Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/May 2019

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

File:Centaur mosaic - Google Art Project.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 14:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Centaur mosaic from the Villa Hadriana, Roman art

* Support —Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moving to  Oppose due to how dark it is--BoothSift 02:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

[edit]

Retouched: color balance, cropped

I agree--BoothSift 04:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ZoomViewer is not currently working here either. From the source and considering the resolution I suppose of course a professional quality, but what about the access to the file ? Impossible to display it larger than 4000 px width. What can we do ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:40, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fortunately, we can have files bigger than 100 MB. This bug is phab:T218089. Should we stop promoting images because MediaWiki software is broken? I don't think so... Yann (talk) 04:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • IMO, the point to such a huge resolution is not to see the whole file in a browser, but to be able to crop out some details. You can still see the original resolution in the set of tiles. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still doesn't work for me. The best thing is usually to "tile" the big image. The original is presented in four tiles, but they are of uneven size making two of them too large anyway. If this version (not the 50% jpeg) could be tiled into 6 or 8 tiles, I think anybody could view/download it and if necessary re-assemble the image in their computer. --Cart (talk) 11:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
80Mpixels Habitator terrae 🌍 18:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good. Now the zoom works with that version. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Habitator terrae 🌍 11:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Habitator terrae while I think the GAP original is a bit dark, you should not change the colour balance. You have no reference and can't just pick a grey tile and say "make that neutral grey". If the tiles have a warm hue then that may be quite natural: this isn't a computer image printed on Xerox copy paper. It is likely the GAP professionals had a colour checker card to ensure their equipment/process was calibrated. Also your file size seems a bit extreme at 592MB. Photoshop with maximum quality 12 gives 436MB but the original was only 207MB so there is little point in saving any higher quality than that. For example Photoshop level 10 is 198MB which is a considerable saving and likely to make the image more accessible. On my PC I have a version with a +1ev exposure increase, a slightly more generous crop (27993×18139), original colour balance (a little warmer) and an sRGB profile so folks all see the same colours. I can stick on Dropbox or upload here if there is interest. -- Colin (talk) 15:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Colin: I don't change the clam; I look at the color levels and change for every RGB channel the max and min input to the real max an min color (defined by a minimun level with my eyes). So this wasn't real color balance. This all was done by GIMP, and saved with 100% JPEG quality, without using the original quality, because that remove data for future edits. Habitator terrae 🌍 17:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Habitator terrae and Yann: I don't understand your first bit about "the clam"? But it sounds like what you've done is not really an acceptable adjustment. Most images not not reach min and max for RGB and many do not reach min and/or max at all. I would really not expect an old mosaic to be bright white and each colour saturated -- generally they have low contrast and saturation. I did suspect you had effectively increased the global contrast. I have to  Oppose for now because this is an artwork scanned by professionals. Btw, the way to save a copy that avoids removing data for future edits is to save as PNG then generate any JPG copies you need from that. I can upload a version I mentioned above. If you both have no objections I could overwrite this "retouched" file and ping folk, or I could upload separately to a different file (but then need Yann's permission to create a third alt and it gets a bit messy). If folk really want the highest-quality version, I could download the four higher-resolution tiles and recreate this sized image from those. -- Colin (talk) 17:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Colin: You can upload a separate file, and I will eventually replace the alternative. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, ok, it will this evening before I can do this. -- Colin (talk) 07:41, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hopefully there is a size for everyone there. -- Colin (talk) 23:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The ZoomViewer works for all sizes including the gigapixel one! (FYI when you first access ZoomViewer for a new image, it creates a cache of image tiles to use, which for very large images takes so long you get an error message. But if you are patient, the cache gets created eventually, and when you try again it works). Yann since the gigapixel version can be viewed with ZoomViewer and is the highest quality/resolution image we have, and is identical but for size with the two others, I would propose that we should feature as "finest" the gigapixel image.. -- Colin (talk) 09:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is very weird. The ZoomViewer works here, even for the biggest one, but not for the current nomination, and even for smaller ones. :oSSS Yann (talk) 17:05, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, I admit, I was sloppy here. I was pinged by Colin (about the new versions) who now reprimanded me on my talk page. I looked at the versions he uploaded and assumed one of them had also been uploaded onto this alternative version as Yann indicated he would do once they were available. I hope that offer still stands and I will leave my support vote here in the meantime. --Cart (talk) 09:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure what Yann intends to do. Yann, please don't overwrite or delete files (for now). Hope we can agree on the optimal file to nominate. Perhaps it would be cleaner to start a new nom? -- Colin (talk) 10:15, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Great resolution and no issues for me. I recommend downloading the image and using a decent image viewer, nomacs for example can handle this just fine. – Lucas 11:10, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 00:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 01:58:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Golden Gate Bridge as seen from the Marin Headlands during blue hour in April 2019
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /BoothSift 02:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Joy & Heron - Animated CGI Spot by Passion Pictures.webm, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 19:06:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • We promote pictures all the time because we like the craftsmanship behind them, how the light falls on a tree, the curve of a bottle, the color of a flower, the lines in a slope, etc. All very subjective reasons and digital photography is hardly groundbreaking by now. I don't see why we can't promote some moving pictures on the same grounds. Educational? I don't care if it has the heron's feeding habits wrong, what I care about is that it teaches that unselfish generosity can be rewarding even if you don't expect it. A rather good thing to educate youngsters in IMO. (Sorry about the spoiler, but it has been viewed by a lot of people now.) In the old days, such morale was taught with the help of allegories and fables, now we have animations. I don't think that grapes are what foxes normally eat either, but people usually overlook that in favor of the fable.--Cart (talk) 19:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Colin: Fish are the main diet, however herons do eat worms. --BoothSift 00:34, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get hung up on the worms. I only mentioned it as the only educational aspect I could find was heron diet, and that was wrong. They might eat worms occasionally, but they aren't its main diet and there is no way the chicks would refuse any food. While there is a moral story, that argument holds for many works of fiction.
Compare Elephants Dream which was created on open source software to demonstrate what it could do. It has its own wiki article so is notable itself. This is a commercially produced short film to promote a big Chinese company (though with a oddly American-looking fisherman). Since adverts and other promotional material are not typically sold (and I assume the dog remains trademarked) then giving this a free licence is just a clever way for the promoters to increase its footprint on the web. The Commons I like is free, independent and has an educational mission. This is Commons being abused as a platform for the commercial promotion of large corporations. Don't think that represents us at our "finest" at all. -- Colin (talk) 08:00, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict) We are usually very happy when professional photographers with companies and other companies (like SpaceX) release their material to us via OTRS. Yes, it is beginning to dawn on marketeers that it is good to give out some free photos and media. That is why we these days have so many good free photos of politicians and other notable people, some of which are FPs. This is the same thing. --Cart (talk) 08:36, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Limited images from promotional material can be very useful to illustrate a product or people. SpaceX launches are notable so having material that documents them is great. I think this crosses the line too much. It isn't providing information about a product or the company. It is just brand promotion dressed up in a cartoon, and you can see from their Wiki article that the company is heavily investing in promoting its brand. There's nothing notable here. We seem to have a mindset with film/CGI that anything with a free licence is in scope. I don't think pure advertising/promotion is a valid use of Wikimedia servers. -- Colin (talk) 10:34, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think we are just as guilty of helping big brands ourselves when we promote gorgeous photos of cameras, watches, booze, airplanes and luxury cruise ships to FP. --Cart (talk) 10:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No we aren't "just as guilty" as those have educational value, those illustrate real actual things and having a great picture of them hugely improves Wikipedia or WikiVoyage or someone's educational book on how best to use your camera, etc. On their own, the promotional value is low and they represent distinct products. We'd have more problems if the camera was obscured with a splash saying "World's fastest autofocus" or a ship had a banner saying "Live your dreams on a --- cruise". We don't currently have folk uploading promotional short films for luxury cruises, with voice-overs from famous actors, and beautiful models pretending to be captains and waiting staff. Or an advert where some Canon brand ambassador is standing in a breathtaking location and explaining why he chooses Canon to get the job done. I hope you'd think those were out-of-scope.
This film is totally about brand promotion, which is not concerned with getting across information but about establishing good emotions for the brand. We don't learning anything about JD.com at all, or about fishing or about herons. But that cute dog mascot is stuck in your neurons linked to positive emotions. Someone somewhere in a marketing meeting, dreamed this up solely as a way of getting "cute dog mascot" brand awareness up from X% to Y% and about ensuring that brand awareness is a positive one. "Generosity" is in the film not as a moral tale to improve society but because that's a positive social value we now link to "cute dog mascot" and will recall if we see the JD.com logo. -- Colin (talk) 11:49, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you are so opposed to this film, why don't you nominate it for deletion per out of scope, I think that would be a more appropriate place for such discussions. That way you will get a better response from the community on whether free material from Company A is good and free material from Company B is bad. Here where we should mainly discuss the quality of the film. Btw, personally I think the dog is ugly. --Cart (talk) 12:36, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've thought about it but "in-scope" deletions are notoriously difficult. There is a gap between "so obviously out-of-scope that the community wishes to delete the file and prevent any use on any project" and "so barely in-scope that it isn't an example of our finest educational media files". -- Colin (talk) 13:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - I respectfully disagree with Colin on this. It's a cute film and very well done. It doesn't matter to me if it promotes a company (and if it does, not so well for anyone like me who still hasn't a clue which company it is). Hell, every Disney film promotes a product, if you think about it, even if the product was originally the Disney films themselves. I don't think that would ever make a Disney film unworthy of a feature in the alternate universe in which they decided to make one freely licensed. I can also definitely think of advertisements that if they ever became freely licensed would be great FPs. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • My photos don't "promote" any products. They are neutral. They could be used to promote a product. They can also be (and are) used to illustrate a Wikipedia article about a shaver, camera or steam iron. And they do so at high level quality of illustration. That's the difference. This is a fictional cartoon created by a marketing agency. Yes you aren't supposed to spot the hidden marketing objective. And you aren't the target market (yet) because this is a huge Chinese brand. If you were Chinese, you'd recognise the dog. The film director wrote "we ... saw an opportunity to play with his [mascot dog Joy's] innocence, and connect the audience with the company’s ethos in a genuine and meaningful way". The film closes with title "Make Joy Happen" which is a current brand theme. JD asked the production company to make a short film to promote their brand. That's 100% what this is about and 0% about what Commons is about. -- Colin (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 23:26, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animated
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 18:30:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vihorlat v zime
 Oppose Due to the shadow--BoothSift 23:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 23:25, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 05:59:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pile of banded mongooses(Mungos mungo)
@Charlesjsharp: , @Daniel Case: Is this better?--BoothSift 23:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but still not FP for me. Charles (talk) 08:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 06:04, 1 May 2019 (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 1 May 2019 at 09:06:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Through truss bridge over Gerstle river, Delta Junction, Alaska, United States.
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco2 12:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 04:57:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kebagh Dance
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 08:46, 1 May 2019 (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 5 May 2019 at 08:55:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Atomium central sphere
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:17, 1 May 2019 (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 5 May 2019 at 05:04:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lukat Gni
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:15, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Mary Jackson working 2 - Restoration.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 09:14:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mary Jackson
  • You don't recognize a computer when you see one, I'm shocked! Joking aside, Back in those days they needed one fridge-sized computer for every maneuver on any space flight. On the top left "fridge" you can read "Automatic AngelAngle Control", that one was dedicated to just compute/calculate the angle to keep the spacecraft on course. The "fridge" below, labeled Knuckle/Roll Power" is taking care of the roll thrusters of the module. On the first missions, they couldn't build a computer large enough to compile all this info into say an auto pilot, so the results were read of the dials since they didn't use printers, then put together on paper and adjusted using slide rules. God, I feel old knowing how this worked! This could of course be one of the backup systems or an older model, used for the sake of the photo, and not linked to the actual mission; but that is how I read the labels. It's not unlike the very first computer I used. --Cart (talk) 10:25, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, I was a bit in a hurry when I wrote that – thought it was obvious that "machinery"=computer ;). But thanks a lot for the explanation – I know a thing or two about aircraft, but that doesn't help much with spacecraft … --El Grafo (talk) 13:45, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:17, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Salinas de Fuencaliente - La Palma 03.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 05:21:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Part of the Salinas de Fuencaliente, Fuencaliente, La Palma
  • Aesthetically, it doesn't work (to me). You seem to say "important background as it's more educative", but this blue corner is ugly in my view. Depends on the purpose of course. Maybe for the children at school this sea is good, but for a poster in a living room, it's not okay in my opinion. And I'm not suggesting a better crop, I'm saying "a different composition without the sea would have made a better photo", it means a different angle (when shooting). I know you can't cut this part now. But the composition is not successful : space is wrong, too small, too tiny sea, not an elegant compo. Maybe more water would have worked, not sure, as it looks cluttered -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if possible, I would add more sea, not less. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:12, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:16, 1 May 2019 (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 10 May 2019 at 16:06:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Oppose Resolution is OK for me, we recently featured this one which I voted for and which has a lower resolution still. But Lucas' other criticisms are valid for me. The sharpness isn't very good - I can excuse a bit of unsharpness at the top or the corners, but even the altar here doesn't seem to be naturally pin-point sharp, and some areas seem quite seriously oversharpened to compensate. There's also quite a lot of noise at the sides of the image on the pews. All in all this doesn't for me add up to one of our best church photos in a very competitive genre. Cmao20 (talk) 19:05, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  I withdraw my nomination 😄 ArionEstar 😜 19:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 23:02, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 02:51:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glorificação da Imaculada Conceição pela Santíssima Trindade. Painting of the nave ceiling by Veríssimo de Freitas. Convento e Igreja de Nossa Senhora da Lapa (Church and Convent of Our Lady of the Conception of Lapa), Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 23:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2019 at 21:31:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling frescos in the order church St. Georgen in Bayreuth, painted by Gabriel Schreyer.The stucco works were made by Bernardo Quadri. Finished about 1711.
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 23:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2019 at 22:32:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mesh detail, Centro de Eventos do Ceará, Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil.
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 03:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2019 at 22:25:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Paróquia São Luiz Gonzaga, Avenida Paulista, São Paulo, Brazil

Alternative

[edit]

Church São Luiz Gonzaga, Avenida Paulista, São Paulo, Brazil

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 01:32, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima by Joe Rosenthal.jpg (delist and replace), not delisted

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 07:28:59
Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima Proposed replacement

  • The file page has two uploads, the difference between the two uploads is the noise removal. The first upload is as sharp as the original, it can be copied to a new file page if consensus goes that way. I prefer less grain/noise, but I thought others may disagree, therefore two uploads. (I don't know much about Commons FP nom process, User:Yann feel free to do what you think is right). FWIW, the original image has lots of abnormal patches in the sky area (some are not easy to see), so the edited image is an improvement. Bammesk (talk) 19:13, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination This is not going to succeed. I will propose the other version later. Yann (talk) 09:56, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 6 delist and replace, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not delisted. Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 15:20:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
@Famberhorst: It is a good picture, really, it deserves the QI and VI, but in terms of FP, that is debatable. --BoothSift 05:59, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:56, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 16:45:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

spherical HDR panorama in a tram museum in Dortmund
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 15:22:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Support Now--BoothSift 03:37, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 22:59, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural# Netherlands
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 13:37:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Moscow Leningradsky railway station

 I withdraw my nomination Mimihitam (talk) 06:28, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Info Mimihitam, you can't just remove a nomination from the list even if it is withdrawn. It has to be closed and archived first like I do now. The next time, please just leave your nomination in the list and someone will take care of it. --Cart (talk) 06:46, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 06:43, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 10:39:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

2006 American Buffalo Proof

 I withdraw my nomination Yann (talk) 06:15, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 06:18, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2019 at 09:39:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Columns in Turkish baths, Salamis, Northern Cyprus
Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:10, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:2017.07.03.-19-Glubig-Melang-Fliess Wendisch Rietz--Keilfleck-Mosaikjungfer-Maennchen.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2019 at 19:18:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green-eyed hawker - Aeshna isoceles, male
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 23:03, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 04:12:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eurygaster maura on eyelet
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 04:37, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2019 at 07:43:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Christchurch Art Gallery, Christchurch, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:2017.05.13.-06-Schwetzinger Wiesen-Edinger Ried--Zottiger Rosenkaefer.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 16:43:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tropinota hirta
@Cmao20: Actually, it is closer to 13mm long for adults, 15mm for larvae. --BoothSift 06:38, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are quite right, Charles, although the focus isn't terrible for me, I can definitely see what you mean about the yellow 'painting' around the edge of the bug. Switching to  Oppose until this is fixed. Cmao20 (talk) 11:16, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment You're talking nonsense about the colour. First, I never change colours and second, insects don't have real colours. They are generated by light reflections. And that just is very yellow on this yellow flower. The only evidence that I see here is that you want to kick off alleged competitors. --Hockei (talk) 12:21, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough. I will take your assurance at face value, if it isn't a real issue but merely an artifact of light reflection then I am happy to reinstate my  Support. Cmao20 (talk) 13:40, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 21:11, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2019 at 19:39:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling fresco, created by Anton Clemens Lünenschloß 1748 - 1751, in the Catholic parish church St. James the Elder in Burgwindheim
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 21:05, 3 May 2019 (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 3 May 2019 at 18:00:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape in Glennallen, Alaska, United States
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 21:09, 3 May 2019 (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 3 May 2019 at 14:29:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A plate of chips at the Chalet Cafe on the A281 Henfield Road in the Cowfold civil parish of West Sussex, England.
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 21:12, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scots' Church Interior 1, Melbourne, Australia - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 18:09:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The interior of Scots' Church, Melbourne, Australia, as viewed from the rear of the church looking toward the altar.
  • Fair enough - I know you tend not to like it when these pictures include too much vertical field of view, and I can understand. I did see that one as well but thought I'd go for this because I suspected some people might oppose the other because of the slight distortion of the bottom corners. We'll give it a go if this one doesn't pass. Cmao20 (talk) 19:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know some people think an Alt should just be for a different crop/processing of same image, but I'd be tempted to try an Alt for the balcony view. Might be simpler to let folk choose which they prefer, and I don't think both should be featured. -- Colin (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Alternative

Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 21:09, 3 May 2019 (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 7 May 2019 at 15:26:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

'Growing Up' Pavilion located on the West Kowloon Cultural District promenade in Hong Kong, it will open to the public approximately 6 months.
I might suggest to buy a new SD card then and shoot pictures in higher resolution. SD card prices have gone down significantly and they're much more affordable now than they used to be. Even though that sharpness is good, I'm afraid that the resolution is not enough for 2019 Featured Picture of architecture. --Podzemnik (talk) 03:45, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 21:06, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2019 at 15:14:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 06:48, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2019 at 11:12:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Light Painting
  • Thanks! Based on what you wrote in the RT-template, I removed it from the file. That is just normal editing. ;-) The template is to be used if you say clone out a lamppost or a cow on the road, big things like that. Or if you reduce the star trails into just dots. --Cart (talk) 13:07, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose. The vertical composition with a very dark sky and no prominent stars while the road is cut off on both sides doesn't work for me. – Lucas 16:42, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination 🇪A〒ℂ🇭A  💬 18:00, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 18:25, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2019 at 05:54:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A pair of zebras(Equus) fighting with one zebra in the background
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 06:09, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2019 at 06:41:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A female llama with her cria at Laguna Colorada.
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /BoothSift 06:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 10:08:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination per cart + It's taken using a smartphone 🇪A〒ℂ🇭A  💬 11:04, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 18:29, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 19:22:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thomisidae spider in Actinocephalus polyanthus, an Eriocaulaceae, in the protected area named Parque Natural Municipal das Dunas da Lagoa da Conceição, in Florianópolis, southern Brazil.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 04:11, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Virginia Creeper Sphinx - Darapsa myron, Lorton Workhouse, Lorton, Virginia (42905749240).jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 21:21:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:58, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Waidhofen an der Thaya - Thayaufer Pano 2017.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 05:14:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Waidhofen an der Thaya vom Thayaufer aus gesehen - Pano

 I withdraw my nomination Thank you for your reviews. --BoothSift 16:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment - I feel like you often withdraw too quickly. One opposing vote and one neutral vote are sufficient to convince you you were wrong? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Boothsift, I agree with Ikan. Most seasoned nominators usually wait for at least four opposes and for the opposes to be more than the supports before they even consider withdrawing. You need a bit more patience, not these quick withdraw and reload. This is a photography forum, not an assembly line. --Cart (talk) 21:41, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, I did not withdraw when Mongoose Pile had two opposes, did I? I withdrew for other reasons, not because of the opposes. I preselect what pictures I wish to nominate and I did this one out of order. In order to not mess up my order that I had planned out, I decided to withdraw this one and I will renominate it later. I discussed this with my friends. Thank you, hope that kind of makes sense--BoothSift 21:48, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't make sense to me, no. I feel like you are very changeable in what you support. Flexibility is great, but I'm feeling like you go too far in that direction. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:48, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: If it makes you less confused, I'll put the list online. --BoothSift 22:43, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really have any interest in looking at your prospective nominations before you make them. Sorry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:43, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 16:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Actinocephalus polyanthus - PNM Dunas da Lagoa da Conceição 2.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2019 at 12:41:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Actinocephalus polyanthus in sand dunes of Parque Natural Municipal das Dunas da Joaquina, in Florianópolis, southern Brazil.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 11:21, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 08:39:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:22, 5 May 2019 (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 10 May 2019 at 06:10:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Javan slow loris (Nycticebus javanicus)
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 06:53, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Marie-Aimée Roger-Miclos - Photograph A from the Album Reutlinger de portraits divers, vol. 21.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 04:48:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Marie-Aimée Roger-Miclos
  • The information at the source is wrong, and the whole series is misattributed. I wrote to the BNF last year, but I never received an answer. We need a bot to fix this on Commons. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:44, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 05:38, 6 May 2019 (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 10 May 2019 at 00:54:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Restoration, painting by Édouard Joseph Dantan, 1890
@Basile Morin: Done! Also moved this page. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:29, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, Adam -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:21, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support This artwork shows two different points of view : the one of the sculptor, totally uninterested in the uncovered body, and the one of the artist Édouard Joseph Dantan representing nudity in 1890 -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - Is that some kind of weird allegory? He has a woman posing nude, and instead of depicting her, he's restoring a clothed figure? WTF? My father was a painter and I've been around art and artists my entire life, and for the life of me, I can't understand what this artist is getting at. I also don't find this a good painting in terms of form. It's the equivalent of the difference between a snapshot, with a series of perhaps independently interesting items but no great form, and a great photo in which the work is more than the sum of its parts. I think I shall have to oppose, because I see neither valuable documentation of a process of restoration nor [don't see] a particularly good painting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:21, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • First of all, it looks like you don't understand she was supposedly wrapped when sculpted by the artist represented in the painting, and this is just the end of the posing session. Secondly, if this was "not a good painting", it would certainly not have been sold 182,500 USD on this website. This image is also used on several Wikipedia pages. To finish, as for the documentation of a process, it is quite good in my opinion, and of course this is an artist's view of an artist's action, so the level of the interpretation here might be considered, you can't say File:Édouard Manet - Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe.jpg is an inaccurate documentation image for a picnic for example -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:49, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: , please show us what your father "is getting at", or just give a link to his Wikipedia page, so we can compare and discuss He was a painter, not a sculptor, right ? Looks like this artist here has been around sculptors's studios to explore that field. This artwork shows in my opinion two different views : the one of the sculptor completely uninterested in the naked body, and the one of the artist Édouard Joseph Dantan representing the unwrapped model in 1890. It reminds me this quote : “Art is what makes life more interesting than art.” (Robert Filliou) -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's interesting that you think high prices prove the artistic value of something. I don't, and since you do, you would never appreciate my father's art, since at the moment, it sells for 5 and not 6 figures. So it must be inferior, from your point of view, I imagine. I note your explanation of what we're looking at, but my reaction to the form doesn't change. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:33, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Objectively, high prices definitely prove the artistic value of something yes, at least in the art official estimation, but subjectively it's different of course. Some people would vandalize museums if they could, since the exposed works don't match their personal tastes. Five or six figures the price of your father's paintings, wow well, if it was six like Édouard Joseph Dantan, he might be a notable artist. Want And I would like to learn more about your personal education and knowledge, then Could you say more about this imperative "documentation aspect" you seem to consider so important in painting in general ? Looks nonsense to me, although works in this situation (I mean it's not abstract) -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:02, 1 May 2019 (UTC) fixing my comment since somewhat I misunderstood Ikan's father' works were sold millions USD :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:22, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, there is no imperative to document anything. That's something I considered after appraising the quality of the art, as it could give a different kind of value to a work of visual arts in the absence of other interest to me. My personal education? I've already said that I'm a professional musician. My education in visual arts is informal though pretty extensive. But am I the issue here? I have but one opinion. But back to prices: Prices prove the current market value of anything; they say nothing whatsoever about its artistic value. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:18, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • And if you want to know the truth, first, you misread my comment, which said "5 and not 6 figures", and it was sarcastic. We've just sold the first artwork by my father that we've sold since his death (yes, for 5 figures, that part is true), and he was never a huge seller; he truly painted for art's sake. Of course he hoped to sell, and he did sell quite a few things over the course of his career, though not nearly enough to live on (teaching and lecturing took care of that, and art supplies and paying for models is very expensive), but he never made a single concession to style or critics and just did what he felt was demanded of him by Art. That meant abandoning styles that had he continued them for a few more years, he probably could have become very rich. I don't care if you believe me or not on anything I'm telling you, but valuing art by sales prices was absolutely anathema to him, and I don't think any more of it than he did. Some of the greatest art is priced at $1,000-3,000 and struggles to get sold, and some of the biggest shit in the world sells for millions of dollars. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Correct, I have no formal credentials in visual arts or art history and have never claimed to. Feel free to disregard any of my opinions on art that you disagree with. And disregard them in music, too, if you like. My credentials shouldn't play a role in determining what music you do and don't value! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:13, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, so what about this comment : "He has a woman posing nude, and instead of depicting her, he's restoring a clothed figure? WTF?" What the fuck, you say, I don't understand. Have you ever visited a sculptor's studio and seen how they work ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This painting has been sold at the price of a small apartment in Paris or New York (or 10 brand new cars, or equivalent) and I think investors know quite well what amount of money is worth to be spent here. Although art is subjective, this indicator defines the artistic value, not as an emotional index, but more like the fact to be exposed in prestigious galleries or in museums, or the fact to be signed (or appreciated) by famous artists, etc. Édouard Joseph Dantan is a notable painter, and reading the biography of this artist, his father Antoine Laurent Dantan and his uncle Jean-Pierre Dantan are both famous sculptors, who may have been influential -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:43, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paraphrasing Wikipedia, this man was a salon painter who was very successful in his lifetime and whose reputation was then eclipsed by more progressive artists. More recently, as what some would call academic painting has become more popular with the critics, his reputation has gone back up. There is nothing the least bit permanent about the monetary value of artworks nor the reputation of artists (obviously with some partial exceptions, who for at least the time being have remained at the top rank of received opinion ever since their lifetimes, and I'm not suggesting that isn't often just). The same is true in music, and I think many people would not consider whichever album made the most money last year to therefore be the very best music that was released, nor the very best recording. Of course that's different, because that involves a very large number of relatively small spenders, rather than some critics and a very small number of very large spenders, but wealth does not equal taste, and have you not noticed that what's in in the art world very often varies from year to year like the latest fashions in clothing? Anyway, I think this discussion is probably pretty much played out. I'm aware this kind of art is now in again. That doesn't mean I have to value it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:11, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Does Wikipedia talk about Dantan's negative "reputation" ? Not in my reading. He had success, yes. The "classical style" later fell out of fashion, but certainly for everybody at this time. Sotheby's site says "Une restauration shows Dantan at his very best through the virtuosity of paint handling, attention to detail, complexity of compositional arrangement and relative monumentality". Also mentioning his "sense of humor", it indicates the sculpture Winter by Jean-Antoine Houdon as probably a major source of inspiration -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's my point; this style fell out of fashion, and with it, his reputation. I get the distinction you're making, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Moving to  Support now thanks to the discussion above--BoothSift 05:15, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, interesting :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:13, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting indeed - thanks for the informative comment. Cmao20 (talk) 19:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 05:38, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media#Nudes
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2019 at 05:56:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Women working in a rice field near Junagadh, Gujarat, India
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 06:34, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:San Antonio volcano - Panorama 03.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 07:27:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from south to the caldera of the San Antonio volcano, in the background the villages Los Quemados, Las Indias, and Fuencaliente
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:39, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:The British Commonwealth of Nations - together 44-pf-437-2016-001-ac.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2019 at 07:50:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

World War II posters from the United Kingdom
thanks Charles (talk) 17:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Also move to oppose now that I've seen the original. Colin is right in his comment below that the original should be uploaded first so it is easy to compare with the restoration, I missed that here. --Cart (talk) 19:45, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info J’ignore ce que vous voulez dire par « altération » de couleur. Il n’y a aucune altération et je n’ai pas fait de modification directe des couleurs. J’ai simplement posé un calque de réglage : Niveau à 60 % 12-1,17-235. Rien qui puisse être définit comme « altération ». Ce terme est d’ailleurs extrêmement péjoratif et un rien provocateur. Vous avez l’original à disposition sur le site des « National Archives and Records Administration » je vous invite à reproduire la faible modification ajoutée pour vous rendre compte par vous-même. De plus le principe de couleur d’origine ne s’applique qu’aux couleurs qu’avait l’affiche en sorti d’imprimerie. Le vieillissement du papier et des pigments est sûrement la plus grosse altération que ce document ait subit. Il ne faut pas hésiter à me poser des questions sur mon travail ou à laisser un commentaire si vous voulez des informations avant de voter.--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 07:07, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Moving to  Oppose per others--BoothSift 01:21, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, the colors differ among the two sources, but yours are different from both (and they look too punchy to me). I can not tell you which ones are "correct". Nobody can without seeing the original print. The IWM has a second version of the scan (on the same page) with a color target included in the frame – if we can find out which standard it follows, that would be the thing to base any corrections on. --El Grafo (talk) 09:00, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • je redit ce que j'ai dit ci-avant : je n'ais pas modifié les couleurs. J’ai posé un calque de réglage : Niveau à 60 % 12-1,17-235 sur un document scanné par les «National Archives and Records Administration». Faire autrement serait précisément faire ce que vous me reprochez. nonsense.--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:44, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In fairness, WWII is about as close to a ubiquitously-agreed 'good war' as any there is, even if the Allied Powers arguably did not always act completely honourably (e.g. Dresden). But I would argue even a poster glorifying a 'bad war' would be featurable if it were a high quality reproduction of historical interest. Surely visitors to Commons are intelligent enough to know we don't necessarily sanction the ideological standpoint of the material we feature? Cmao20 (talk) 13:06, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think FP is the forum for your comments Cmao20 on the 'honour' or otherwise of the bombing of Dresden. Charles (talk) 14:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • My point was only intended to illustrate that while there could be legitimate debate over elements of Allied conduct, the morality of the war itself as a whole is surely pretty black-and-white, and therefore I'm not personally concerned about an image that might 'glorify' the actions of the Allies in the war. I wasn't trying to push an agenda on anyone, Charles, I only brought it up because I thought it was relevant to the point I was trying to make - that regardless of the fact that there's more room for moral debate about individual campaigns and actions, we IMO shouldn't be afraid of the moral position of this image. (Although, as I say above, I would have no personal problem featuring a propaganda piece with a moral standpoint I consider objectionable, if the quality and historical interest were there. Questions of whether we 'agree' or not with the image are, to me, interesting but beside the point.) Cmao20 (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
thanks Charles (talk) 17:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't vote against photos of the statue in Kiev that glorifies the notorious mass murderer of Jews, Khmelnytsky, because of its subject matter. I guess some of you think I should, but I don't agree. There's no need to actually support a feature of a photo of something you hate, but voting against it because of its content is something I think we should discourage. After all, a photo of propaganda could be treated approvingly, disapprovingly or neutrally, but the work of propaganda remains an excellent example of its type. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:19, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose colour saturation. Charles (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose S. DÉNIEL, you say you have adjusted the levels. This has a consequence on saturation. If one increases brightness, the saturation tends to decrease and if one decreases brightness, the saturation tends to increase. Some image editing software attempts to compensate for this when adjusting levels. So, it is quite possible to affect the perceived saturation with your levels adjustment. The image has a serious flaw (indicated) where some lines have got lost. The image does not contain a colour profile: please ensure Photoshop is set to save one when you export to JPG and if missing from the original, then you need to assign one (likely sRGB). Our best restorers first upload the original to Commons and then their own restored version either on top (if the adjustments are likely to be non-controversial such as minor fixes) or to another file (if the adjustments are extensive, such as fixing/replacing lost or damaged parts). It isn't good enough simply to point to an external site for reference to the original: we should host that too.
Wrt political comments, I think it quite natural for a propaganda photo to provoke political comment and for that to influence voting (taking a moral objection for example). Charles is being over-sensitive here and I think we should permit users to make brief comment of their reaction or opinion of the image, without turning this into a political forum. -- Colin (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am not be over-sensitive Colin. The comments made by Cart and Cmao20 were not at all related to the FPC. Both editors have responded positively and I have thanked them for their responses. Try reading what was posted and my comments before interfering. Of course we "should permit users to make brief comment of their reaction or opinion of the image." My objection was that people should not be "turning this into a political forum." Charles (talk) 22:06, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Charles. Cart obliged your delicate sensitivities because she's nice that way. Cmao20 argued against your criticism, justifying their post. I didn't see you complain about Uoaei1's oppose vote. Cmao20's response (that it was a "good war") was perfectly understandable comment, though wouldn't satisfy anyone opposed to any war. Ikan also further commented that he believes people should not oppose because they have a moral objection to the purpose of the propaganda. I didn't see you complain about Ikan either, even when he mentioned another conflict and his strong adjectives condemning it. In the history of FPC, people have always made small comments such as these.
Unlike your butterflies and lizards, Charles, the purpose of a political poster is to elicit a strong feelings in the viewer. "Together" is a strong message to unite people when they might otherwise see differences or seek disunity. The poster's message "Together" was also used in the Scottish anti-independence campaign Better Together (which claimed that Scotland would be forced out of the EU if it left the UK, a claim that subsequent events have proved ironic). It is quite natural that Cart should also recognise similar sentiments regarding recent UK politics. For a poster, the "wow" factor is surely that it resonates strongly with people, or forcefully repels them, and people should be allowed to demonstrate that briefly in their comments. -- Colin (talk) 09:00, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suspect, Charles, that your own opinions of Brexit or the Dresden bombing are leading you to take offence at others making comment on the matter. Uoaei1 opposed due to the poster "glorifying war". As a community we should be open to discussing oppose or support vote rationales. One argument is that this was a "good war" that many people feel justified and proud to have taken part in (the subject of the poster, after all, is the Commonwealth army proudly marching together [with white people in front]). Cmao20 anticipates and accepts the counter-argument that there were also bad parts of this "good war". Perhaps, then, no war is good. At the other extreme Ikan adds that he thinks we should not oppose, even if it were celebrating what most people would regard as a war atrocity. These are all different people putting arguments about how to judge a poster that glorifies war. The poster's message and power to influence is significant just as the colours on the wings of a butterfly are significant. -- Colin (talk) 12:58, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Colin - that was exactly what I was trying to do. The only reason I wrote it was because I was thinking to myself why Uoaei1 believed we shouldn't feature something that glorified war, and I was trying to think what reasons he/she might have for arguing this about WWII. Hence I thought I'd acknowledge the opposite viewpoint that the 'good war' maybe wasn't entirely good. I did believe my comments were thus relevant - I wasn't 'politicking' for the sake of it - and I didn't expect my comment to elicit so much controversy. Cmao20 (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Colin. Daniel Case (talk) 19:47, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Overprocessed Poco2 20:46, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Overprocessed. – Lucas 10:59, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per others. --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:05, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info en réponse à Colin
  • "This has a consequence on saturation." – bien sur. Pour vous ça caractérise une retouche excessive ?
  • "The image has a serious flaw (indicated) where some lines have got lost. " - Bien vue, merci, c’est corrigé.
  • "The image does not contain a colour profile" – Évidement qu’il contient un profil couleur !!! Vous ne le voyez pas ? Essayez avec gimp, s’il n’y a pas de profil il va vous le demander. Chez moi, Gimp me demande de valider le profil de photoshop : le sRGB IEC61966-2.1. c’est que ça fonctionne correctement puisque c’est ce que ma version de photoshop utilise. C’est plutôt de votre côté que ça ne marche pas. De toutes façons peu importe puisque l’image de départ comporte un profil Adobe RGB (1998). Vous pensez que mon Photoshop a fait une erreur en convertissant un profil couleur Adobe ? Ce serait drôle. Dans l’absolue il aurait été préférable de garder du RGB (1998) pour être le plus fidèle possible – mais depuis une copie en JPG ça n’a pas vraiment d’importance. De nos jours on considère que la conversion RGB en sRGB se fait bien. Mais si vous pensez que ce n’est pas le cas je vous invite à faire la vérification et a nous en parler. Personnellement je fais confiance à mon/mes logiciels, ils sont meilleurs que moi pour gérer ça au mieux.
  • "Our best restorers first upload the original" – Je ne sais pas ce que font les meilleurs retoucheurs, mais moi j’essaie de ne pas faire n’importe quoi. Étant soucieux de la planète et des finances de la fondation je ne vois pas l’intérêt de verser une image alors qu’elle est déjà à disposition de tous-le-monde sur le serveur d’un organisme gouvernemental des plus sérieux. Si encore c’était un TIF mais non c'est un jpeg. Ce n’est pas un original. C’est seulement l’original de mon travail et mettre ça sur nos serveurs n’a pas réellement d’intérêt. Surcharger les serveurs avec des copies de copie en jpg est tout simplement inutile, ça ne garantit rien et ça pollue la planète inutilement en surconsommant de l’énergie dans le stockage. Vous ne devriez pas répandre cette préconisation.--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 13:49, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info en réponse à Charles,Cart, Cmao20, Ikan Kekek, Daniel Case, Poc, Lucas, Palauenc05, Martin Falbisoner, 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰, George Chernilevsky, Wilfredor, El Grafo - Pour ceux qui imaginent que je suis sensible à la propagande anglaise de la WWII ou que j’ai dans l’idée de faire l’apologie de la guerre, je tiens à préciser que ce n’est pas le cas. J’habite la ville de Brest en France qui fut presque totalement détruite par des avions – principalement anglais – et aussi américain. Ce qui restait encore debout est tombé dans les combats de la libération. Les brestois (y compris ceux de ma génération, qui n’ont pas connu la guerre) reste très nostalgique de celle ville détruite et nous sommes très sensibles a cette perte immense aussi bien humaine que patrimoniale. Tout ce que je peux dire c’est : plus jamais ça, pour personne et nulle part. L’intérêt de cette image est principalement historique. L’intérêt esthétique ne doit absolument pas être ramené a un concept d’esthétique de la guerre, qui je l’espère, n’intéresse personne. Ce concept d’esthétique de la guerre n’a d’ailleurs pas sa place ici. Les votes mentionnant ce motif devraient être supprimés. Vous comprendrez que je trouve très insultant et provocateur d’associer ce concept, même de loin, a mon travail ou a ma personne. Je pense, comme Charles, qu’il est anormal de préjuger de ce que pensent les votants et anormal d’être obligé de se justifier à propos de spéculations. C’est triste de perdre notre temps constamment avec ça. Je suis vraiment choqué (et il en faut pourtant beaucoup pour me choquer) qu’aucun admin ne soit intervenu pour stopper cette discussion qui a complètement pollué le vote. Malheureusement, je n’en suis guère étonné. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 13:49, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admins do not interfere unless someone reports the debate to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. Even then, heated debates are allowed as long as we don't resort to calling each other insulting names or make verbal threats to each other. This debate on the featurability of a war-time poster hasn't reached that stage yet. Also most of the 'opposes', like mine, had nothing to do with the content of the poster but rather the questionable color. --Cart (talk) 14:08, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
*@S. DÉNIEL: What's going on here?! I eventually opposed simply because of color issues... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ce n'est pas une question de vote. Un commentaire qui associe un participant a un propagandiste contrevient aux règles et pas seulement celle de FP. ça devrait passer avant des questions de couleurs non? Comment pouvons-nous discutez serainement photo dans ces conditions. Regardez ce Post en entier, vous le trouvez normal? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 13:11, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have uploaded the original: File:The British Commonwealth of Nations Together - NARA - 44267185.jpg. This is what we do on Commons. We are a repository of free educational media and as such hold millions of JPGs that are absolutely identical to ones that appear elsewhere on the internet. Indeed, when we upload images from archives like this, we take special care to ensure they really are identical and warn people not to fiddle with them (see the warning generated by the NARA template I used). If folk want to create derivative works, to restore or to change colours or brightness, then that's fine (to a degree that the changes have educational merit) but should be uploaded to another file. This is all very very standard Commons practice, so please don't argue about it.
The original image from National Archives does indeed have an embedded Adobe RGB profile. The image you first uploaded, and I reviewed, did not contain any embedded colour profile. You can see this at Jeffrey's Image Metadata Viewer. The new version you have uploaded does contain an embedded sRGB profile. When you wrote "Obviously it contains a color profile! Do not you see it?" etc, you are either being dishonest with me or have made a mistake for which most people would apologise. Since the original is in AdobeRGB then for best quality you should have retained that. Converting from AdobeRGB to sRGB runs a risk of posterisation, though that risk is small for an image that is a poster with few print colours. Your first upload, with no embedded colour profile, could display differently for different viewers with different applications.
Some people might have been comparing with the quite different print at the Imperial War Museum, and you only have yourself to blame for that confusion by not uploading the original. The colours in the IWM poster are really quite different.
Your image is slightly brighter than the original, due to the adjustment layer you added. This makes the colours appear a litle paler. I see no good reason to brighten the image. It may be a valid thing to do if you belive the image brightness levels are quite wrong but not if you are just adjusting to taste. The difference it makes is not enough to cause me to oppose (that wasn't a reason for my oppose vote) but I wish you'd just left it alone.
You have fixed the error with the flag being misaligned and embedded a colour profile. I have uploaded the original for you and improved the file description page with a better template for NARA images with improved categorisation. I'd probably support, but since you've been so rude to everyone I'm going to unwatch instead. -- Colin (talk) 18:52, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This is what we do on Commons" - Ce n'est pas une obligation et ça n'a rien a voir avec le vote. Common regorge de fichiers en multiples exemplaires de tailles et de colorimétries différentes. C'est autant de serveurs et d'électricité qui sont gaspillés.
  • "This is all very very standard Commons practice, so please don't argue about it" - Pollution comes from very standard practices. Je parle de ce que je juge utile si j'en ai envie. Les pratiques peuvent changer quand c'est pour le bien de tous. Il serait temps que common se soucie de ce problème.
  • "You can see this at Jeffrey's Image Metadata Viewer." Je ne connais pas cette visionneuse mais j'imagine qu'elle n'est pas infaillible. Mon workflow n'a pas changé et ma première version de l'affiche contient bien un profil - je l'ai vérifié avec mes outils - Autre solution vous pouvez allez dans l'historique de la première image, regardez dans common les métadonnés (avec le déroulant) et il indique bien Espace colorimétrique sRGB. Je vous invite a tester une des procédures que je vous donne avant de me traité comme un menteur. Partez du principe que ce que je dis est exact : c'est une attitude plus constructive.
  • "Converting from AdobeRGB to sRGB runs a risk of posterisation" - Mais il n'y a aucune posterisation? Le risque est minimine il n'est pas avéré et j'ai le droit de prendre ce risque. vous ne faites que parler de problèmes qui ne sont que potentiels. Votre insistance a trouver des problèmes là où il n'y en a pas est incompréhensible.
  • "Since the original is in AdobeRGB then for best quality you should have retained that" - Non, comme c'est une retouche d'image ça ne pose aucun problème de changer de profil. ce n'est pas un original. Il n'y a aucun original. Un JPG ne peut pas être un original. Une infime différence de colorimétrie n'est pas un problème et encore moins sur une copie retouchée en JPG. La nouvelle compression en JPG est plus destructive que le changement de profil couleur. Le fait que je vous indique moi-même la présence de ce profil Adobe RGB (1998) montre ma probité et ma compétence technique. Je vous donne une information et vous, vous la retourné contre moi pour en faire une nouvelle critique injustifiée et une nouvelle contrainte inutile. Vous perdez toute mesure.
  • "and you only have yourself to blame for that confusion by not uploading the original" - Je ne blâme personne de se tromper, tous le monde a le droit de se tromper, vous et moi y compris. Permettez-moi d'indiquer une erreur quand il y en a une. Wilfredor ne s'est pas plein de mon message et s'est excusé : fin de ce qui n'est même pas un problème!
  • "I see no good reason to brighten the image" - Moi je vois une bonne raison, le vieillissement du papier. Permettez que je puisse avoir une opinion personnelle différente et la liberté de faire ce que je pense utile. Cette insistance a pousser les autres à faire ce que vous voulez est anormale.
  • "I have uploaded the original for you and improved the file description page with a better template for NARA images with improved categorisation" - Merci, mais mon travail était satisfaisant. Vous avez fait ces changements pour montrer que vous êtes meilleur. C'est une démarche qui peut être considéré comme hautaine et destinée à rabaisser votre interlocuteur. La plus-part d'entre nous faisons des modification sans rien dire et sans donner de leçon. Quand on donne des conseils on laisse les autres le droit de ne pas les suivre.
  • "I'd probably support, but since you've been so rude to everyone I'm going to unwatch instead" - Ce qui montre que vous votez plus pour l'homme que pour l'image. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:02, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support good restoration (without major alteration, and this file is probably closer to the original than the "original" scan from the NARA).  Comment the oppose votes are either bogus or solved. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 14:54, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  weak support now per my comment above. Next time please upload the original right away to avoid this kind of confusion. "Weak" because I appreciate the work that has been put into the restoration, but I'm not particularly wow-ed by the poster itself. --El Grafo (talk) 08:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 10 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 12:10:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the city of Cusco, Peru.
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:41, 6 May 2019 (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 6 May 2019 at 20:51:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Limoilou, Quebec city
 Oppose After a second look, too ordinary IMO--BoothSift 01:33, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:50, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2019 at 17:09:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spherical panorama of the courtyard of the former Real Seminario de Nobles in Calatayud, Spain.
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 22:49, 6 May 2019 (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 6 May 2019 at 22:10:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

At some points the trenches were so close together that it was possible to throw a biscuit from the British into the Germans.
I removed some scratches, and dust spots Ezarateesteban 23:32, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't you do noticeable things like fixing the tear in the lower right? I mean, I think it's featurable, but I really can hardly see any improvement. So I'll  Support, but I really don't think this is a notable restoration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:03, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What sould be to do to restore it?, I remove all scratches and small black points Ezarateesteban 10:58, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Then why do I see them? Anyway, I said that a real restoration would fix the tear - as well as actually getting rid of all the dirt and black spots. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:37, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Please, it needs a better identification template, better categorization, link to the source and upload the original to commons, details of the alterations made in the retouch template.
    Español: Esto necesita una mejor plantilla de identificación, mejor categorización, enlace a la fuente y subir la original a commons, detalles de las alteraciones realizadas en la plantilla de retouch.
    --Wilfredor (talk) 00:13, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done source and retouch template, if anybody helps to categorize I'll appreciate it Ezarateesteban 01:17, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some categories. --El Grafo (talk) 09:34, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Author is wrong --Wilfredor (talk) 02:04, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What's wrong with the author? This seems to be indeed the signature of Hal Eyre, WWI cartoonist. --El Grafo (talk) 09:34, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Listo, era que faltaba una coma luego del nombre del autor pero ahora esta mucho mejor --Wilfredor (talk) 00:16, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Ezarateesteban 17:34, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 05:09, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Waidhofen an der Thaya - Thayaufer Pano 2017.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2019 at 06:57:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Waidhofen an der Thaya as viewed from Thayaufer
  •  Comment - I still like it, but was anything edited? Seemingly not. So why are you renominating it, instead of not withdrawing it in the first place? I also see a good place for a crop. I'll mark it, and perhaps Duke of W4 would consider it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination For good this time. --BoothSift 22:43, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 11:12, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 20:58:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • @Eatcha: thanks for doing the work to close your withdrawn nom. Just remember to add the ", not featured" in the title and leave a space between the text and the closing template per the guidelines. :-) I've done that for you here. --Cart (talk) 15:10, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– 🇪A〒ℂ🇭A  💬 14:49, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 00:11:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: it has not gained any new support !votes in two days, as opposed to all these opposes. Daniel Case (talk) 06:31, 6 May 2019 (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: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:02, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Church of St Gertrude, Kaunas - Diliff.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2019 at 21:21:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of St Gertrude, Kaunas, Lithania
  • Maybe not one of his very best, but it still seemed to pass the bar by a decent margin for me. IMO it's just as good as this, which is passing FP with flying colours, in terms of composition, angle, sharpness, colour and resolution (although I notice you didn't vote for that one either). Maybe church interiors have a bit more wow than church exteriors, but this one impressed me certainly. Cmao20 (talk) 10:11, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ezarate and Boothsift, I can try to de-noise the sky, if that would change your opinions, but I'm personally not sure it's worth it given that the image is 50 megapixels in size. IMO a bit of noise is acceptable at this resolution. Nevertheless happy to give it a go if you believe it's necessary. Cmao20 (talk) 10:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination Looks like this one has no realistic chance of passing. I am surprised to be honest as I still like the composition and it's extremely sharp - but that's the consensus and I don't think it's worth keeping it open any longer. Thanks for the reviews. Cmao20 (talk) 21:23, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 21:23, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2019 at 06:47:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anas platyrhyncho in Colmar (Haut-Rhin, France).
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: it does not appear likely that it will overcome these opposes. Daniel Case (talk) 16:41, 4 May 2019 (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. /– Lucas 06:41, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2019 at 10:49:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crucifix by Francesco Giolfino 1502 in the New Cathedral in Brescia.
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:57, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2019 at 06:37:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lok Baintan Floating Market
  • Would you like to try a translation of the Indonesian, anyway? I spoke Bahasa Terengganu in the 70s, though I also spent 2 years in the local Sekolah Kebangsaan in the kampung where I was living. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:00, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Water transport
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2019 at 07:31:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Salvator Mundi, by Leonardo da Vinci
  • Well, this is what w:Salvator Mundi (Leonardo) says, which is a bit different: "It was sold at auction for $450.3 million on 15 November 2017 by Christie's in New York to Prince Badr bin Abdullah, setting a new record for most expensive painting ever sold at public auction.[7] Prince Badr allegedly made the purchase on behalf of Abu Dhabi's Department of Culture and Tourism,[8][9] but it has since been posited that he may have been a stand-in bidder for his close ally and Saudi Arabian crown prince Mohammed bin Salman.[10] This follows late-2017 reports that the painting would be put on display at the Louvre Abu Dhabi[1][11] and the unexplained cancellation of its scheduled September 2018 unveiling.[12] The current location and status of the painting is unknown,[10] but it may be in a storage facility in Geneva.[13]" The short version is that "This follows late-2017 reports that the painting would be put on display at the Louvre Abu Dhabi" is different from "It should be on display at the Louvre Abu Dhabi", which implies (without directly stating) that something illegal is going on. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know if it's OK, because I don't know if it's accurate. All I know from the Wikipedia article is that there were reports that it would be displayed. The reports seem not to have been accurate, but it's possible that there was indeed a plan afoot for a show or longer loan and it fell through. Do you have any knowledge beyond what's in the Wikipedia article? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The fact that something was reported in no way proves that the reports were in any way accurate. If you use the word "reportedly", you are unambiguously accurate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:49, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:01, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Une Reastauration by Edouard Dantan.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Kaiserin Augusta verlässt Newyork, Chromo-Lithographie von C. Saltzmann 95, nr13 aus G. Wislicenus, Unsre Kriegsflotte - restored, borderless.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2019 at 14:24:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 00:49, 8 May 2019 (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 11 May 2019 at 19:35:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling fresco of the Basilica Vierzehnheiligen painted by Jos.Appiani
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 00:45, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2019 at 21:42:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Christchurch Town Hall, Christchurch, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 28 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 06:07, 8 May 2019 (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 8 May 2019 at 11:44:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old harbour on Pianosa Island

Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 13:37, 8 May 2019 (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 9 May 2019 at 00:39:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Evacuation ANZAC Village
PNG because is a ilustration, not a photo Ezarateesteban 13:33, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I removed scratches on the frame (I just cropped it per Peulle), if you desire I'll nominate the original but it has bad name. Ezarateesteban
 Support - No, the crop of the frame is a significant change, and I approve of it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Hum and what about things like an orange dot next to the authors's signature? Is restoration work suppose to take care of those too, or not? I'd also have a few more notes: The picture is tilted. On the top there is significantly less space than at the bottom. And finally, I'd like the description to provide better understanding what's in the picture. It's decades old cartoon and it could be hard to understand without a context. --Podzemnik (talk) 00:58, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done I found this picture here without categories, I can't improve descriptions too much Ezarateesteban 02:43, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Podzemnik and Ezarate: ✓ Done That was actually pretty easy: Categorization sugged that this shows en:Tommy Atkins, but there is nothing in this caricature hinting at anything British. The text on the trash (and the fact that the author was drawing for an Australian newspaper) suggests that the former "residents" of this fine mansion were indeed Australian soldiers. "ANZAC" is the abbreviation for Australian and New Zealand Army Corps. The depicted person is quite obviously a Turkish (Ottoman) soldier (note on the wall says "So long Turkey", he's wearing a en:Fez, …) discovering the the Aussies have left (file name/title suggests it was an evacuation of sorts). This is what is immediately apparent from the drawing. To make any sense of this, of course we need to know what happened in Turkey in 1915. So Military_history_of_Australia_during_World_War_I → en:Gallipoli_Campaign#Evacuation. Did I miss anything? --El Grafo (talk) 14:11, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
See now Ezarateesteban 13:33, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /BoothSift 03:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2019 at 21:25:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Park at the Landscape Protection Area on the peninsula promenade, Pörtschach am Wörthersee, Bezirk Klagenfurt Land, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Austria
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 07:57:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ahuriri River before sunrise, Canterbury, New Zealand
Yeah me too. It's usually not as exciting as if you point our camera directly to the place when the sun is rising (like I did 20 minutes before this shot) and I need a moment to start liking it. It also works better with black frame. --Podzemnik (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:38, 9 May 2019 (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 13 May 2019 at 17:35:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Helophilus pendulus
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 22:48, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Diptera
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2019 at 14:26:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wooden St. Nicholas Church in Suzdal Kremlin
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 23:21, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Russia

File:VY El 18 2243 Haugastøl - Finse.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2019 at 16:50:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

El 18 with Regiontog between Haugastøl and Finse, Norway
Confirmed results:
Result: 26 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 23:22, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2019 at 00:17:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cetoniidae (our Cetoniinae) of Gymnetis genera, photographed at an archipelago of southern Brazil, named Ilhas Moleques do Sul, near the island-city of Florianópolis. The plant wich the beetle was is Senna sp, probably Senna pendula.
@ArionEstar: Yep I noticed that, however I agree with Lucas below. --BoothSift 22:31, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 08:37, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 16:30:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Apis Mellifera drone at the moment of birth
Moved to alt--BoothSift 18:32, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • El Grafo, A.Savin: do we have evidence that it was upscaled? Maybe it is a composite of several shots to get more of the environment top and bottom. I would clarify with the photographer before opposing because of guesses. – Lucas 16:44, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lucas: No hard evidence. But if it helps, here's the reasoning behind my guessing (which indeed it is): 1) In macro photography, you typically have the opposite problem – "too much" environment because you can't get close enough to your subject for one reason or another (so you'll have to crop some of it away). 2) The picture was shot in 2007. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this kind of elaborate compositing images we've gotten used to were routinely done back then? 3) I'm not sure whether what you're proposing is even possible. I don't have to tell you that shooting macro at close distance is very different from stitching a panorama. I imagine you'd probably run into big parallax-induced issues in stitching as soon as you start swivelling the camera (putting together a straight focus stack can be difficult enough if you're not really really careful while shooting). 4) Under close inspection, the noise pattern in the background of File:Drone Reconnoitering.jpg (the original upload) looks quite normal to me. The noise in the background of the candidate has some kind of a pattern to it that reminds me of JPG artifacts. --El Grafo (talk) 17:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

[edit]

  • Those examples were featured years ago and much has happened in photography since then. They are also underwater photos, bees are not that hard to find. --Cart (talk) 11:11, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 02:50, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 14:14:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pink mountain-heather
@Ikan Kekek: About 1/3 inches long, the flowers--BoothSift 03:40, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:31, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Édouard Manet - Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe.jpg (delist and replace), delisted and replaced

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 09:53:03
Édouard Manet - Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe Proposed replacement 

Result: 12 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted and replaced. --A.Savin 02:33, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Centaur mosaic - Google Art Project retouched.jpeg (delist), delisted and replaced

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 05:43:52
Centaur mosaic - Google Art Project Proposal replacement

  •  Delist and replace I took the original 4 GAP tiles that provide the highest resolution version and assembled them in Photoshop. Saved this locally as a TIF (2GB). Cropped out the black frame. Added an exposure adjustment layer with +1ev (i.e., one stop brighter). Saved copies of this as three JPGs at different resolutions, with sRGB colour profile, quality level 10 of 12. For the largest file (nominated here) I can download it in Firefox and view it brower-sized but when I click to magnify to 1:1 then Firefox just shows a blurry temporary image while trying to render it. Eventually it seems to give up and show black. Sometimes also for very large images, it will show black for a while but will eventually display the image. I think Browsers aren't really meant to be used as viewers for gigapixel images. It works just fine in Photoshop and other quality image tools. The Zoom viewer works fine and can be used to examine the detail.
The difference between this and the previous nomination is size (1.3 gigapixel vs 500 megapixel) and how it was brightened. I used a Photoshop exposure adjustment layer and did not alter the colour balance (temperature). The previous nomination was altered by eye for temperature, brightness and contrast by adjusting the red/green/blue channels. Since we have no reference for how warm-toned this image should be, I think it best to assume the original photographers calibrated their work. I'm not sure why the GAP original was dark (other photographs and video of this work don't appear as dark), though it doesn't appear as dark when you remove the black frame. As mentioned in the previous nom, this artwork is only a remaining portion of a larger floor mosaic, so black frame was modern. -- Colin (talk) 08:59, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist and replace -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 10:14, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist and replace - Thank you for explaining, Colin. It sounds like the ideal thing would be to edit the photo while standing in front of that floor, to check on the actual colors and tones in situ. In the meantime, though, your work is absolutely gorgeous (based on the 12k width version, which is plenty big enough for me). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:18, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ikan, the pros use a ColorChecker card that is photographed along with the artwork. The main purpose is to calibrate the colours and the hue of neutral white/grey which can vary depending on what light source is used. It can also be used to adjust exposure so I'm not clear why the original is dark. A computer monitor can also be calibrated with a device placed on the screen while lots of different colours are displayed in sequence. This also requires the image view/edit software used to respect that calibration. It is quite hard to compare by eye, but we have the tools to do it accurately. For example, the brightness you see on your monitor, and your ability to distinguish the really dark shades, is influenced also by how bright your room is, and whether there is a light source (window) behind your monitor. Your impression about whether an image here is too warm or to cold is also influenced by your monitor settings and whether you are viewing just the photo or have it as a thumb surrounded by "white". See also The dress and this illusion. Laptops usually have poor quality screens, even expensive ones. This is why I think we should try where possible to retain the image produced by the professionals, though I'm sure they make mistakes too. -- Colin (talk) 10:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 14 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted and replaced. --A.Savin 02:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2019 at 23:01:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Tallinn from Olaf's church, Estonia

 I withdraw my nomination Per the request of the author --BoothSift 05:59, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 04:55, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 13:39:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Closing of 2018 Asian Para Games
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 22:32, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2019 at 09:40:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Argentina, 8 gold escudos (1836)
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:00, 11 May 2019 (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 May 2019 at 22:45:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Asarkina ericetorum
I second this statement. Hope you get better soon @Jkadavoor: --BoothSift 01:12, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 00:58, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Diptera
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2019 at 20:28:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

2 Mark Notgeld banknote (1922) of Berlin, the reverse shows the first electric streetcar, 1882.
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 00:56, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2019 at 21:09:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) during the golden hour, Chobe National Park, Botswana.
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 00:57, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Order_:_Crocodilia_(Crocodilians)
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2019 at 21:10:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view during sunset of Dasht-e Lut, located in the provinces of Kerman and Sistan-Baluchistan, Iran.
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 05:43, 12 May 2019 (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 15 May 2019 at 21:04:49 (UTC)

  •  Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 21:04, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Since this is a set nom, there is unfortunately no place to fill in the FP category (See the list at COM:FP), but since the closer will have to find that for it anyway. I wonder which category you think this is suitable in? We have two photos and an etching. --Cart (talk) 21:16, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - I like the etching best and would definitely support a feature for that photo by itself. I'm not sure this is great as a set nomination, though I may later decide it is. But I think that the first two are more of a set, in that the view is much more recognizably similar between the two and they are both photographs, though of course we can see that the same place is shown in all 3. The Getty Museum's link in the first photo is to the wrong photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:55, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The first one is not a great photograph due to the blurry subject walking in the foreground with cut feet, and the awkward crop at the left. The second picture is an ordinary archive photo, not exceptional because of the burnt sky. And the last image is too different in style from the two others -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:54, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Basile, but would support the etching by itself. Cmao20 (talk) 16:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Basile Morin. 对不起--BoothSift 01:27, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 02:27, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 05:43, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 00:20:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Alternative

[edit]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:11, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2019 at 12:41:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Oppose I personally think they could have done better. The background and the tail of the fish are not very sharp, however I do understand that the fish is moving. --BoothSift 18:31, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Btw when I start uploading again material to Commons (not before 2020) you can expect underwater pictures done by myself with my Canon 5DSR, end of May will start that activity --Poco2 20:16, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes just the conditions and limited equipment don`t help to make FP underwater photos even in aquariums. --Wilfredor (talk) 21:15, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: Nice, can't wait to see them! @Wilfredor: I understand, not everything can be perfect and you did the best you can. --BoothSift 21:45, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:11, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/ Commons:Featured picture candidates/

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2019 at 16:55:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castle Mountain
  • Great JakubFrys, please remember you have to sign your posts with "the four squiggles" ~~~~, otherwise it is hard to see who made the comment. I've fixed it for you on these two posts, it will be up to you in the future. --Cart (talk) 17:03, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:10, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Canada
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2019 at 16:28:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Le Garçon au gilet rouge, by Paul Cézanne, National Gallery of Art
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:11, 12 May 2019 (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 21 May 2019 at 05:32:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Romantic portrait

 I withdraw my nomination I don't think the comments about the top crop makes sense, but the crowd decides... Yann (talk) 18:11, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:15, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2019 at 16:53:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden morning by Police Creek
  • Since it's a known landmark with its own WP article, we can figure out where it is, but coordinates are always nice anyway. However, the name of the creek is wrong. According to Google maps and the WP article it is Policeman Creek not Police Creek. The Commons category and a lot of pages you get when you Google the place, has it as Policeman's Creek, so I'm not sure which to use. --Cart (talk) 22:45, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Canada
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2019 at 20:22:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stiftskirche in Tübingen
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2019 at 15:17:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 06:14, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2019 at 08:19:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of Baku, capital of Azerbaijan.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 06:06, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Almeida Júnior - Scene of Adolfo Pinto’s Family - Google Art Project.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2019 at 18:40:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Scene of Adolfo Pinto’s Family, by Almeida Júnior
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /😄 ArionEstar 😜 00:07, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2019 at 17:55:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, x neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 18:45, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2019 at 10:34:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • It is a tool in Photoshop that take all the middle tones (the soft nuances) and make them either darker or lighter. It can be good to use if you photograph water or glass, but in landscapes like here you get all these very thin dark/black shadows. The photo looks more like a colored ink drawing than a photo where you would expect to see a lot of subtle nuances of color. You can take a look at this tutorial for more info. --Cart (talk) 11:22, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 18:42, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2019 at 13:19:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of River Lima and bridge.
  • One easy way of getting the exif right when you do a panorama, is to simply take one of the photos in the panorama, make it as large as the panorama in an ordinary post-processing program, add the panorama as a layer and merge. That way you get all the right exif from at least one of the photos. It is usually more right than the strange things the pano-making give you. I usually do so with my panos, example. You could do that and upload the file on top of this. Change a pixel somewhere so the auto-blocking doesn't complain about uploading the "same" file. --Cart (talk) 20:13, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --BoothSift 22:50, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment To examine the EXIF data (included any embedded colour profile) of an image on Commons, it is handy to follow the steps at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates/Archive 19#Jeffrey's Image Metadata Viewer where Christian Ferrer has written a little script to add a link to an online tool. If you examine this image then it does actually have an embedded sRGB colour profile. I'm not sure why Cart doesn't see one, and there's only one version of the file. Perhaps you could check again? Alvesgaspar, I wonder what profile you used when exporting your images as files for Hugin to assemble. Did you save them all with sRGB colour profile, or accidentally use another profile such as ProPhoto RGB or Adobe RGB? It is also worth checking that all your source images are set to the same colour temperature and tint -- usually they will not be if your camera is set to auto white balance. If they aren't, pick the average or best and ensure they are all set the same before exporting. For fixing up EXIF, exiftool is the one for the job, though it takes a bit to learn what the right options are. Alvesgaspar, if you view one of your source images (exported as JPG) in a browser and also this image in a browser, do they appear the same? If they do then we can't blame Hugin. Perhaps this is the colour Alvesgaspar saw or desires for the morning photo. It may still be worth experimenting with the RAW files for the tint (for green) or temperature (for blue coldness) to see if you prefer another. -- Colin (talk) 07:28, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I only looked at the exif where it says 'Uncalibrated'. I didn't think of using the tools mentioned above, but I thought you could sort it out one way or the other. :-) --Cart (talk) 08:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Footnote: I have learned that the EXIF information ‘Uncalibrated’ is rather unreliable. If I save a photo in AdobeRGB colourspace (with Photoshop), the EXIF data also say ‘Uncalibrated’, only further examination reveals that it is indeed AdobeRGB. --Aristeas (talk)
  • Cart, ah I didn't spot the "Color Space" tag. I only noticed that it has an embedded profile. And that is in fact what browsers do -- the "Color Space" EXIF tag is ignored by web browsers. Aristeas, this EXIF tag only has two values: sRGB or uncalibrated. A photo exported in any colour space other than sRGB should set this tag to uncalibrated (and embed the profile). So this makes me a little suspicious that Alvesgaspar's individual photos might have been exported with a colour space other than sRGB, even though the final image claims it is sRGB in the embedded profile. But it also could just be that Hugin lost the tag. I do seem to recall, when I used Hugin in the past, that it could get confused with colour spaces. -- Colin (talk) 09:05, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 13:05, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Plaza de la Glorieta - Las Manchas 16.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2019 at 04:56:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leaves sculpture, Plaza de La Glorieta, Las Manchas, La Palma

 I withdraw my nomination --Llez (talk) 11:13, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 13:07, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2019 at 06:54:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Martyrs' Window in Freiburg Minster
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:12, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Stained glass
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 07:31:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:11, 13 May 2019 (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 13 May 2019 at 15:32:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Alternative

[edit]

  • @Agnes Monkelbaan: interesting change, though the tall tree on the left is very nice when it's full. Perhaps you could try to get rid of the right part only, and change a bit the format (4:3 or just completely free). I may support such a version. Now I'm neutral -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:19, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Answer
  • No, I mean the tallest tree of the first version above. This is the best part of the picture in my view. So if I were you, I would just cut the building at the right. That would make a 4:3 format approximately. Note added -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:58, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative 2

[edit]

Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 15:52, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges#Netherlands
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 14:28:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dulahazara Safari Park is home to at least 4,000 animals of 165 species. It was developed on an undulating landscape of around 2,224 acres of area at Chakaria Upazila in Cox's Bazar District, Bangladesh.
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 15:54, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2019 at 07:02:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Northern part of Lake Wanaka with surrounding mountains, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:10, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 13:03:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Saslonch group from the hamlet Sacun in Urtijëi, South Tyrol
  •  Support We do have other FPs of these mountains, but the angle of this one is different enough for me to vote for it. The light is not great, but the resolution certainly is. The right frame is less sharp than the others indeed, but it's OK for me given the size of the panorama. Cmao20 (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Light is not ideal but I like it. It's kind of moody and I like that it gives the same color to the sky and the mountains. The right unsharp frame is alright I think, at 50 % it's not really visible and it still gives us resolution of 22 megapixels. Btw what do you use for removing dust spots? Lightroom has a feature "visualise spots" and it should help you to identify them. I marked a few more dustspots, please remove them :) Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 20:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the advice. I'll work on it. Normally I look for DSs increasing the contrast on the darker part with command-L and it works pretty well but for DS seekers it's probably not enough ;-). Cheers --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 15:56, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 06:00:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 05:26, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2019 at 09:45:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The apsis with gothic frescos and the main baroque altar in the St. Jacob church in Urtijëi, in Val Gardena.
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Italy

File:St Mary's, Bourne Street Church 1, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2019 at 06:43:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St Mary's, Bourne Street Church, London, UK, facing north east towards the altar.
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Tephra layers - San Andrés y Sauces 03.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2019 at 07:05:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tephra layers at the LP-4 near Cumbre San Andrés y Sauces, La Palma
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:12, 14 May 2019 (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 14 May 2019 at 15:28:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bilberry bush and moss in Gullmarsskogen ravine
  • Thanks! There is also a fly near the ant/bug/whatever, but I like the big lurking spider concealed in the bush. :) It's a bit difficult to spot so beware all small critters! --Cart (talk) 17:43, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I saw the fly but wasn't so sure but didn't want to embarrass myself if it was part of the twig. I have found the spider now and can just make out the web nearby. -- Colin (talk) 17:54, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • But, but, but without the twig, where would the ant sit? <<feign sobbing>> You are quite right that this photo has its roots in the children's books I read when I was very small, their pictures influenced my way of looking at forests. The books were by Elsa Beskow, a Swedish version of Beatrix Potter, and if you look at one or maybe two of her books you might recognize something. ;-) --Cart (talk) 09:21, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:26, 14 May 2019 (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 14 May 2019 at 18:33:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Coppery-tailed coucal
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:27, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2019 at 15:18:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Oppose Upon a second look, I am not wowed. --BoothSift 23:08, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
*@Boothsift: Photo cut out differently. --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:16, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That comment is not by me! --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*@Johann Jaritz: Photo cut out differently. --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:16, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This one neither, it seems someone is trying to be funny. --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:25, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2019 at 18:41:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lama glama
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:28, 14 May 2019 (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 14 May 2019 at 21:27:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rainbow over Waimakariri River just before sunset. Canterbury, New Zealand
@KennyOMG Can you please point me where it is exactly? I feel like these halos are often visible in a thumbnail but they're not actually there when you look at it in a full size. I don't know why. In a full size I see only halo like thing on the left side but that's just a white cloud behind the trees. I didn't apply any local local filters. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:51, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You can see them on thumbs more often because it exaggerates the effect. Open your pic in PS, Image > Adjustment > Equalize, then adjust the gamma (0,5 is probably a good guess) and you'll see it's present no matter the size. It bothers me on full size as well (without any ps wizardry). The lighter area on the left is not an issue, it's a legit cloud indeed. -- KennyOMG (talk) 07:23, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 22:57, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2019 at 20:55:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wilkin River close to its confluence with Makarora River, Otago, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:28, 14 May 2019 (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 22 May 2019 at 17:54:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Curious fox puppy on the way to Rysy, High Tatras, Slovakia


 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Very cute but unfortunately below the minimum 2Mpx. --Cart (talk) 21:53, 13 May 2019 (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. /--Cart (talk) 06:45, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 22:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bee fly (Lomata belzebul)
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 08:32, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was formely FPX; I replaced with FPC-results-reviewed so the buggy FPCbot picks it up. – Lucas 08:32, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2019 at 23:33:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Montreal panorama
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 08:31, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was formely FPX;I replaced with FPC-results-reviewed so the buggy FPCbot picks it up. – Lucas 08:31, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Webysther 20190126122247 - Serra da Mantiqueira.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 00:15:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •  Info created and uploaded by Webysther - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 00:15, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I think this is one of the panoramas with the highest resolution ever proposed. -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 00:15, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The horizon is everything but not straight. Also, I'd prefer more landscape and less clouds. ArionEstar, don't you want to slow down a bit? Your nominations exhaust local reviewers which is not good for the community and for the project. It seems like your nominations are based on hit and miss technique. Considering that most of the time it's the miss, I'd suggest that you take a break from FPC and study the reasons why your previous nominations were rejected and try to learn from these reasons. Some other users already expressed their concern about the number and the quality of your nominations. Considering how many users contribute to Commons, we're only a very small community here at FPC. It's sad to see regular reviewers annoyed and you're not taking their concerns into your consideration. Please, listen to them and slow down and choose your nominations more carefully. All the best, --Podzemnik (talk) 00:46, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Podzemnik: I think I have the same exact problem as Arion, we both withdraw and quickly nominate another image. Only Cart has brought it up with me though, do you think that we're being a little too harsh on Arion? --BoothSift 04:48, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Boothsift, the difference is that you are a new user on this forum and you are still learning how to select photos. You have improved in your ways of seeing the finer aspects of photography and what is expected of an FP. Arion has been here for many years and is rather going in the opposite direction when it comes to selecting photos. --Cart (talk) 05:35, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Boothsift: I think we're not too harsh, we're just politely asking Arion to put more effort into selecting the images he wants to nominate as most of his nominations are rejected. Not a big deal from my point of view. I think things written down often look more serious than they actually are :) I really like that there are users who nominate other users images like you or Arion, it just can get tiresome for the community to see 4 nominations from the same user on the same day and all being rejected. Further per Cart's comment :) Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 06:37, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - Without prejudice to this particular nomination, Arion, you might consider posting some thumbnails of pictures you're considering nominating to Com:Photography critiques. I've gotten some very useful advice there when there were photos I really liked but wasn't sure they would get a good reception here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:45, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Arion, even if you don't care about creating work for the voting FP community, could you please think about what you are doing to the photographers who's images you nominate? It is never pleasant to hear negative words about one's work. Yet for every careless nomination you create, a photographer gets 'pinged', you give them a false hope and they come to this page only to hear harsh words about their photos. A very careful selection process is not only about selecting the best photos, it is also about not bringing unnecessary negativity to people. If I nominate a 'bad' or controversial photo of my own and it gets shot down, it is not such a big deal, but I take very, very, very great care when I nominate someone else's photo since I don't want to disappoint them. --Cart (talk) 05:47, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I don't want to pile on here for just one user, but since it is being discussed... Another problem with frequent poor nominations where plenty fail, is that only a minority of reviewers are brave enough to oppose -- we have lots of reviewers who are so timid that they only ever support (as well as reviewers who support nearly everything). It is never pleasant to oppose a photo. As Cart notes, the photographer may get hurt or at least their ego knocked down a little. The opposer has to list the defects, whereas supporters can just leave a vote. And every review, done properly, requires examination (or familiarity with) existing FPs and existing images in the same category or style/subject. The reviewer has to consider if the image can be rescued by some change, or if it is hopeless. So, a proper review takes longer than it takes you to create your nomination, if you aren't doing such careful checks yourself. Multiply that by the several reviews needed before a withdrawal. I think that if the current rapid nominate-withdraw pattern continues at FP, we shall have to consider banning "withdraw" simply to slow down bad nominations/nominators and encourage good. Or some scheme where a withdraw is permitted but then you can't nominate again for 5 days. Perhaps some of this commentary belongs on the FP talk page or even along with the advice on nominating. -- Colin (talk) 07:58, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - Do we really want to change rules that apply to everyone, if the problem is really mostly with one user? I could imagine another solution, and I think you all know what I'm thinking of. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:30, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Colin I agree that it takes courage to oppose. I did my first oppose only a few weeks ago. Before that, I simply didn't feel confident enough to oppose so I didn't vote on FPC that I didn't like. Now, when I've gathered some skills in photography and know how it works here, I feel confident to oppose. I really value regular opposes like you or Ikan Kekek. I mentioned before that people should be encouraged to oppose more - at the end, it's not a big deal. Considering the rules, I was thinking to cap the number of images a user can nominate in a month like 10 or so, but I agree with Ikan that we should wait what happens. I don't really like adding more rules :) --Podzemnik (talk)
  •  Comment Podzemnik, Colin, Ikan, Cart: Arion seems to have retired now on Commons according to his user page. – Lucas 17:01, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lucsa, thanks for the info. Per Wikipedia:Retiring most retirals are temporary and simply a break due to frustrations. ArionEstar's nomination success-rate has gone down recently, which many people have noticed. A break is probably a healthy thing to do, and he's welcome back when he wants to. -- Colin (talk) 21:30, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 08:31, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was formely FPX; I replaced with FPC-results-reviewed so the buggy FPCbot picks it up. – Lucas 08:31, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chesterton Windmill, Chesterton - 2016.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2019 at 06:19:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chesterton Windmill, built in 1632
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:38, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Industry
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2019 at 08:41:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fusinus syracusanus (Linné, 1758), Syracusan Spindle Shell; Length 2.8 cm; Originating from Mytilene, Greece
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:39, 15 May 2019 (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 May 2019 at 22:01:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ultra rare sight of a Black-browed Albatross (Thalassarche melanophris) in the northern Hemisphere.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 13:36, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was formely FPX;I replaced with FPC-results-reviewed so the buggy FPCbot picks it up. – Lucas 13:36, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The bot skipped it, so I think it will not pick it up until after the usual five days minimum. --Cart (talk) 14:10, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2019 at 17:05:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Comment Thanks, a light sharpness has been applied and the the image is less dark now, --Cvmontuy (talk) 19:21, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose still not FP. And this is not a challenging shot to take. Charles (talk) 23:11, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Comparing the initial version and the recent "reprocessed" version, the sharpening has indeed brought a bit of "pop" (when viewed at screen size), but at the expense of strongly increased noise (when viewed at 100%). I think editing has gone a bit too far there. On my display, the third version from 18:52 looks just as sharp at screen size as the latest one, but without the excessive noise. The CA is also much less apparent in that version. Propose to maybe go back to that one and just brighten it up a bit … --El Grafo (talk) 08:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Noise has been reduced thanks --Cvmontuy (talk) 17:49, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 22:49, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Iguanidae_(Iguanas)
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 06:01:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ural owl nestling
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 06:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Formely FPX but now replaced with reviewed so the buggy bot picks it up, worked last time. – Lucas 06:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 05:07:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 06:50, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Formely FPX but now replaced with reviewed so the buggy bot picks it up, worked last time. – Lucas 06:50, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2019 at 10:04:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Marmota marmota
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /BoothSift 05:57, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2019 at 02:13:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

That Tree of Wanaka, in Lake Wanaka, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 10 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Boothsift (talk) 04:00, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2019 at 06:33:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ostrich in Bucaramanga, Colombia
  • Fair enough, sharpening is not a deciding factor for me. Could you please explain “larger-than-life”? I've never seen this expression in this context. – Lucas 19:11, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Larger than life" doesn't mean anything in my view since it depends on your device with the dimension of its pixels, or on the size of your prints. I've heard this expression only in macro photography, using macro lenses, with regards to the size of the subject in the sensor. For example a mosquito is considered "larger than life" on a full frame camera if its size on its 24x36 mm sensor is bigger than its size in reality (35 mm equivalent magnification). Here this head is definitely larger than the size of any standard sensor, so it's not "larger than life" in my opinion. And it is not particularly a small subject to photograph either. But this is shot at 42 mm and with a longer focal length (e.g. 300 mm) the bokeh of the background would have been better -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:15, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In post process, not really. The max focal length of this camera with a wider aperture could have been a compromise here during the shooting. Or with the same settings, a simple bottom-up view with a more homogeneous spread of trees or sky also could have helped to isolate the animal -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:14, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:14, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2019 at 21:50:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old Town Hall in Waischenfeld
  •  Comment - Does every artist know that, about flipping a painting? I have yet to hear that told to me or discussed by any of the hundreds of painters I know, including my father. I would question that, too - I think paintings are meant to be judged only right side up - but I'm curious to know if you have a convenient source for someone well-known who made that assertion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:21, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ikan Kekek, I have also heard the "look at the painting in a mirror". There are plenty of art tips that include both. [2], [3], [4], [5]. The idea is to free your mind from what you have painted and look at it with new eyes as if you haven't seen it before. Seeing it from another way, you see only lines and composition, not the object(s) in the painting. It's a version of the very old trick when you learn to paint or draw, to copy other images upside down so your brain will not get stuck in preconditioned ways. Another way is to draw the empty space between objects instead of the objects themselves. There are a number of these ways to see things in a new light. A really good painting will stand all these tests. --Cart (talk) 21:01, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cart, thanks for the links and remarks. At least one of those folks has real credentials, though for my own edification, I think I may ask my artist friends what they think of this idea and see if they agree. I think that concentrating on the empty space between objects and what shapes it makes is absolutely classic and has a lot to do with how still life painters set up their still life objects, so the idea of concentrating on the empty space in a drawing does sound like something any number of my artist friends could talk about. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:38, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, Ikan, very much for your spontaneous discussion, and Cart for the provided links. My background: when attending university some 35 years ago I took a series of courses in oil painting, engraving, and photography throughout my stay both to broaden my knowledge of the arts in general and to balance my studies for my more mathematically centred main subject. One of our tutors' shared mantras, himself a skilled artist (died 2004, see this link (in German)), was that one should turn / mirror / flip one's painting, etching, or sketch ever so often during the creative process and it should appeal to the eye in every orientation. Also squinting your eyes to obscure the details and thus view mainly the balance of colours and of tonality is often very helpful. Even our then photography tutor agreed that a photographer with artistical aspirations will instinctively reflect on the same procedures either at the moment of shooting an image or later on during cropping. Of course this does not apply rigorously to mainly photographical reproductions, but even these may be aesthetically pleasing when well-balanced in the above respect. I do hope that this explanation is satisfactory for you. Franz van Duns (talk) 08:21, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure it does. I can always stand to learn new things. I do know about squinting. I remember seeing my father do that a lot. Thanks for taking the time to explain. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:11, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 22:35, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture #Germany

File:Laurisilva - Parque Cultural La Zarza 02.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2019 at 07:48:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Footpath through the Laurel forest (laurisilva) of the Parque Cultural La Zarza, La Palma
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •  Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:48, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Llez (talk) 07:48, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment It looks like you've taken this with the wrong flash setting. A "slow sync" flash might have been better. (From flash manual: "When taking pictures against a dark background landscape, slow sync will slow the shutter speed when the flash is activated. Dark background landscape will appear brighter.") For example, I used this trick on this photo with similar hard light conditions. After attempting several combos and settings, the slow sync was the only one that worked. --Cart (talk) 09:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I'm more bothered by the shadows from the flash and the noticeable light fall-off from the flash from front to back. I'm also not sure what the subject is supposed to be. The composition looks random and at least the thick branch on the top right should have been cropped entirely. – Lucas 11:08, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
With the slow sync flash you get less prominent shadows from the flash; one reason why I mentioned it. --Cart (talk) 11:28, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 09:48, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Asiatic lion marking its territory.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2019 at 13:39:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Asiatic lion marking its territory
  • Sorry, since you did withdraw it, it is archived manually and not by the Bot (It is ignoring 'withdraw' templates and will let this run for the full nine days before it picks it up). You have to do your test some other way. Trust me, we are very tired of this malfunctioning Bot and that no one will fix it, I can't do that I'm sorry to say --Cart (talk) 13:11, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination Thanks for you votes/reviews Eatcha (Talk-Page) 12:42, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't know exactly. It has been ignoring some of its tasks (not closing/removing FPX, FPD, withdraw, reading any additional file as an Alt, not responding to templates like 'weak support', etc.) as long as I have been active on FPC. So at least since June 2016. I have asked the BotPeople several times to get it fixed, without success. If you know how to fix it (or know someone who can), that would be WONDERFUL! I have sort of given up by now. --Cart (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You can simply ask on the talk page of one of the admins. (BTW, do you have the Preferences → Gadgets → Interface: Other → MarkAdmins box checked to keep track of what users are admins?) I think the right admin for this would be Yann since they have also worked a lot with keeping the FPC list clean when the Bot is not working properly. Or they may know who to contact. --Cart (talk) 13:53, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eatcha, sorry, I forgot to ping, but I guess you are watching this anyway. --Cart (talk) 13:59, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cart,Sorry for my vague reply, Actually Wikimedia Admins aren't the admin of a particular tool hosted on the tools server. I mean the person who created the tool (The FPCBot)? Or any other person with that level of privilege who can add me to the maintainers list ? I know that the creator is inactive now -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 14:03, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Eatcha: The source code for the bot is updated with any changes from github daily. If you submit patches to the GitHub project, Daniel had said previously that he will review/commit it. He is still active on GitHub. If you want to formally take over, you'll need to ask him. -- KTC (talk) 15:46, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess we can pull the source code from somewhere else instead as well, but I don't think direct changes to the code on Cloud with no version control somewhere accssible would be a good idea. -- KTC (talk) 15:50, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • KTC, I emailed him about the issue and if he has no problem in stepping down. If I say that I would stay here for years that would be a lie but I would at least fix the issues once in a 6 months if I takeover and then left commons and please note that as of now I am not used to the Wikimedia tool-forge , I joined it just 4 days ago but I can fix this python script + add new features in the BOT. -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 18:10, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eatcha, do not feel any pressure! If you can fix it for now, that would be fantastic. You can stay as long, or short, as you like. Someone else will take over after you, at least we would get the code updated and the Bot fixed for now. And don't think you have to answer any posts right away, we all have normal lives too. --Cart (talk) 18:16, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • There's really nothing about Cloud that need to be understood unless you want to do more. At the moment, all it's being used for here is a server that's up all the time running two cron job, one git pull'ing daily from the GitHub repo, and the other calling the bot script 3 times a day. -- KTC (talk) 09:00, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Eatcha and KTC. I just read the mail and replied to it, and now noticed this thread. Just want to say that it's correct that I am not active here anymore but as mentioned I will be able to review incoming fixes to the github repository. And I think it's a good idea to replace me as the main contact person for the bot. (I have also updated my talk page and the FPCBot page to be more clear about this)./Daniel78 (talk) 11:06, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Bug fixing will be discussed on cart's talk page. Want to know why ? because she was the reporter and this page is not a talk-page after all. Thanks, --Eatcha (Talk-Page) 18:09, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:11, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2019 at 13:15:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Salon of Ambassadors, Alcázar of Seville
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 17:23, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Cathédrale Notre-Dame - extérieur - cadran solaire (Strasbourg).jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2019 at 10:21:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:14, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2019 at 19:03:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of Dortmund.
@DerMische I think nobody doubts technical quality or usefulness of your panorama. I think that folks are missing "wow factor" that is possibly the most important for FP star, and composition that is easy to identify. --Podzemnik (talk) 23:00, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what your intention was, but the result is not outstanding to me. The lighting is not especial, the contrast maybe a bit too high but the crop everywhere lacking a balance with the sky is what I really missed here. There are cases where what you aimed to do may work but for that there should be some kind of clear separation between the subject and the surroundings (e.g. with help of a city wall). Just my thoughts Poco2 07:20, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:12, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 13:37:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Volokolamskaya metro station
Confirmed results:
Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:14, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Russia
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 20:16:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise over Lake Wanaka from Boundary Creek, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:15, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 18:27:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset by Wapta Falls
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:18, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Canada
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 19:06:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

One of the cases of being at the right place at the right time while having the camera and the right lens with me. The picture shows the St. Nikolaus Church in Mittelberg on the Ritten plateau, just before a huge thunderstorm. My first images had the strong rainbow, but with the church still in the shadow, but luckily the sky opened a bit further, placing the church in the limelight.
  • Thanks for showing it. :-) You might be a bit too hard on yourself, the photo has some other qualities and the technical quality is good enough for some articles. It also helps explain this photo in case someone is in doubt if it's real. --Cart (talk) 05:40, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 30 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:21, 18 May 2019 (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 28 May 2019 at 09:05:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 16:27, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2019 at 08:35:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An abstract water sculpture on the north forecourt of Hatfield House in Hertfordshire, England
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Fountains
  •  Info created & uploaded by User:Acabashi - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek.
  •  Support I got mixed but mostly positive feedback at COM:Photography critiques, so I decided to try a nomination here and see how it does. I love the form and the dramatic juxtaposition of the partly sunlit metallic gray sculpture with the much more threatening dark gray and white thunderstorm clouds, a kind of commentary to me on the difference between the cheery fountains in which humans control water and the elemental forces that actually keep us alive, but on their own sometimes violent terms. (By the way, are fountains "Objects"? Please recategorize if you can do better.) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak oppose The cold light on the sculpture and water plus the clouds are gorgeous, but the very black shadows in the trees spoils the image IMO. Might be fixable from raw. --Cart (talk) 08:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:30, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Fountains

File:2017.07.04.-17-Scharmuetzelsee-Bad Saarow--Nebelkraehe.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2019 at 18:08:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hooded crow - Corvus cornix
  • The eyes / head shall stay close to the center. Especially when you zoom into the picture. Also the plants heads in the background would be cut off. The crop is right as it is IMO. --Hockei (talk) 10:59, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 21:19, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cog wheel on a huge crane claw - 1.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2019 at 19:28:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cog wheel on a huge crane claw
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 21:18, 19 May 2019 (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 19 May 2019 at 15:14:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alces alces andersoni
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 21:24, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima by Joe Rosenthal.jpg (delist and replace), delisted and replaced

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 05:22:46
Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima by Joe Rosenthal Proposed replacement

Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 11:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Bath Abbey Eastern Stained Glass, Somerset, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2019 at 21:27:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The stained glass and altar at the eastern end of Bath Abbey in Somerset, England.
  • Ikan Kekek, There is only one other FP of Bath Abbey, this one, which is taken in the opposite direction to the one I've nominated, and is more focussed on showing the fan-vaulted ceiling rather than the stained glass. I made sure that was the only one by looking through the entire religious building interiors category (or at least the UK section). Cmao20 (talk) 06:36, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 05:11, 20 May 2019 (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 24 May 2019 at 00:00:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sun over Lake Hawea, New Zealand
I can practically hear the celestial choir doing its oohs and aaahs over these crepuscular rays to end all crepuscular rays ... Daniel Case (talk) 04:23, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 05:11, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural_phenomena#Sun
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 02:33:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

What Our Girls Are Doing
I keep part of the frame @Ikan Kekek:  @Cmao20: Ezarateesteban 11:59, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I can't understand the manuscript letter too much, could you please provide the transcription, please? Ezarateesteban 23:03, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok done. The next time perhaps you should stick to nominating things you understand since you are responsible for your nom. --Cart (talk) 10:34, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks W.carter. Remember that Wikimedia projects are based on collaborative projects, all we must help to picture be featured Ezarateesteban 13:54, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ezarate Wikimedia Commons is surely a collaborative project, but I agree with Cart that you as nominator are responsible for the picture and the nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 20:14, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 05:09, 20 May 2019 (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 25 May 2019 at 14:14:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 17:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Formerly FPX changed to FPC-reviewed for the buggy bot – Lucas 17:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 05:10:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An Asmat Wood Carver
Moving to  Neutral per below--BoothSift 22:59, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 14:26, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 12:55:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • inside front cover
    inside front cover
  • inside rear cover
    inside rear cover
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media#Animals
  •  Info created by John Cotton/ State Library of Victoria - uploaded by Pigsonthewing - nominated by Pigsonthewing -- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:55, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Additional info "44 images (samples below above) of sketches of the birds of the Port Phillip District, NSW, Australia, made in the notebook of the ornithologist John Cotton between 1844 and his death in 1849. Kudos to the State Library of Victoria, who have digitised these and made these high-resolution tiffs freely available, recognising that no copyright in them exists." per Andy Mabbett's comment on the FPC talk page. --Cart (talk) 18:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:55, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support High value.--Peulle (talk) 14:46, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Are we to understand that you are in fact nominating the entire notebook, since you have that title on the nom as well as the "samples" in your comment? If an image is to be integrated into the FP system, every image need to be included in the nomination, not just a few samples. All the images will be examined individually, and all of them needs to hold the FP standard in order for the set to be promoted. It's a pretty tall order with 44 images... but if so, you need to withdraw this nom and create a new one with all the images. One of the now active users who have made similar large batch noms is Adam Cuerden, perhaps he can give you a few pointers. I have also changed the FP category since "Animals/Birds" is for species photos of birds; these are paintings with several families on some pages. --Cart (talk) 18:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment These are very good, but I think for them to qualify as a set nomination we'd need to nominate all of them rather than a fairly random selection. I would support if we had a nomination with all the images. Cmao20 (talk) 19:22, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Gnosis (talk) 20:51, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose as not any single page considered by itself is FP-worthy for me and being a complete set should not lower standards. On the reproduction side, the resolution is far too low to appreciate any details. The Phase One P 45 this is captured with has 39 MP but here not even half of that is left (deep crop or—most likely—a downscale for the web archive).
    Basic leveling correction and better cropping around the pages is needed. I have a suspicion that pages laying underneath could be leaking through and these pages are visible on the edges poking out (especially that green sticker). Each page should have been folded to be separate. Some pages should be turned vertically because the drawing and text demands it.
    On the artwork itself: one page doesn't even contain any drawings, only text. Some pages have their drawings not colored in but in an earlier draft stage and a lot of pages have a mix of drafts and fully colored birds and their environment. Only the pages with fully colored drawings, in full resolution and some minor corrections done (see above) would get my support. – Lucas 21:08, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Before I would even consider some of these paintings and their texts for FP, I would like to have transcriptions of the text on the file pages, identifying what birds are depicted and what the text says about them. Perhaps with accompanying files where the texts are identified in some way similar to these hand painted Canton maps by a Swedish cartographer (also made in the age of the explorers), that I transcribed and translated some time ago: 1, 2, 3 and 4. Old documents like these should be as comprehensive and correctly presented as possible for FPs. --Cart (talk) 22:23, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've looked at only a few of the photos so far, but the ones I looked at were FPs to me, so I'd expect to support a set nomination if the transcriptions Cart refers to were made. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:10, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support We can't avoid the back border. Orientation is not an issue for me. As for the quality, we also need to consider the book as a whole. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Different solutions exist to avoid these heavy and unaesthetic black borders. Either you insert a white sheet of paper behind your document when you scan or when you shoot (like this), or you make fine crops with clean restorations of the corners of each page (like this). In both cases, you get elegant images when you download and print afterwards -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:51, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 11 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bighorn Sheep - Kananaskis.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2019 at 17:40:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bighorn sheep in foggy autumn Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 23:49, 20 May 2019 (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 May 2019 at 14:50:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 23:48, 20 May 2019 (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 May 2019 at 15:04:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castle Eberstein on Schlossberg
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 23:48, 20 May 2019 (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 21 May 2019 at 05:41:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Paysandisia archon, male
 Comment Butterflies are alive and very capricious! By shooting at F25-29 you are sure to have a good quality image, with diffractions. At F7-10 you have a very beautiful image but if it moves it will be fuzzy and if it does not move you will have a lot of areas that will be out of depth of field. In this case, the distortions have been corrected. The iridescence on the butterflies are all natural.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:39, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 05:52, 21 May 2019 (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 21 May 2019 at 10:30:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Hi, the "photographer" (Rodrigo) here, well I pretty much now what I want, and what I want when I grow up... nothing that matters to this evaluation.
But, just to explain for the others, first it was dark and this is a Kiss X7, a noisy entry level camera, so long exposure was a necessity.
Second, I wanted more DOF, without stacking a lot of photos (also because of the next reason)
And finally, the most important, to remove the people around the building, that you even notice, but they were a lot, I mean a lot:i.e., i.e., of people, especially in the light events.
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 21:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton, you misunderstood Daniel. He is talking about the photo growing up, not you. It is a metaphor that can easily get "lost in translation". --Cart (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 17:58, 21 May 2019 (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 21 May 2019 at 08:14:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bottom view of the iwan of the main entrance of Fatima Masumeh Shrine, Qom, Iran.
  • Ikan, no. Regretfully, from this low perspective, the modern lamps don't fit in and stick out visually, but from another angle they wouldn't be so prominent and wouldn't be a problem. I oppose because of visual disturbance, not because of the existence of modern appendages. – Lucas 21:22, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 17:57, 21 May 2019 (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 26 May 2019 at 03:01:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape with stormy clouds and a pirogue on the Mekong at golden hour in Si Phan Don
  • Clouds would fit also, but Natural gathers several elements, and that's more a landscape for me. Concerning the shadow, reducing the intensity with Lightroom would work but I prefer not to alter the reality. The boat is in the light. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:14, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Laos
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2019 at 03:42:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sepia smithi
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 11:15:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A member of the ATS (Auxiliary Territorial Service) serving with a 3.7-inch anti-aircraft gun battery, December 1942
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:28, 22 May 2019 (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 22 May 2019 at 06:16:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

50 Pfennig "Notgeld" banknote (1920) of Berchtesgaden, Germany.
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 11:25:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Buddha Amitabha in His Pure Land of Suvakti, Central Tibet
  • @Llez: This is certainly not perfectly rectangular. From the right side, it seems to be tilted CCW. But from the bottom, it seems to be tilted CW. And from the left side and the top, it seems OK. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:24, 22 May 2019 (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 26 May 2019 at 09:04:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • The engraving you found is certainly closer to the one in the nomination. Looking at the curls, necktie and shadows in the that engraving, it might be based on the one I found (1720) since it is just a book illustration of a later date (1878). --Cart (talk) 12:01, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • didn't "find" the engraving. The file description gives sources for the Newton engraving and the tree engraving. Only the apple is original. I agree that there are similarities (the mouth shape is different) which may indicate it being derivative. The etch marks are nearly identical in the SVG. -- Colin (talk) 13:02, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I don't understand why sky in the left side of the tree is black but on the other side is white. The reproduction in SVG can't have been trivial but there is less detail than the original, especially where the dark area of hair has effectively been crushed to solid black. One other problem with the montage is that Newton is lit from the left, the tree is lit from the front-right and the apple from the front. The apple just seems randomly placed. -- Colin (talk) 11:52, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The composition, light, placing of apple, partial heavy frame and everything is well within the artistic freedom and style of Art Nouveau. Nothing wrong with it, I only question if this work is original enough to be FP. Looking at the style of the creator, I'd also guess that the tree is borrowed from some other work. --Cart (talk) 12:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes only the apple is original. I guess it just doesn't work for me :-). It also isn't clear to me why one would want to emulate an etching in SVG rather than create a more realistic image. -- Colin (talk) 13:02, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Request If you don't intend to 'withdraw' or 'FPX contested' this nom, would you please not close and archive this. It can be used to check if or how long it will take for FPCBot to deal with this. Thank you for helping us improve the Bot. If the nominator whishes to make a new nomination, I think that would be ok since they would be "donating" the end/closing of this nom to the Bot Fixing Project. :-) --Cart (talk) 10:16, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Not going to overcome these 4 opposes in the time that is left and per the opposes--BoothSift 02:34, 21 May 2019 (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. /--Cart (talk) 06:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 14:43:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 15:32, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:59, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 13:30:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Skulls and bones in the ossuary of Hallstatt, Upper Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:59, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 21:35:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Taranaki Falls Walking Track in Tongariro National Park in Manawatu-Wanganui Region, North Island of New Zealand
  • Fischer.H, es ist nicht nur Höflichkeit, im 'oppose' einen Grund anzugeben, sondern es steht in den Abstimmungsregeln COM:KEB : "Bitte füge ein paar Worte an, warum dir das Bild gefällt oder nicht gefällt, insbesondere wenn du dagegen stimmst. (Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate)". Bitte geben Sie einen Grund an. --Cart (talk) 11:25, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 07:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ruta de los Volcanes - Llano de Jable - Caldera de Taburiente - La Palma.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2019 at 08:41:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from Ruta de los Volcaes at the western slope of the Pico Birigoyo on the the Llano del Jable, the Montaña Enrique and the Montaña Quemada, in the background the Caldera de Taburiente, La Palma
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 16:56, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2019 at 06:42:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Borobudur temple Park, Indonesia
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Cmao20 (talk) 06:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2019 at 03:20:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trillium grandiflorum blooming in the North Walker Woods, Ontario, Canada.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 16:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2019 at 21:38:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the old bridge over the Main in Würzburg, Bavaria, Germany
  • Ikan Kekek, you are quite right, it is fixed now. I have also fixed another dust spot in the sky in the middle of the image. Tournasol7, sorry for editing your picture but I think I have done an OK job of it; feel free to revert if you'd rather do it yourself. Cmao20 (talk) 06:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 22:54, 23 May 2019 (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 23 May 2019 at 05:12:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Seed Fluff bulrush Typha latifolia
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 06:38, 23 May 2019 (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 22 May 2019 at 21:49:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kerspetalsperre, a reservoir close to Halver, Kierspe und Wipperfürth (Germany)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 04:58, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 20:36:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

One of my collection of record players. This image displays both the initial and final positions of the pick-up cartridge with the stylus below resting in the record groove. A music signal is generated when the vinyl record with its engraved audio signal is accelerated to the precise rotatation speed and the lowered stylus thus inevitably travels the full length of the groove from the beginning to the very end.
  •  Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:34, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will support, too, once Franz van Duns specifies the make and model of the turntable, or at least the tonearm (and the stylus if it's a different brand). I think that's relevant if anyone wants to use such a great closeup of a tonearm and stylus in a reference article. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:44, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info My, I'm flabbergasted! A nomination as featured candidate just 10+ months after joining Wiki Commons. Yes, of course, I will provide all the requested information in due time. First of all, it is a Technics SL-120 turntable, purchased by a friend's father in the late 1970-ies. Second: the pick-up cartridge is a Shure V-15 type III Stereo Dynetic Phonograph Cartridge (now corrected), and together with the record player and a stash of exquisitely preserved classical records I also acquired a spare cartridge in an elegantly fashioned box. Third: I'll also try to find out the brand of the J-shaped tonearm. Finally: of course, I could easily remove the tiny dark triangle at lower right, or even make a fully sharp image of the currently blurred white knobs in the foreground by including a vastly greater number of images in the focus stack, but after having given thought to this matter (and others) I decided proactively to preserve these features. Why? When viewed at full resolution these supposedly distracting "kinks" just vanish in my eye. But, as King of Hearts noticed, it is not alone in my eye, but in the wiki user's to decide what is agreeable and appropriate at standard wiki viewing sizes. Phew, it is very late now in Germany - I'll muse over this matter tomorrow. Great thanks for your support! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franz van Duns (talk • contribs) 08:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, Franz, and welcome to FPC! Please sign your post (type 4 tildes [~] in a row), and also, please add the information about the turntable, tonearm and stylus to the file description on the file page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:35, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Cuz why not--BoothSift 01:43, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Like the detail and DoF. -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 03:12, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The level of blur in the foreground is unpleasant -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Request Franz, per above, the make and model should get included on the file page, and also any major manipulations or double exposures should be mentioned. The image shows two tonearms, it should be made clear that the real thing only has one (if that's the case). – Lucas 07:53, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:14, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info It was getting really, really late and I made a few mistakes and omissions which I shall now correct. This "double-headed" image was explicitly created by me as a tongue-in-cheek entry for the somewhat whimsical Wiki Commons Photo challenge/2019 - April - Beginning and end, thus the contorted title "Groove and needle in close embrace from beginning to end" and the deliberately almost poetical description text related to the stylus' movement from, well, beginning to end. As conspicuously noted in a frame below the summary box on the image page it is composed as a focus stack of 20 images (to be precise I took two focus stacks, one with the cartridge on the left and the other after carefully having lifted the cartridge to the right. These two stacks were subsequently merged). Focus stacking is mandatory to achieve a great depth of detail in macroscopic regions, but also works just as well for larger objects. When I participated in the above mentioned competition last month I assumed that the concise information I had provided would suffice for that purpose. I now see a certain conflict concerning the demands for (a) a contest entry versus (b) an unexpected nomination for featured picture status. For this reason I will momentarily refrain from altering the image during the current voting period, given that I have already been awarded 2 stars for exactly this version and will not replace it by one of the two focus stacks it is based on, but, as Lucas suggests, I will duly add some extra facts to the text. By the way, the pick-up arm is a SME model 3009 series II improved. Thanx for all your comments. I am willing to learn from you all, as a community. Franz van Duns (talk) 09:55, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Franz van Duns, per Ikan's and Lucas' comments above, could you please add the technical info, as well as the part about the double exposure, you have given us here to the |description= part of the file info on the file's page. This page will be archived in 9 days and the info needs to accompany the file for all users to see in a convenient way. Thank you. --Cart (talk) 10:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:29, 23 May 2019 (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 May 2019 at 20:23:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reflexions in the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, United States
The new crop is better, I strike my oppose vote. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:30, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Reflections

File:Roque de los Muchachos - ORM - LST-1 - 01.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 18:09:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Large-Sized-Telescope LST-1 (LST), Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos (ORM), La Palma
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:31, 23 May 2019 (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 27 May 2019 at 06:56:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aletta Jacobs
  • @Ikan Kekek: I'm afraid I can't tell you more than that. I suppose 8 inches would be oddly large for a photo in a secondary mount, but the number of circular portraits I've seen is... possibly only this one, as they're usually oval, so I don't actually know. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:37, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 22:57, 23 May 2019 (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 26 May 2019 at 17:46:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brachysomophis cirrocheilos
  • Thanks Cart for notifying me about the problem, but it's actually designed to read any image larger than 150 as an alternative. ∴ any image which is defined smaller than 150 can be used without any problem. Please define them smaller than 150px, it's not a function of actual file size. -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 12:38, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfortunately, what is written in the Bot description and what is happening in reality are often two very different things since the Bot is malfunctioning on many levels. This little eye is smaller than your little happy guy, even so it caused the Bot to close the nom like this with an "Alt" comment. Do as you wish, I just hope you are not causing any trouble for this nom. --Cart (talk) 12:56, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2019 at 23:11:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amazon Kingfisher ( Chloroceryle amazona) at Cano Negro, Costa Rica

* Support --Ermell (talk) 21:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately they voted twice--Boothsift (talk) 22:33, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 23:12, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Alcedinidae
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2019 at 16:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fresco on the apse in the St. Jacob church in Urtijëi,in Val Gardena - Leonhard von Brixen 15th century.
  • Easy! He said he found the man depicted ugly, not that he found your photograph ugly for any other reason. In my humble opinion, it would be best if you backed off and tried not to make this personal. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • So describing the things I photograph as junk is fair game, but any timid comment against the unquestionable beauty of anything in front of your lens is sacrilege, of course ... Nur die Ruhe, whatever I write it's only one vote of many and not worth this amount of bickering. – Lucas 10:38, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:05, 24 May 2019 (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 24 May 2019 at 06:59:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pilgrimage church Saints Primus and Felician with rosary church, Maria Wörth, Carinthia, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2019 (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 29 May 2019 at 04:59:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

TEST NOM

test nom -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 05:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC) test nom[reply]

  •  Info The Bot closed this as 'Featured' but since it is a test nom, I will mark it as 'Not Featured' and archive it manually so it will not enter the FP system. --Cart (talk) 08:30, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /(test nom) --Cart (talk) 08:30, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:2017.07.06.-30-Grosser_Storkower_See_Storkow_(Mark)--Saphirauge-Paar_bei_Eiablage.jpg, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2019 at 21:18:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Goblet-marked damselfly - Erythromma lindenii, couple laying eggs
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 08:25, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2019 at 03:00:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

New Brighton Pier during the sunset, Christchurch, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 08:23, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#New_Zealand
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2019 at 08:20:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Altar of Our Lady at the catholic parish church Hallstatt, Upper Austria – View for weekdays with closed wings
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 12:27, 25 May 2019 (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 29 May 2019 at 09:24:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 12:31, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2019 at 17:38:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Little egret put to flight
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:28, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:"Wind Mountain" Columbia R - NARA - 102278851 (page 1).png, featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2019 at 23:45:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Wind Mountain". Columbia River (above Cascades) looking up
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media
  •  Info created by unknown- uploaded by US National Archives bot - nominated/restored by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 23:45, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Ezarateesteban 23:45, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - Hi. The identification of this photo is incomplete, so I cannot judge the photo yet. From https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305488, the link that is given in the file description: "These records are manuscript watercolor views along the northwest boundary between the Rocky Mountains and Point Roberts. The sketches were created by James W. Alden who accompanied the survey party that, during the 1860's and in compliance with the Treaty of 1846, was responsible for recording characteristics of the northwestern boundary of the United States." This information is also provided there: "Specific Media Type: Paper". So "Author" is not "Unknown or not provided" but James W. Alden, and the medium must be specified as "Watercolor on paper". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:38, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Can you examine the NARA template properties and set the appropriate parameter to remove the "Please do not overwrite this file" warning -- this is a restoration file, rather than an original. Also the "This file was provided to" licence text isn't correct for this file either, since this file is a derivative. What makes you think the original backing paper was neutral grey, and the painting from 1850s on pure Xerox white copy paper? Look at the white swirling cloud on the right and the leftmost edge of it. In the original, the artist has given the cloud a bright white "silver lining" but in your restoration it is a cold blue tint. I think it is one thing to repair damage but quite another to change the colours of an artwork, without any reference. It will have yellowed/aged over the years, but is unlikely to have been a modern white. Also I don't understand why the border has got slim black/transparent triangles -- it's as though you rotated the whole image after cropping. But the original border/background paper is huge so the background can be cut square. -- Colin (talk) 07:29, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Regretfully, I agree with Colin, but I would go back to the original and see whether a more subtle restoration is possible that's a little more true to the original. Cmao20 (talk) 09:39, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Very good now, thanks.  Support clearly. Cmao20 (talk) 18:30, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Redone, only removed dust spots Ezarateesteban 23:42, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment - That seems to look better, and you should ping those who voted. And you fixed the problems I laid out above. But what's with this notice in Metadata? "Copyright (C) reserved" Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:45, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The metadata and the copyright is copied from the original that was uploaded as PD so it isn't an issue IMHO
@Cmao20: @Colin: @Ikan Kekek: Ezarateesteban 13:41, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why isn't it an issue for the metadata to contradict the copyright status? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Copyright (C) reserved" Who reserved that copyright? It may added by the camera. Furthermore the artwork is made is made between 1857-1862 so is in PD in USA. There is nothing to doubt about copyright Ezarateesteban 15:19, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK.  Support, but that notice should be deleted, then. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:01, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /BoothSift 04:43, 26 May 2019 (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 25 May 2019 at 14:14:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 21:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2019 at 19:12:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Macaca nigra self-portrait
Well he should have just went along with it, not try to own the image or whatever he did. --BoothSift 06:16, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing against your compassion for the photographer, but in my opinion we should only judge the photograph itself and not the story behind it. – Lucas 06:18, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Destroyed a photographer's life"? You must be joking. Actually he certainly made a huge amount of money selling this to whoever wanted it. This whole story was just a very successful marketing scam. Why do you think PETA claimed a copyright on it? For the animal's welfare? Ha! Ha! Ha! Regards, Yann (talk)
  • Actually, this is pretty much a good picture. Sometimes humans don't manage to get so nice shots. The eyes are in focus, it is not blurry, the facial expression is awesome. The DoF is a bit narrow, but considering the distance, certainly a corrected version would get a chance as FP if it was nominated by a regular photographer. This picture is of good quality, it is a striking portrait, the monkey looks curious, smiling and surprised, that's what makes it great IMO. Because it is a selfie, it means the animal is 100% natural in its environment, not distracted by humans, just captivated by its "game". And that is special -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:12, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a lot of good quality photos that doesn't wow me and this is one of them. Btw, it's debated weather the facial expressions of monkeys and apes show the same emotions as those of humans. --Cart (talk) 08:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I've changed my view on this image over the years. I think what PETA did and what Wikimania did with the image was disgraceful and disrespectful, but PETA lawsuit aside, I don't buy the claim it destroyed his career. It looks like the photographer (like most) didn't have a particularly great career to begin with and is bitter that taking a viral photo didn't change things for the better. He claims he's "lost £10,000" but that's speculation about what he might have earned, not money he actually had and lost. If the 30 minutes of monkeying-around with his camera hadn't produced the "money selfie" he'd have been the same broke photographer he says he is now. The claim to fame is that it is entirely a "monkey selfie" whereas David's claim to ownership is that he engineered the situation. His story now is that he was attempting to photograph the apes as they groomed and played with him, but discovered they would play with the camera if he sat next to it, holding the tripod. If instead of being a "selfie", David had pressed the button as an ape gazed at her reflection in the glass, it wouldn't have been a "selfie" and not have gone viral. The whole magic of the photo is the "what's the chance of that?" and "what a clever ape!" reactions. Being a professional photographer is about consistently satisfying the client with great photos and being relied upon to do so next time, not one single photo created by a chance encounter in 30 mins. A look at David's website suggests this photo is the only thing that separates him from any other wildlife photographer who runs workshops to make a living. -- Colin (talk) 08:16, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Maybe, maybe not, who knows for sure. In any case I don't want commons to turn into a platform that pinches material from creators who don't consent or share their work voluntarily under a cc license. That's the main reasoning behind my opposing vote. The image actually might even warrant an FP status. It's striking, popular, well known & well done. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:18, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with not pinching material, but the raison d'être for this image is that the ape is the "creator" and it was a wild chance encounter rather than a trained animal. If David had creative input into the work, then it isn't a "monkey selfie", and no different to any other (of many) photos of these apes grinning. But if the ape is the creator then they don't get copyright. Neither do US Gov employees, whether they consent voluntarily or not. I don't think David can have it both ways. I think it quite rational to oppose for the reasons you give. -- Colin (talk) 12:55, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a striking image yes, but not the work of the owner of the camera. Otherwise you can claim to be the artist when someone just borrows your material, after publishing their shots in newspapers. Is that "your work" ? No. You just bought the camera, and expect to become millionnaire because someone talented pushed the button. In this case, the talented subject is a monkey, and legally there's no ownership for this species (fortunately or unfortunately, but in any case the owner of the camera would not be the artist). So, for now, this picture is like the work of someone who took a shot of the Mona Lisa in the Louvre Museum and claims to be the owner of the work. We just say "This painting is in the public domain", that's not "yours", it belongs to Da Vinci. But you engage lawyers and absolutely want to sell your photo of the Mona Lisa. Well, sorry that's your problem, there are laws. And now if you can't pay the attorneys, you're a bit responsible too. Maybe you can expect recognition for your work (go visiting the macaques in Indonesia), but only the fair part, not the extra part (means not this lucky selfie). That is public domain. Your story and the camera belong to you, you were not forced to publish anything, now the picture belongs to everyone -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:41, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think your comparison with photographing a PD artwork is valid. Copyright law is what it is, there is no logic to it, and the law is pretty settled in the US at least. The thing is, if David had set his camera up with an intervalometer to take a pic every few seconds, or had rigged a trigger trap to detect an ape walking by, or had remotely triggered the shutter when the ape pulled a funny face, he'd have full copyright of the image, but it would not have gone viral: it wouldn't be a "selfie". That's the claim he's chosen to make, and if you take him at his word that the ape took the photo, then he loses rights to the image. If instead, he engineered the photo, then his claim is a fraud, and he'd still not be entitled to his £10,000. -- Colin (talk) 15:06, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eatcha, I see no reason why the bot shoudn't recognize and calculate with all possible templates used by people. – Lucas 19:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Edit conflict) I think the {{unsupport}} is a too problematic template to add to the tuple since I doubt the Bot will be able to pair it with the right {{support}} vote without a major code re-write. It is hardly ever used and it is better that users are very clear in their votes. There will always pop up strange templates that someone found somewhere, a human will have to check those. --Cart (talk) 19:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 12 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 21:59, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Example.svg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2019 at 18:56:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Test Image

File:Example image.png

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2019 at 04:57:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

TEST IMAGE
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 06:38:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pacific reef heron (Egretta sacra), Boat Harbour, New South Wales, Australia
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 18:52, 26 May 2019 (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 26 May 2019 at 08:26:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
I have applied a tiny bit of Smart Sharpness to the photo, please revert if you don't like it. --Cart (talk) 09:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me as well, Thank you--Bijay chaurasia (talk) 10:01, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 18:57, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 19:10:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flower of Celmisia semicordata in Dunedin Botanic Garden, Dunedin, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:18, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales

File:Caldera de Taburiente - View from Mirador de los Roques 01.jpg, not featured

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2019 at 05:22:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Mirador de los Roques on the Caldera de Taburiente, La Palma
  • You are right, sometimes shadows in the foreground can't be avoided. But that is when you take 2-3 photos with different EV and merge them. Like in this example where the light conditions were almost identical. It is a merge from three photos with slightly different time, one for the foreground (ferns in shadow), one for the middle (leaves on trees) and one for the lit trees in the distance. --Cart (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 04:45, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 22:30:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reflexions in the water
  •  Comment - I wouldn't support cloning out the plants. They are part of the scene. I do support opposing the nomination because you don't like the way the plants look in context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That is a better way of putting it, then--BoothSift 03:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 05:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bahram Gur hunting
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:17, 27 May 2019 (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 31 May 2019 at 10:25:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Shell of an Orchid Murex, Chicoreus orchidiflorus
  •  Comment Still, I've worked with the MP-E 60 mm lens—which I suppose you are using—with focus stacking and was able to get better results. If you aren't focus stacking than that might be a limiting factor. – Lucas 13:26, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:18, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:2017.07.06.-39-Wendisch Rietz--Kanal zwischen Scharmuetzelsee und Grosser Storkower See-Schleuse.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 09:40:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Canal between Scharmützelsee and Großer Storkower See - canal lock

File:Featured video logo.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 15:26:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

TEST NOMINATION
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: reason - Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 15:33, 25 May 2019 (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.

File:Piazza Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli fontana con satiro Brescia.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2019 at 20:12:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fountain and mascarone of satyr on Piazza Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli square in Brescia
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 14:36:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--BoothSift 21:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ponte Barca Abril 2019-1c.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tempio Capitolino Piazza del Foro Brescia.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Plaza de la Victoria (frente al sud).mnba.png Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:SVG logo.svg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017.07.06.-29-Grosser Storkower See Storkow (Mark)--Saphirauge-Paar und Maennchen.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pierre-Auguste Renoir - Luncheon of the Boating Party - Google Art Project.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Apollo 11 Lunar Lander - 5927 NASA.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Polystichum setiferum 'Cristato Pinnulum' (Niervaren). (d.j.b.). 02.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Banz Deckenfresko Pfingsten 3070549.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Part of Broälven nature reserve north of Brodalen.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Saint-Augustin Church Altar 1, Paris, France - Diliff.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Technisches Rathaus Tübingen von der Brunnenstraße zur blauen Stunde 2019.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017.07.06.-41-Wendisch Rietz--Bluthaenfling-Weibchen.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Aveyron River in Rodez 13.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vieux Limoilou, Québec city, Canadá 17.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mejsene fodres-3.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Baumweißlinge Wittenberge-Rühstädter Elbniederung.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dead Vlei, Sossusvlei, Namibia, 2018-08-06, DD 085.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Duomo vecchio facciata Brescia.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).03.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Domo na estação central de trenes de recife, Estado de Pernambuco, Brasil.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Estornino de El Cabo (Lamprotornis nitens), parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-25, DD 56.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Heart Mountain Relocation Center, Heart Mountain, Wyoming. In his barracks home at Block 7 - 21 - NARA - 539206 - Restoration.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Misty Minnewanka Lake.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ray Strachey restored.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Webysther 20170917093348 - Caverna do diabo.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wegerich - Scheckenfalter auf Kamille.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Balaclava as suggested fashion piece for winter 2018-modeld by ModelTanja.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Reflection of trees in a pond 16-9, The Groynes, Christchurch, New Zealand.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Roof detail of Cardboard Cathedral, Christchurch, New Zealand.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schlumbergera (actm) 13.jpg

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/May_2019&oldid=401849069"