, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#United States of America
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2018 at 11:33:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Field Bindweed in Brodalen
  • Daniel Case & Basile Morin, Just for info: These flowers are very pale in color, so that part is accurate. The current FP is almost white and has not as much detail in the petal as this, please compare. It was a hand-held shot so no chance of focus stacking. I had to back away a couple of meters to get the DoF deep enough to cover the whole flower and maybe the bud. The side view if the third flower was just bonus, but I found it nice that there could at least show an outline of what the flowers looked like from the side. The mishmash collection of other plants is just how these flowers grow, climbing on other plants, so I think that is an appropriate depiction. The light is very bright, high summer, but that made it possible to see the fine silk sheen of the flower, something normally lost in other photos of these plants. I have washed away the CA in Lightroom, so the slight purple sheen is probably some other color thing. --cart-Talk 12:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @W.carter: , sorry for the late answer, for a mysterious reason I got only one of your 2 pings yesterday. So, I had a look on the other FP you point out and see big differences between both. Sure the quality is not the same and this very old FPC from 2007 was of quite low resolution compared to that new one. But the required standards were certainly not as high at this time, and I'm not sure the picture would got the same supports today. However, the lighting was good, and as indicated on the reviews Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Convolvulus_arvenvis_with_mites.jpg the mites on the photo give something special, rather original. For me, the main problem in this FPC really is the light. At noon, the pooring sun hits like a hammer and of course it's visible. Compare to this File:Convolvulus_arvensis_11.jpg for example. Or simply compare to your last FPC set, which was excellent Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Set/Development_of_hogweed_bud with 3 beautiful specimen harmoniously highlighted and all of them shot after 4pm. The problem is not that this picture was hand-held, but really that the light kills it. Maybe another RAW treatment with lower exposition could improve, but not sure. For this kind of subject, the lighting is very important. Flowers like insects are at their best appearance with a grazing light, early morning or late afternoon. The leaves with such radical contrasts are also not very delicate and attractive IMO. Thus, I agree concerning the sharpness and the fine details of the main flower, certainly valuable, but the big white in the eyes doesn't make the whole outstanding, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:17, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Basile, thanks you for taking the time to answer even though I had already pull the nom. I will see what tricks I can do with this and if oppinions can change then. If not, it's not the end of the world. :) I sometimes think we Northerners who live in darkness for such long time each year are a bit too fond of strong sunlight and see a wow in that itself. A bientôt! --cart-Talk 11:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 17:56, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2018 at 09:11:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tammerkoski at night
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 18:02, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2018 at 08:40:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brooklyn Bridge
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 17:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2018 at 08:23:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 17:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Machines
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2018 at 20:30:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cityscape of Seattle seen from after sunset from 701 on 5th Avenue.
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 23:40, 24 January 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 29 Jan 2018 at 03:05:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mekong beach in Si Phan Don
Certainly mine. Though my shoes here are hidden behind the stack of branches -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:50, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 09:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Laos
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2018 at 02:27:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Lōdal Evo T-28 waste collection truck operated by Recology in San Francisco.
  •  Comment I've uploaded it. Feel free to add it as an alternate to this nomination. Personally, I think there's nothing wrong with "antiseptic" images for a project that's about encyclopedic images. dllu (t,c) 06:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose I wish the FP project was about encyclopaedic images, but it isn't. I'm not in favour of artifical backgrounds for this sort of image. Charles (talk) 09:15, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment FP is not only about "high artistic merit", but also about "high illustrative merit". What this image may lack in artistic merit, I hope it makes up for it in illustrative merit. Besides, COM:SCOPE says that Wikimedia Commons is about educational images, "providing knowledge; instructional or informative". To me, it is much more clear and informative to see the garbage truck that has been separated from its cluttered background. I can see this type of image being useful in educational media such as children's books and textbooks. dllu (t,c) 22:19, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I'd put it like this: FP is (supposed to be) about images that make you go "wow!" in some kind of way. Where that "wow" comes from doesn't really matter, and there are many different ways of evoking it. It can come from the subject (like something very old or rare), technical execution (like an incredibly well done macro shot of a boring object), artistic merit or a combination of these factors. --El Grafo (talk) 09:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

[edit]

Recology Lodal Garbage Truck 14425 in San Francisco (unprocessed)

Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 09:43, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Trucks and buses
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2018 at 15:40:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-tailed eagle
  • Sorry, invalid vote. The rules are: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." So far you've only made 43 edits. Welcome back later when you have made more edits. :-) --cart-Talk 17:10, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:20, 25 January 2018 (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 29 Jan 2018 at 21:15:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Info It's basically a section of a plant, designed to be seen in microscopes, with coloured dyes designed to make the different tissues stand out more. Very instructive and typical of something we teachers use in class, as well as in publications.--Peulle (talk) 12:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites: I've added a bunch of image notes, linking the most important features to their articles on Wikipedia. --El Grafo (talk) 09:53, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Isn't this a section through a needle of the tree rather than through the stem, as suggested above? A scale is missing. Annotations would be welcome (they could be added to a derived version of the image). --Cayambe (talk) 15:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cayambe: I was looking for an explanation of which part of the plant we're looking at here and didn't find any in the description. After taking a closer look, I'm pretty sure that information was lost in translation and what we're looking at is indeed a cross-section of a needle (Russian хвоинки = needles). --El Grafo (talk) 09:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you El Grafo, for the explanation. You are right, it is a cross-section through a needle. --Cayambe (talk) 11:52, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 06:14, 26 January 2018 (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 26 Jan 2018 at 09:01:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pied bushchat (Saxicola caprata bicolor) female in Uttar Pradesh, India
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:14, 26 January 2018 (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 27 Jan 2018 at 06:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cremations of en:Pashupatinath Temple on the bank Bagmati River.
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2018 at 21:58:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southern plains grey langur (Semnopithecus dussumieri) female
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 09:28, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2018 at 06:23:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 04:15, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

[edit]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 04:15, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2018 at 17:02:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Final fly-around of the International Space Station by the Space Shuttle. Created by NASA
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:25, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Space exploration
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2018 at 14:27:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thirty-five rowers on a long racing pirogue in Laos
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Team_sports
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2018 at 16:57:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
*  Comment : Thank you for your comments and advice. Alternative version posted.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - Now that I've seen the color version, I prefer the black & white version, either this way or in cart's suggested edit. The color version is more ordinary-looking to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 12:33, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

[edit]

@U and PumpkinSky: , Benh, Basotxerri, Peulle, Alchemist-hp, Ikan Kekek, Johann Jaritz Alternative versie; File:Wijnjeterper Schar, Natura 2000-gebied provincie Friesland zw b.jpg placed.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment The human eye is capable of detecting a wider range of high-low lightings ("dynamic range") than the sensor of a camera. The other argument is that a B&W conversion is already a step off from reality and thus B&W permits by a somewhat exaggerate use of higher contrasts and selective highlighting and moving to shadows (including "dodge and burn") than a colour image. You may or may not agree but that's the essence of B&W. --Basotxerri (talk) 21:16, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - Really? Because b&w is a perfectly valid type of photography. If you don't like the photo, fine, but automatically opposing based on the lack of color is not reasonable, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:17, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 12:33, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Purple Orchid NBG.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2018 at 03:40:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Purple Orchid


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:35, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Xerophytes NBG.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2018 at 03:30:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Xerophytes and Spinning Fan
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:35, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2018 at 11:57:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Christmas table (part of Cuisine of Serbia)
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 12:47, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Food and drink
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2018 at 16:57:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fisht Olympic Stadium in Sochi
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: it is of too low technical quality to feature.--Peulle (talk) 22:47, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 20:51, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:2014 ICF Canoe Sprint World Championships - Krylatskoye Rowing Canal panorama (2014-08-08).jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2018 at 16:49:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

2014 ICF Canoe Sprint World Championships. Krylatskoye Rowing Canal on August 8, 2014 (during 2014 ICF Canoe Sprint World Championships)
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: of the above comments. --Peulle (talk) 22:48, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 20:52, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rifugio Friedrich August - Sleigh.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2018 at 21:26:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sleigh at the Rifugio Friedrich August, in the background the Duron Valley, Trentino, Italy.
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 22:55, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles

File:Ullibarrí-Gamboa - Punta de San Juan -BT- 01.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2018 at 21:19:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Punta de San Juan as seen from Ullíbarri-Gamboa. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 19:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2018 at 01:36:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yellow dragon fruit with spoon used to eat it
  •  New version uploaded - @King of Hearts: The lack of contrast in certain spots around the edges of the fruit bugged me, too, actually. I've gone ahead and made a minor adjustment to sharpen that edge/increase the contrast. Also made a teensy color temperature adjustment per Daniel Case. That being said, if the shadows are the deal-breaker, I don't expect this will change your mind. — Rhododendrites talk |  20:51, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Ermell: Fair enough, though to be clear, it's just a tripod next to a fruit sitting on a bare kitchen counter shot. I didn't set up any lighting. I suppose it's true that it would be better if it were a studio shot, with some control over the lighting/shadows... — Rhododendrites talk |  21:19, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rhod, just to clarify, any photography that is set up indoors under some sort of controlled circumstances, is usually called "a studio shot" regardless of the equipment used. This photo is called a studio shot even if it was done just by placing the camera on a tripod next to the work table in my kitchen with only the lamp over the sink as light. :) --cart-Talk 22:09, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 19:58, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2018 at 07:27:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fresco "Madonna with child, surrounded by music playing angels“, a monumental work by Anton Kolig, painted 1927-29 on the southern wall of the Roman Catholic parish church Saint Kanzian in Saak, Nötsch, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 16:24, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media#Religion
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2018 at 20:44:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old town hall in Bamberg
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:59, 30 January 2018 (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 29 Jan 2018 at 16:24:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Great Frigatebird at Fernando de Noronha (Brazil)
  • Sorry, invalid vote. The rules are: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." So far you've only made 43 edits. Welcome back later when you have made more edits. :-) --cart-Talk 17:09, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:54, 29 January 2018 (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 2 Feb 2018 at 20:13:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pteroglossus torquatus Costa Rica
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:52, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Order : Piciformes (Woodpeckers and relatives)
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2018 at 14:04:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Buddhist votive altar with the historical Buddha in his "celestial body" surrounded by monks and bodhisattva, and on the obverse with Maitreya
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:55, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Кордицепс серо-пепельный - Cordyceps entomorrhiza.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2018 at 21:09:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 21:53, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2018 at 22:51:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View upwards through the pillars of the Göltzschtal Bridge

"Symmetry is the aesthetics of the stupid" Ludwig Mies van der Rohe.--Ermell (talk) 20:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • <span style="{{Transform-rotate|90}}; margin:50px 0px">[[File:Göltzschtalbrücke blick nach oben 0582.jpg|300px]]</span>
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--cart-Talk 10:34, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2018 at 02:01:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: of all these oppose votes.--Peulle (talk) 18:42, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 01:15, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, St.-Viktor-Kirche, Innenansicht -- 2018 -- 0596-8.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2018 at 17:17:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kreuz im Chor der St.-Viktor-Kirche, Dülmen, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Deutschland
  • I checked several horizontal lines. Some looks like tilted CW, some tilted CCW, some are not tilted. Not easy for a historical building. May be the cross isn't centered, may be the position of the camera was shifted. I can't fix this for this photograph. --XRay talk 06:58, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:56, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2018 at 06:46:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the city of Puno next to the Lake Titicaca, in the Peruvian Andes, not far from Bolivia.
  •  Oppose Sorry I have to oppose for now. It´s very good but not perfect. The mentioned transition is too obvious for me. It doesn't matter anyway, except of delaying the promotion a few days. --Milseburg (talk) 21:07, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--PumpkinSky talk 11:36, 31 January 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 9 Feb 2018 at 02:42:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Birefringent ice
  • @Ikan Kekek: The only criterion I see is "Images (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons." So the 2mp rule simply doesn't apply to animations, videos, and SVGs, and there needs to be strong mitigating reasons otherwise (i.e. exceptions). — Rhododendrites talk |  05:38, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 18:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Feb 2018 at 09:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Comment I respect your opinion. But do not share your opinion. If you look closely at the picture, you can see that the birch branch has been broken off earlier (left end). That the branch has been there for a long time, you can see from the decayed leaf against the birch branch (bottom right). In my opinion everything is in harmony with the environment and nothing has been put in scene!--Famberhorst (talk) 16:15, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:28, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/January_2018&oldid=285016602"