Commons:Propositions d'images remarquables
Cette page recense les images qui sont proposées pour être affichées dans les Images remarquables. Notez qu'il ne s'agit pas de la même chose que l'image du jour ou que les images de qualité.
Les archives des votes précédents se trouvent sur cette page.
Il existe également une liste chronologique des images remarquables.
Voir aussi les Images de qualité, les propositions d'images de qualité et les critiques photographiques.
Procédure
[edit]Conseils avant de proposer une image
[edit]partie en cours de traduction depuis la version anglaise, votre avis est le bienvenu.
Lisez entièrement le guide avant de commencer
Quelques règles informelles à retenir avant de proposer une image (les termes en italiques sont la traduction anglaise des termes).
- Définition (display resolution) : les images de Commons peuvent être utilisées sur d'autres supports qu'un écran d'ordinateur, par exemple pour être imprimées ou vues à très haute résolution. Il est important que les images proposées aient la plus haute résolution possible. Au moins 2 millions de pixels (par ex. 2000 x 1000) semble raisonnable à présent. Les images de définition inférieure sont systématiquement rejetées sauf s'il y a une bonne raison.
- Mise au point (focus) : tous les objets importants de l'image devraient être nets. Dans l'idéal les objets non primordiaux sont nets.
- Avant-plan et arrière-plan (background and foreground): ils peuvent être dérangeants. Le sujet principal ne devrait pas être caché par le premier plan, ni se confondre avec l'arrière-plan.
- Qualité générale (general quality) : Les images proposées devraient avoir une très haute qualité technique.
- Une retouche (digital manipulations) ne doit pas tromper l'observateur. La correction de quelques défauts dans l'image est acceptée pour autant que ce soit limité, bien fait, et non pour tromper. Les retouches courantes sont le recadrage, la correction de la perspective, de netteté, des couleurs ou de l'exposition. Des manipulations plus importantes, tels quel l'élimination d'éléments dans l'arrière plan, doivent être décrites dans la description de l'image, par le biais du modèle {{RetouchedPicture}}. Les retouches non décrites ou mal décrites qui transformeraient le sujet sont inacceptables.
- Utilité (value) : notre but principal est de présenter des images utiles et précieuses. Les images devraient ainsi être spéciales d'une façon ou d'une autre, donc, entre autres :
- La plupart des coucher de soleil sont beaux, et la plupart ne sont pas différents des autres existant déjà.
- Les photos de nuit sont souvent belles mais davantage de détails sont visibles de jour.
- "Beau" ne veut pas dire "utile".
Au niveau technique, nous avons l'exposition, la composition, le mouvement et la profondeur du champ.
- L'exposition (exposure) est l'obturation du diaphragme qui modifie la luminosité (brightness) pour rendre avec qualité les ombres et les lumières au sein de l'image. Le manque d'ombres dans le détail n'est pas nécessairement négatif, cela peut être un effet désiré.
- La composition (composition) est l'arrangement des éléments dans l'image. La "Règle de trois" est un bon guide pour la composition, c'est un héritage des écoles de peintures. L'idée est de diviser l'image par deux lignes horizontales et deux lignes verticales, nous avons donc trois parties dans chaque sens. L'objet ne doit pas forcément être centré. Les sujets intéressants doivent êtres placés aux 4 croisements des lignes. L'horizon ne doit jamais être mis au milieu, car il couperait l'image en deux. L'idée principale ici est de rendre l'image dynamique.
- Netteté (sharpness) renvoie à la manière dont les mouvements sont représentés dans l'image. Ils peuvent être nets ou flous. Ils ne sont pas mieux l'un que l'autre, cela dépend de l'intention du photographe. L'impression de mouvement dépend des différents objets de l'image. Par exemple, photographier une voiture de course qui apparaît nette par rapport à l'arrière plan ne donne pas une idée de la vitesse. Il faudrait en fait que la voiture soit représentée nette, mais avec un arrière plan flou, créant ainsi le mouvement. D'un autre coté, représenter le saut d'un joueur de basket net avec le reste de l'image flou, en raison de la nature peu habituelle de la photo, lui conférerait de l'intérêt.
- La profondeur de champ (depth of field or DOF) renvoie à la zone de mise au point devant et au delà du sujet principal. La profondeur de champ est choisie en fonction des besoins spécifiques à chaque image. Une profondeur grande ou petite peut améliorer ou dégrader la qualité de l'image. Une faible profondeur de champ peut attirer l'attention sur le sujet principal, en le séparant de son environnement. Les lentilles à petite distance focale (grand angle) ont une grande profondeur de champ, et vice versa, les lentilles à grande distance focale (petite ouverture) ont une petite profondeur de champ.
Proposition
[edit]Si vous pensez avoir trouvé ou créé une image qui puisse être considérée comme parmi les meilleures de Commons, avec une description et une licence appropriée, copiez le nom de l'image dans la boîte ci-dessous (en incluant le préfixe File:), après le texte déjà présent :
Après cela, vous devrez insérer un lien vers la page que vous venez de créer en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.
Vote
[edit]A l'exclusion de tous autres, vous pouvez utiliser les modèles suivants:
- {{Pour}} ( Support),
- {{Contre}} ( Oppose),
Ainsi que :
- {{Neutre}} ( Neutral),
- {{Comment}} ( Comment),
- {{Info}} ( Info),
- {{Question}} ( Question).
- IMPORTANT: veuillez notamment NE PAS UTILISER les modèles {{weak support}} ( Weak support) ni {{weak oppose}} ( Weak oppose), ils ne sont pas reconnus par le robot, et votre vote serait considéré comme non valide.
Merci d'inclure quelques mots expliquant pourquoi vous soutenez ou non la promotion de l'image, surtout si vous votez contre. N'oubliez pas de signer avec ~~~~.
Règles
[edit]Règles générales
[edit]- Le résultat est donné 9 jours après la proposition (voir le planning en bas de page). Les votes ajoutés le 10e jour ou après ne sont pas décomptés.
- Les utilisateurs non-enregistrés peuvent proposer des images, faire des commentaires, mais pas voter.
- La proposition elle-même ne compte pas comme un vote : il faut l'ajouter explicitement.
- Le proposant peut retirer une image à tout moment, en écrivant : {{Withdraw}} ~~~~
- Souvenez-vous que le but de Wikimedia Commons est une bibliothèque pour tous les projets Wikimedia, y compris des projets futurs ; les images n'ont pas à être utiles uniquement pour Wikipédia.
- Les images peuvent être retirées de la liste dès le 5e jour si elles n'ont reçu aucun vote "pour".
- Soyez attentifs et très sélectifs dans les choix que vous faites, car il ne peut y avoir que deux propositions actives par proposant. Toute proposition supplémentaire sera rejetée sans examen.
- Seulement 2 nominations actives par même utilisateur (qui est, en nomination sous "review" et non encore close) sont autorisées. Le principal but de cette mesure est de contribuer à une meilleure qualité moyenne des nominations, par un choix plus judicieux des photos présentes en nominations.
Règles de promotion
[edit]L'image candidate devient une image remarquable si elle remplit les conditions suivantes :
- Une licence appropriée (bien sûr !)
- Au moins sept votes "pour".
- un ratio de 2/1 de votes "pour"/"contre".
- Deux versions différentes de la même image ne peuvent pas être promues en même temps, mais seulement celle avec le plus grand score.
Contestations
[edit]Avec le temps, les critères d'évaluation évoluent, et il peut être décidé qu'une image qui était auparavant assez bonne pour être dans la liste ne peut plus l'être.
Pour qu'une image soit déchue, il faut qu'une majorité de 2/3 avec au moins 5 votes accepte de retirer l'image, autrement elle reste "remarquable". Pour voter, utiliser les modèles {{Keep}} ( Keep : mérite de rester "remarquable") ou {{Delist}} ( Delist : ne mérite plus le label).
Pour contester une image, copiez son nom avec le préfixe dans la boîte ci-dessous à la suite du texte déjà présent :
Vous devriez inclure les informations suivantes :
- Informations sur l'origine de l'image (créateur, importateur).
- Un lien vers le vote d'origine.
- La raison pour laquelle vous contestez le label, avec votre signature.
Insérez ensuite un lien en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal.
Sommaire
[edit]Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste
[edit]Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste, cliquez ici et ajoutez votre proposition en haut de la liste : {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:FILENAME}}
Propositions en cours
[edit]Featured picture candidates
[edit]Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 15:42:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Cemeteries#Poland
- Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Pudelek (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 09:20:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
- Info created and uploaded by Claude TRUONG-NGOC, nominated by Yann
- Info French political historian who specialized in Russian history. From 1999 until her death in 2023, Hélène Carrère d'Encausse served as the Perpetual Secretary of the Académie Française, to which she was first elected in 1990. She was also a member of the European Parliament. She received numerous honors and awards. She is known for having predicted the breakup of the Soviet Union.
- Support Professional quality portrait of a notable writer. -- Yann (talk) 09:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 05:42:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#India
- Info Sri Prasanna Anjaneya Gudi, a small temple dedicated to Lord Hanuman, located on Hemakuta Hill in Hampi, c/n/u by iMahesh (talk) 05:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 07:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 02:11:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Nevada
- Info: Aztec Sandstone outcropping in the Valley of Fire; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:13, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 02:11:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Utah
- Info: Mount Spry and the East Temple; second nomination - redeveloped to improve fidelity. All by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- iMahesh (talk) 05:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:13, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 23:06:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Noctuidae (Owlet Moths)
- Info Caterpillar of the variegated banded owl (Noctua fimbriata) on a Muehlenbeckia. Focus stacking of 10 frames. All by me. -- Ermell (talk) 23:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ermell (talk) 23:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 07:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Very nicely done though I'd reduce the saturation a bit. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 20:10:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Windows
- Info Beyond installation, the works of Ólafur Eliasson often have elemental qualities that invite human interaction. Many people come to the ARoS Aarhus Art Museum and take the elevator to the fifth floor just to walk the spectral circle of Eliasson's panorama looking out over Aarhus to see the city in a different way. While there are many images of sections of Your rainbow panorama, this one best shows human interaction with this architectural art piece overlooking the city. c/u/n by GRDN711 -- GRDN711 (talk) 20:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- GRDN711 (talk) 20:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: per COM:FPC and COM:I: "Images should have at least 2 real megapixels of information"-- Basile Morin (talk) 22:59, 2 December 2024 (UTC) | 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. |
- I withdraw my nomination Thank you, Basile. Still like the image but I should have caught that. GRDN711 (talk) 03:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 16:13:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#United_States
- Info created by, - uploaded by - nominated by -- Don (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Don (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Currently {{Uncategorized}} and JPG is a more compatible format -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I had tried to list Cats twice, but it was not saved?? I did 2 just now. As for the format a TIF is far higher res then JPG and was native for this shot. Are you suggesting I down res. the photo for this nomination?? --Don (talk) 05:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The colours are really nice and vibrant. However, I'm not sure whether 3:2 is the best aspect ratio here; there is a lot of negative space with lines (boat trails) leading away from the main subject, quite distracting IMO. Would like to see a different crop and reconsider. BigDom (talk) 06:25, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 11:28:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Motorsports
- Info 1961 Cooper T53 in a historic race at Donington Park in 2023. A very good panning shot with with beautiful and harmonious background. Created and uploaded by Julian Herzog. Nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 11:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ArildV (talk) 11:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support A clear Wow! -- Radomianin (talk) 12:52, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Excellent motion control -- George Chernilevsky talk 12:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support Old vehicle, panning effect, light and quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:37, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support and thank you for the nomination! — Julian H.✈ 20:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Don (talk) 05:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support One of Vulcan's favourite! Everyone can feel the speed of historic racing! –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good. --BigDom (talk) 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Perfect panning, cute car. – Aristeas (talk) 14:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 09:11:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
- Info created & uploaded by DanielTahar - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The left eye is not quite sharp, which could perhaps be improved a little with software. Overall, however, very expressive and balanced. --Superbass (talk) 21:19, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Two holes and green leaves on the bark of a tree trunk in the forest in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 05:38:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Others
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 03:13:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Others
- Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 03:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Janeklass (talk) 03:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Focus stacking issues. Images notes added. Fixable, in my opinion, like here. Possibly also chromatic aberration -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is very complicated stacking (because the object is very thin) - The stacking step is 1-2 micrometers. There may be some stacking errors in here due to the complexity of this work. Chromatic abstraction can also be , it comes from the peculiarities of the microscope objective. By the way, this work is the winning work in the microscope category of the science photo competition. Janeklass (talk) 05:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Here < is also a "winning work" (first prize) that would be straight rejected at FPC per COM:I.
- "Chromatic problems also come from our standard lenses and are usually easily fixable in post-treatment. I made a try on Lightroom with this picture and got spectacular improvement. The result is of course available on request.
- These stacking issues are fixable in my opinion (like were the others similarly supposed to be "impossible"). The goal is to promote the best images, here, not all the interesting photos. It may take some time of extra work, only.
- Possible also to start with COM:QIC (easier) before FPC.
- Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 14:32:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Luxembourg
- Info A really nice church interior of a smaller church with some beautiful art and lovely golden light. Also a Christmas tree to get us in the mood! created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice catch, thank you! Poco a poco (talk) 15:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:19, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice light which shows all details of the ornate altars etc. – Aristeas (talk) 14:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Secretario (Sagittarius serpentarius), parque nacional de Amboseli, Kenia, 2024-05-23, DD 13.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 13:57:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes
- Info Secretarybird (Sagittarius serpentarius), Amboseli National Park, Kenya. Note: we have no FPs of the whole family Sagittariidae. c/n/u by Poco a poco (talk) 13:57, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:57, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Really nice: I've never managed to get a good shot of the secretary bird. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great composition and expression, and per Charles, difficult shot Cmao20 (talk) 14:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Question A juvenile? Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- According to this information "...juveniles have brown under-coverts and black colouration on the tips of the shoulder feathers", which I cannot see here, but I'm obviously no expert. Poco a poco (talk) 07:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Me neither, but the article you reference does state that 'The colour of the bare skin is yellow in juveniles rather than red or orange as seen in adults.' Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Where do you see bare skin here? Sorry, I'm lost. Poco a poco (talk) 09:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Around the eye. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 14:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 13:56:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Paris
- Info Basilica of the Sacred Heart, Paris, France. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 13:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Outstandingly beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 14:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Bottom crop deliberate ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it's, I thought that I rather show the border than a cropped window. Poco a poco (talk) 15:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Blurry, though -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:20, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great. Almost 20 years ago I wanted to buy a postcard of the dome interior there – but all postcards showing the interior were mediocre or even blurry. This photo would make not only a wonderful postcard, but also a wonderful poster. – Aristeas (talk) 14:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 12:17:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1950-1959
- Info created by Arthur Sasse / International News Service, uploaded and nominated by Yann
- Support One of the most reproduced and parodied pictures of Einstein, according to reports, Einstein liked the photo so much that he requested International News copies of them for personal use as gifts. -- Yann (talk) 12:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:37, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- An insect photographer (talk) 00:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Famous image of the mad scientist. Crazier than here -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 21:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Solid reproduction of this iconic photo. – Aristeas (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 10:43:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Fulgoridae (Planthoppers, Lanternflies)
- Info One FP of another species in this genus. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:01, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support Excellent level of details. Terragio67 (talk) 19:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The stacking error at the front leg should be fixed.--Ermell (talk) 22:27, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- True, and I will happily support this fantastic creature when the issue is fixed -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done Oops, cloning error sorted. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for fixing the bug, Charles! -- Radomianin (talk) 12:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cool creature, beneficial light from the side. – Aristeas (talk) 13:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 06:45:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Printed#Magazine_and_newspaper_illustrations_in_color
- Info created by J.C. Leyendecker - uploaded by SDudley - nominated by PDMagazineCoverUploading -- PDMagazineCoverUploading (talk) 06:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Excellent high-quality reproduction of a rare unpublished Leyendecker illustration. PDMagazineCoverUploading (talk) 06:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks for the nomination! I would also support this. :) --SDudley (talk) 17:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 20:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Namdae stream water reflection of colorful clouds from Wolhwagyo bridge in Gangneung South Korea.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 06:09:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Reflections
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful sky and reflection; while the cityscape itself is not extraordinary, the many tents add much charm to it. – Aristeas (talk) 13:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 19:20:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#United States
- Info created by Superbass - uploaded by Superbass - nominated by Superbass -- Superbass (talk) 19:20, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Superbass (talk) 19:20, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Excellent Cmao20 (talk) 03:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wonderful mirror image with great colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Großartig! -- Radomianin (talk) 15:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Skyscrapers, trees with autumn colours, a beautiful sky and the reflection of all these things – almost too good for a single photo ;–). – Aristeas (talk) 20:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 20:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 04:55:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
- Info Chief Raoni Metuktire of the Kayapó people with an indigenous leader from other countries in Abya Ayalam (during the National Movement of Indigenous Peoples that takes place in the capital of Brazil). Created by Xakriaba - uploaded by Xakriaba - nominated by Zquid -- Zquid (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Support -- Zquid (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 12:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Maybe overprocessed, like this one? -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Invalid vote. Newly created account can't vote, sorry. Please read the guidelines -- Basile Morin (talk) 17:56, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Very expressive, strong image. I wonder a bit about the noticeable noise. I would not mind it at all if this was a photo taken under difficult circumstances at high ISO speed, but acc. to the Exif data this photo was taken at ISO speed rating 180 with a Nikon D3200, therefore I would expect a very low level of noise. Strange. – Aristeas (talk) 20:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with Aristeas, in my opinion it looks like the noise has been artificially added. Sometimes photographers do this to either simulate "analog grain" or to mask blur/shake. I took the liberty of creating a denoised version: SwissTransfer link If you and the community are fine with the result, please feel free to use the file for an update. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 22:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the effort. In my opinion, there could be also artificial shadows or blackness (like in the picture linked above), strong color enhancement and/or clarity -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Right, the photographer wanted to emphasise the two women. That's why he probably blacked out unimportant surrounding elements. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Man and woman, I think. How do you guess these intentions by the author? I don't find them on the file page. These elements may be important. In the background but perhaps also on the subjects, with painting brushes. Without RAW we have no idea about how looks like the initial work -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out. You're certainly right, it's
probablydefinitely a man. I just suspected, as I did, that the author wanted to black out something he thought was unimportant. But without a raw file, I can only guess, not know. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 07:31, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, Raoni Metuktire is definitely a male (at least, by his chromosomes:-)) After further observation, I can confirm the background is artificial. There are clear cut marks around the hair and feathers -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:41, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Basile Morin I think you are right about the cut marks... I did't see it when I made my choice. But I read comments for my suggestions, and learn different things to look for. This was another one. Thank you! // Zquid (talk) 02:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Understood. Thanks. In this case, I also regret that the resolution is only 3,016 × 2,121 pixels, about four times smaller than what the sensor of this camera is capable of. Probably downsized image, then, which is against COM:I -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks again to Basile, I hadn't checked the link at first. Sorry, of course Raoni Metuktire is a man. Too bad we couldn't rescue the nomination, because the motif is really impressive. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out. You're certainly right, it's
- Support - An insect photographer (talk) 23:08, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above and {{Retouched}} missing. Not one of the finest images of the website, in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Thank you all, for your time and thoughts! Zquid (talk) 02:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Ramsau bei Berchtesgaden (DE), Milchstraße über Hochkalter & Hintersee -- 2024 -- 1018-50.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 03:05:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Sky
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by me -- A. Öztas 03:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- A. Öztas 03:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
OpposeDifferent from this fake but artificial too. Painted brush in the center -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)- What is supposed to be artificial about it and what kind of painted brush are you writing about? A. Öztas (talk) 04:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's supposed to be natural :-) And please, assume good faith, it's your work. You should know (better than us) what you've done in the sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You brought it up, so I'm interested in what you consider being "artificial" in the sky. Is it about emphasising the structure of the Milky Way (high/low or white/black)? I don't understand, assuming good faith, what you're getting at. A. Öztas (talk) 04:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. "Emphasising the structure". "High / low, white / black" -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Will you also explain why you quote it like that or do you want me to guess? A. Öztas (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You guessed well and put words (your own words) on the issue mentioned above -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I honestly don't think a painting brush was used, the milky way has brighter borders on each side that can naturally be captured by long exposure photos -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Giles Laurent: , thanks for your comment. Please take a look at the 3 versions in the history. Resize them at the same size, and superimpose them, each separately. Then you realize very clearly that yes, a painting brush was used. Moreover, it's very possible also that the initial upload was already more or less heavily edited. In this version, the center of the sky is too dark, and certainly not faithful -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't know exactly what you mean by painting brush - it's the first time I've heard the term in this context - but if you mean masking, I've already commented on this with regard to the white and black levels. I'm just surprised at the astonishment, as this is a common process in image processing. Or are we talking at cross purposes? A. Öztas (talk) 13:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- "Painting brush" is the official name on many software editors, isn't it? Usually an icon with a "painting brush" 🖌. Now there's a 4th version uploaded. Not yet observed. But If you darken selectively some areas here and there, while the sky is supposed to be a giant uniform surface, it makes it fake -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying, what you mean. By your reasoning, wouldn't most photos then qualify as "fake", not only on FP? We can discuss this matter on my talk page, if you want. This would not only apply to (even slight) HDR images but also to those where, for example, a building is subtly emphasized. If you set the threshold for "fake" at any adjustment that doesn’t globally affect the entire image, then so be it — at least that's a clear position. As for the term "painting brush", as I mentioned earlier, I wasn't familiar with it in this context. In the software I use, this tool is called "draw mask". Either way, I hope we’ve now discussed this topic thoroughly. --A. Öztas (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Discussion continues below and I'm also interested in talking with other participants, having different points of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying, what you mean. By your reasoning, wouldn't most photos then qualify as "fake", not only on FP? We can discuss this matter on my talk page, if you want. This would not only apply to (even slight) HDR images but also to those where, for example, a building is subtly emphasized. If you set the threshold for "fake" at any adjustment that doesn’t globally affect the entire image, then so be it — at least that's a clear position. As for the term "painting brush", as I mentioned earlier, I wasn't familiar with it in this context. In the software I use, this tool is called "draw mask". Either way, I hope we’ve now discussed this topic thoroughly. --A. Öztas (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- "Painting brush" is the official name on many software editors, isn't it? Usually an icon with a "painting brush" 🖌. Now there's a 4th version uploaded. Not yet observed. But If you darken selectively some areas here and there, while the sky is supposed to be a giant uniform surface, it makes it fake -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I've just checked the picture on my computer (I was previously on my phone) and it seems you were right that a painting brush was used.
- However I don't think the result is very different at first sight from adjusting curves/exposure adjustments, which is something a lot of people do and the result doesn't look unatural to me (especially if you compare it to something really unnatural like this). But perhaps the center of the milky way was darkened too much (it's not supposed to be that much darker) and perhaps the brighter part shouldn't have been brightened with a paiting brush but with a global exposure/contrast adjustment because looking at thumbnail we see the brushstrokes and comparing it to the previous version, the brighter parts changed shape and were extended, which in the end changed a bit the shape of the milky way and is something that shouldn't happen.
- Also, there's one other new thing I've noted now, there's a strange change change of exposure in this zone that might be improved -- Giles Laurent (talk) 17:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't know exactly what you mean by painting brush - it's the first time I've heard the term in this context - but if you mean masking, I've already commented on this with regard to the white and black levels. I'm just surprised at the astonishment, as this is a common process in image processing. Or are we talking at cross purposes? A. Öztas (talk) 13:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Giles Laurent: , thanks for your comment. Please take a look at the 3 versions in the history. Resize them at the same size, and superimpose them, each separately. Then you realize very clearly that yes, a painting brush was used. Moreover, it's very possible also that the initial upload was already more or less heavily edited. In this version, the center of the sky is too dark, and certainly not faithful -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I honestly don't think a painting brush was used, the milky way has brighter borders on each side that can naturally be captured by long exposure photos -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You guessed well and put words (your own words) on the issue mentioned above -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Will you also explain why you quote it like that or do you want me to guess? A. Öztas (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. "Emphasising the structure". "High / low, white / black" -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You brought it up, so I'm interested in what you consider being "artificial" in the sky. Is it about emphasising the structure of the Milky Way (high/low or white/black)? I don't understand, assuming good faith, what you're getting at. A. Öztas (talk) 04:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's supposed to be natural :-) And please, assume good faith, it's your work. You should know (better than us) what you've done in the sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Should be fixed, both. --A. Öztas (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain Painting brush removed. @Giles Laurent: there's a noticeable difference between the second-third-fourth and the fifth version, and in the previous ones, there was no reason to darken artificially some zones in the sky so as to create strong and unnatural contrasts. Thanks for pointing this out, and for confirming the manipulation was not only my subjective impression. The sky is supposed to be flat. So the normal processing in this case is not local touches but should be global, yes -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Weak supportI don't think this is a picture that had strong editing, I actually think the result out of the camera is close to what we see in the picture (contrarily to this picture), but the top of the picture is perhaps a bit too dark compared to the rest? -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)- I agree with you there, I've lightened it up a bit at the top. A. Öztas (talk) 13:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you tor the improvements, moving from weak support to Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with you there, I've lightened it up a bit at the top. A. Öztas (talk) 13:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Ignoring the brush discussion, I just don't think the milky way ever looks like this in Europe. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Well if you would try astrophotography you would see that it looks like this, even in Europe. First you need the perfect weather conditions: 1) no clouds; 2) new moon phase : extremely important because as soon that the moon illuminates the sky, you lose easily 80-90% visibility of the stars; 3) as low as possible light pollution (so you have to be far enough from big cities); 4) be late enough in the day because often until midnight there's still remains of the sun light polluting the sky in summer. Then you also need the right equipment: 1) a tripod; 2) a lense with small f number (like F1.4). And finally you need to find the right parameters (manual focus, multiple seconds exposure, not hesitating to increase ISO, etc.). Once you combine all that, the camera can capture a milky way that looks like this. But of course what the camera sees is different of what the naked eye sees because the naked eye can not do a multiple seconds exposure on the contrary of a camera. This means the naked eye will always see a much much darker sky -- Giles Laurent (talk) 19:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation, but you do agree that the Milky Way never looks like this to the naked eye. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- The exposure time of this was 30 sec at F1.8 and ISO 640. You almost couldn't even see the outline of the mountains with the naked eye at that time. This is what it looked like there taken with a smartphone. A. Öztas (talk) 10:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation, but you do agree that the Milky Way never looks like this to the naked eye. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well if you would try astrophotography you would see that it looks like this, even in Europe. First you need the perfect weather conditions: 1) no clouds; 2) new moon phase : extremely important because as soon that the moon illuminates the sky, you lose easily 80-90% visibility of the stars; 3) as low as possible light pollution (so you have to be far enough from big cities); 4) be late enough in the day because often until midnight there's still remains of the sun light polluting the sky in summer. Then you also need the right equipment: 1) a tripod; 2) a lense with small f number (like F1.4). And finally you need to find the right parameters (manual focus, multiple seconds exposure, not hesitating to increase ISO, etc.). Once you combine all that, the camera can capture a milky way that looks like this. But of course what the camera sees is different of what the naked eye sees because the naked eye can not do a multiple seconds exposure on the contrary of a camera. This means the naked eye will always see a much much darker sky -- Giles Laurent (talk) 19:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Surprisingly good image quality given the circumstances of darkness. I like the water reflections of the milky way galaxy --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 20:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Magnifico --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 19:02:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Uzbekistan
- Info created and uploaded by Humoyun Mehridinov - nominated by Красный -- Красный wanna talk? 19:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Красный wanna talk? 19:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Is there some chromatic aberration at full size? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, and sharpness could be better too. I'm honestly not sure about this one. I made this downsample which is 8.5 megapixels and better but still corner sharpness isn't great. But the motif is really cool so unsure how to vote, will think about this one. Cmao20 (talk) 01:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Noticeable CA and low level of detail, probably due to the lens. It is a common effect according to the Wikipedia article Canon EF-S 18–55mm lens -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 13:15:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#United_States
- Info Walking path underneath the Hell Gate Bridge on Randall's Island (New York). all by — Rhododendrites talk | 13:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 13:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 20:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Pretty photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support An impressive sight; great quality, light and composition Cmao20 (talk) 01:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice light and composition. Crop perhaps a bit tight at the bottom under the lamppost, but the vanishing point with Matryoshka doll effect is cool -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Weak supportGreat image, but maybe needs perspective correction a bit. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 02:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I think you're right -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think it's distorted. The front and exterior sides of the pylon are wedge-shaped, so what looks like the sides tapering in is actually the wedge tapering back. — Rhododendrites talk | 15:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry Rhododendrites, but I think Екатерина Борисова is right here. I had the same impression as you at first sight, but after comparison with your other photo File:Under Hell Gate Bridge on Randalls Island (60101p).jpg taken from further point of view, it becomes obvious that the perspective should be fixed. These arches are not leaning in reality. Note added. I will remove my support otherwise, because it's also architecture -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support-- by others.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Iwaqarhashmi: I think you were just trying to copy a vote, but you copied in a separate nom :) — Rhododendrites talk | 18:54, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, my bad. Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 18:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 19:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 23:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:27, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Weak supportGreat image, but like Екатерина and Basile I think your other photo shows that a slight perspective correction is advisable and would further improve the image. – Aristeas (talk) 20:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)- New version uploaded - First, I uploaded a version with a perspective change with the resulting empty triangles in the corner filled in, but I couldn't find a fill that worked well so the current version is just a crop. Pings: @Aristeas, Radomianin, Poco a poco, Ermell, Iwaqarhashmi, Famberhorst, Agnes Monkelbaan, Llez, Basile Morin, Cmao20, Екатерина Борисова, and Harlock81: — Rhododendrites talk | 02:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Much better (or "even better"). Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the update. The new version is a clear improvement. -- Radomianin (talk) 04:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- by others, Thank you.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Greatly improved. Thank you! Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 07:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with the comments above Poco a poco (talk) 07:58, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well done, thanks. --Harlock81 (talk) 15:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per others, full support now. – Aristeas (talk) 18:26, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--ArildV (talk) 11:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support without any doubt now, thanks for inprovement. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 02:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 11:31:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Germany
- Info Aerial view of the Vexier Chapel in Reifenberg. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 11:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ermell (talk) 11:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice composition. Appealing viewpoint -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:56, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very simple motif and very beautiful image. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 02:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Екатерина Борисова and Basile. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:08, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support The church nicely stands out from the green background, excellent quality. – Aristeas (talk) 16:39, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support by others.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Support -- Smallworldclick (talk) 11.01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Invalid vote. Newly created account can't vote, sorry. Please read the guidelines --Basile Morin (talk) 18:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 19:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Rolf Kranz (talk) 11:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 19:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:009 Greater flamingos male and female in the Camargue during mating season Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 10:38:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Phoenicopteridae (Flamingos)
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 11:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 12:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support for composition, details, colors, and quality. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 15:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Of course. Cmao20 (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support A piece of art. The shape of the beak, naturally twisted, which fits almost perfectly into the free area like a puzzle piece! And the level of detail is fantastic -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 08:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin and Basile. Congrats! – Aristeas (talk) 10:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Support -- Smallworldclick (talk) 17:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Invalid vote. Newly created account can't vote, sorry. Please read the guidelines --Basile Morin (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 23:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support Excellent level of details. Terragio67 (talk) 19:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 10:12:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Morocco
- Info Main courtyard of Bou Inania Madrasa, Fez, Marocco. My shot. -- Mile (talk) 10:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mile (talk) 10:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not loving the shadow. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:34, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, the harsh shadow doesn't seem to be a feature here. So just a tourist shot in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ikan Kekek (welcome back, have missed your comments round here). Sorry Mile, I like it overall but the light conditions are just too harsh for me and the big black shadow makes it less than FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Ikan Kekek. -- Karelj — Preceding undated comment was added at 14:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 03:23:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Class : Ostracoda (Ostracods)
- Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 03:23, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Janeklass (talk) 03:23, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support - could use a bit of a right crop — Rhododendrites talk | 12:41, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out. I agree that it could be more centered and I've made the changes. Janeklass (talk) 04:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Support – Aristeas (talk) 16:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Honestly I am confused by the discussion below, therefore I suspend my judgement until I can study the image myself in the detail (not enough time right now, sorry). – Aristeas (talk) 10:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)- Oppose Underexposed for my personal taste. It's not an asteroid, so the subject could be better presented.
Some details look interesting at the bottom, buttoo dark, I can't make them out -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- + After increasing the light on Photoshop, I also notice focus stacking errors. Image notes added -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree about the lighting and I won't change it. I made the background darker. Janeklass (talk) 04:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- It's slightly worse now, and you also changed the crop, so my image notes have been displaced. I think you should notify everyone who already voted -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- + The author created the image to be viewed as you see it. It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer, make changes in Photoshop, and then find errors. If you don't see errors right away, then there are none. You can ruin any image in Photoshop, but the author doesn't create the image so that someone can edit it in Photoshop. Janeklass (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- What?! "make changes in Photoshop, and then find errors"? I would be the last person to do that. And it's very clear from the file page that you are the sole and only uploader. You're of course free to do what you like with your pictures, but for me it's a similar case to this one or that one nominated last week. Sorry to be allowed to review here... When I read Ikan's review below ("I do see details well"), I had the impression it was a mirror of my comment (now crossed out) above ("Some details look interesting"). I got curious and then noticed the stacking issues. Please fix these errors like in this nomination. By the way, where do you find that "It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer"? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You downloaded the image to your computer, increased the light in Photoshop, and then you saw the errors. The "errors" you pointed out do not disturb or affect the image. I am very sorry, but I think your assessment is unfair and is not given because they somehow affect the photo, but because you just want to scold. Janeklass (talk) 05:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You darkened the image, not me ("background made darker" in your summary). And you made this change without notifying a (weak) supporter writing "Definitely too dark for me", nor other participants who could also find the image (really) too dark now. Photoshop helps to find potential issues like wrong embedded color profiles (which can make the appearance vary from a computer to another, example here). This was done to help you. It was a tool. But the stacking issues (now located) also appear in the current version -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You raised the light and only then did you see errors that were otherwise not visible. For me, they do not affect the image and the problem does not exist. If you add light, you can see all sorts of things. As an author, the light is set the way I want it and it is not intended to be changed by anyone else. Janeklass (talk) 06:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You darkened the picture (for everyone, not only for me). Proof in the history of the file page and in the summary you left. Given the critics (here and elsewhere by other participants), it would have been more judicious to brighten the picture instead of the contrary. Otherwise it's like you want to hide the mistakes. You also hide the whole content in this blackness.
- No, my first impression was : "Some details look interesting at the bottom". But because it was dark, it could be a wrong impression. Confirmation (I mean denial of "interesting details") comes now, yes. Same as here. I think light should be adjusted and FS problems resolved -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Your words " + After increasing the light on Photoshop, I also notice focus stacking errors. Image notes added". I'm referring to the fact that you didn't see the errors before you increased the light. So you amplified the errors yourself, which are otherwise not so visible and they don't affect the overall impression of the image. But okay, I added a little more light and I won't change this file any more Janeklass (talk) 07:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You darkened the image, not me ("background made darker" in your summary). And you made this change without notifying a (weak) supporter writing "Definitely too dark for me", nor other participants who could also find the image (really) too dark now. Photoshop helps to find potential issues like wrong embedded color profiles (which can make the appearance vary from a computer to another, example here). This was done to help you. It was a tool. But the stacking issues (now located) also appear in the current version -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- What?! "make changes in Photoshop, and then find errors"? I would be the last person to do that. And it's very clear from the file page that you are the sole and only uploader. You're of course free to do what you like with your pictures, but for me it's a similar case to this one or that one nominated last week. Sorry to be allowed to review here... When I read Ikan's review below ("I do see details well"), I had the impression it was a mirror of my comment (now crossed out) above ("Some details look interesting"). I got curious and then noticed the stacking issues. Please fix these errors like in this nomination. By the way, where do you find that "It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer"? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- + After increasing the light on Photoshop, I also notice focus stacking errors. Image notes added -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment If my eyes are good, there is no difference in the light between the first version and this one? And your words "It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer"... and worse: "the author doesn't create the image so that someone can edit it in Photoshop." Apologies, but this idea "If you don't see errors right away, then there are none" sounds a bit clumsy, according to the ton of similar nominations where errors / stitching problems are detected in the middle or even at the end of the voting period. A bunch of examples available in the archives. Currently the focus stacking errors are still present. Thus I don't change my vote -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Editing an image to amplify small flaws that aren't actually visible is very strange behavior to me. Janeklass (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Very visible now, even in the darkness. And also at the top right.
- Could be fixed / uploaded by someone else (not necessarily you).
- Alternative could be proposed. At least for the FS issues. Then it's a democratic choice. Could be also delisted and replaced by a more accurate version later. If you change your mind, or if someone else improves your image.
- Like it or not, that's how it works, actually. And how divergent opinions offer chances to improve.
- It's a mistake to believe that the purpose of increasing the light was "to amplify flaws". Certainly anyone else would / will do the same as observer or re-user, because it's very dark, then trying to evaluate the content fairly and see it under more favorable conditions is useful and / or necessary. The FS flaws popped up at this moment, and were not expected. Most of the users here are happy to meet the opportunity to correct their own images -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I am happy to correct mistakes when I see that the criticism is relevant. At this moment, I feel that the criticism has been overdone and criticized for the sake of criticizing. These "mistakes" are not visible in the picture and do not spoil the picture. Janeklass (talk) 11:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- These mistakes have just been revealed a few hours ago. And first reaction, you darkened the image, which had the effect of making the situation worse, and lengthening the discussion for everyone. It would undoubtedly be wiser to fix the issues like here or there. See also this interesting case -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't darken the image because of your alleged "errors". I cropped the image and at the same time noticed lighter areas in the background and thought that the background would be better completely black. Janeklass (talk) 14:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... noticed something, too? For the record, you said "If you don't see errors right away, then there are none.". You changed the crop? You changed the light? Twice, already? Yes, things happen / appear in the light of a discussion, like in the light of a (well-exposed) photo -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You can keep your opinion. I'll stick to my position and won't fix alleged errors that aren't actually visible and don't affect the image. Besides, this picture's value lies elsewhere for me (and for Wikipedia). What we actually see in the picture is much more important here - whether it ranks among the best is secondary. In my opinion, Wikipedia isn't Instagram, and I add pictures that have genuine informative value. Janeklass (talk) 03:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- 🛑Stop it now. "You can keep your opinion" and other derogatory comments written above are against COM:CIVIL. All various and subjective opinions here are welcome and encouraged on this section, per the guidelines at COM:FPC "A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate". You don't like criticisms, this does not give you permission to be disrespectful to those who don't share your view. You voted above, fine, we all respect your choice, did not contest anything. Do the same, please. Now enough. It's an open project. -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Is the author's position not important, or do you always have to agree with criticism? If so, I will try to improve myself in the future and will not engage in further discussion.
- For now, this discussion is over for me. Janeklass (talk) 05:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Very good. -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- 🛑Stop it now. "You can keep your opinion" and other derogatory comments written above are against COM:CIVIL. All various and subjective opinions here are welcome and encouraged on this section, per the guidelines at COM:FPC "A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate". You don't like criticisms, this does not give you permission to be disrespectful to those who don't share your view. You voted above, fine, we all respect your choice, did not contest anything. Do the same, please. Now enough. It's an open project. -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- You can keep your opinion. I'll stick to my position and won't fix alleged errors that aren't actually visible and don't affect the image. Besides, this picture's value lies elsewhere for me (and for Wikipedia). What we actually see in the picture is much more important here - whether it ranks among the best is secondary. In my opinion, Wikipedia isn't Instagram, and I add pictures that have genuine informative value. Janeklass (talk) 03:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... noticed something, too? For the record, you said "If you don't see errors right away, then there are none.". You changed the crop? You changed the light? Twice, already? Yes, things happen / appear in the light of a discussion, like in the light of a (well-exposed) photo -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't darken the image because of your alleged "errors". I cropped the image and at the same time noticed lighter areas in the background and thought that the background would be better completely black. Janeklass (talk) 14:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- These mistakes have just been revealed a few hours ago. And first reaction, you darkened the image, which had the effect of making the situation worse, and lengthening the discussion for everyone. It would undoubtedly be wiser to fix the issues like here or there. See also this interesting case -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Editing an image to amplify small flaws that aren't actually visible is very strange behavior to me. Janeklass (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Definitely too dark for me but still interesting Cmao20 (talk) 01:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice composition, and I do see details well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It is too dark for my eyes. I thought I could see stacking errors online. When I download the file and brightened it, the the stacking errors become more obvious. It is worth doing this in case your eyes deceive you. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Pictures of the Sun by ESA Solar Orbiter
[edit]Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 21:24:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page
-
The Sun in UV light of 17.4 nanometres, taken by Solar Orbiter's Extreme Ultraviolet Imager (EUI) instrument, assembled from multiple images taken on 22 March 2023.
-
A magnetogram of the Sun that shows the line-of-sight direction of the magnetic field on the Sun's disc, measured by the Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023.
-
The velocity map of the Sun that shows the line-of-sight speed and direction of movement of material at the Sun's visible surface, measured by the Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023.
-
The Sun Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023, at a wavelength of 617 nanometres.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Stars
- Info Created by ESA & NASA/Solar Orbiter/EUI Team, Image processing by Emil Kraaikamp (ROB) - uploaded by Artem.G - nominated by David Osipov -- David Osipov (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- David Osipov (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Procedural oppose I think some of these pictures are great but I don't see how they represent a valid or complete set. They are just unconnected pictures of the Sun by the same spacecraft, there is no governing theme for how they make sense together and complement each other. You should nominate the best ones separately and let us review them. Cmao20 (talk) 03:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I understand your viewpoint. Let me try to explain a bit better why I see it as a complete set. It's like, when we look at the Sun, we shouldn't just see a bright ball of light. We need to see all its sides, like with a cube, to truly grasp it. The magnetogram, the velocity map, the UV picture—they all reveal a different face of the Sun, helping us understand its power and complexity.
- Looking at the Sun in only one wavelength is like seeing a single face of a Rubik's Cube. Each face shows a different color arrangement, but only by observing all sides do you understand the puzzle's complete pattern. Similarly, different wavelengths reveal unique aspects of the Sun, and only together do they provide a comprehensive view. Showing just one picture is like showing just one square of a cube - it doesn't represent the whole picture.
- I think representing the Sun in its full complexity needs more than just one image. The rules, while important, shouldn't limit our ability to represent complex subjects like the Sun fully. David Osipov (talk) 06:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Invalid set and poor quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment According to the European Space Agency, The PHI images are the highest-resolution full views of the Sun's visible surface to date, including maps of the Sun's messy magnetic field and movement on the surface.(European Space Agency. (2024, November 20). New full Sun views show sunspots, fields and restless plasma.) So I just can't comprehend how you could comment on their poor quality. They are literally the highest-res pics of the Sun to date with 92.16 Megapixels res, composed of a stitched mosaic of 25 pics each, taken with a space quality lenses. --David Osipov (talk) 08:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Stitching issues. And this one also from ESA has 196 Megapixels with stitching issues too. But the main problem here is the set, which does not fit the guidelines -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Info Hacker news thread on the pics --David Osipov (talk) 08:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 19:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
- Info created by Олександр Воропаєв - uploaded by Олександр Воропаєв - nominated by George Chernilevsky -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Info Transfiguration Cathedral in Odesa. On July 23, 2023, the cathedral was severely damaged by a Russian missile attack. This is UNESCO World Heritage site in Ukraine -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very sad and high quality, I think it's a bit of a shame that we have the distracting shadowy figure of the second workman in the doorway, but not enough of a drawback not to support. Cmao20 (talk) 03:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Due to its high documentary value, the picture is worthy of promotion. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Rbrechko (talk) 12:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 14:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20 and Radomianin. – Aristeas (talk) 16:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--ArildV (talk) 21:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per others, but I think there's CA on the right, especially the upper right on the edges of bricks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:39, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per others, --Famberhorst (talk) 05:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very important documentation and good quality. I think the worker in the dark does not disturb at all, as it covers an ongoing process which makes the photograph more authentic --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:07, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 16:22:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Corvidae (Crows, Jays and Magpies)
- Info created by Charlesjsharp - uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 21:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thank you for the nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful bird, good posture, composition and quality. – Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Punk on a branch :-) Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Aristeas. Very vivid, great facial expression. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 07:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Support --Smallworldclick (talk) 11:10, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Invalid vote. Newly created account can't vote, sorry. Please read the guidelines --Basile Morin (talk) 18:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 08:18:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Bubulcus
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Crazy eye :) --Rbrechko (talk) 12:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 13:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:08, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 02:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:47, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:34, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very high resolution and excellent level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 06:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 06:11:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons_(Graubünden)
- Info S-charl, bridge over the fast-flowing mountain stream Clemgia, a tributary of the Inn. The autumn colours are at their peak at S-Charl in Switzerland (altitude 1810 metres).
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 11:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Autumn colors make this photo spectacular. --Rbrechko (talk) 12:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 02:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support I just love when the European larch take these colors in autumn -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:45, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 12:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Giles Laurent. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Giles. – Aristeas (talk) 16:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 05:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice composition --Don (talk) 23:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 03:37:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Kazakhstan
- Info created and uploaded by Максат79 - nominated by Екатерина Борисова -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Great composition but I think the colours are a bit oversaturated Cmao20 (talk) 18:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 20:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 02:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Somehow. Despite i think sky colors are more fake. But that structure make it pass and Kazakh could be more represented. --Mile (talk) 10:37, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 12:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive, great structure. Probably a bit overprocessed, but when comparing misc. photos from the WWW I get the impression it’s not completely unrealistic. – Aristeas (talk) 16:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Cmao20 and Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral per Cmao20 and Mile -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 05:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 03:23:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Others
- Info created and uploaded by Radomianin - nominated by Екатерина Борисова -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 03:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 03:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the nomination, Екатерина Борисова. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- I love this picture, it shows the photographer's talent to see beauty and grace in an ordinary street scene. This is the wow factor for me. The color combination is also wonderful here. Thank you for sharing this little masterpiece. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 16:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Many thanks for the appreciation, Екатерина Борисова. The picture was a real snapshot, we were first in a record store and then, as I recall, in a store next door, which we left with the friendly woman in red. During our walk through SF, my camera was always ready for spontaneous snapshots. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Busy background, nothing special. Yann (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Yann --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support When we want to show people walking on a city street the background will usually be busy; somehow the variety of the city must be included – if the background consists just of windows reflecting the sky or a wall we would not get the feeling that we are in the downtown. The vanishing lines of the row of cars on the left and of the buildings on the right, which converge above the centre of the picture, bring order to the composition; the woman seems to be walking towards this vanishing point, her placement slightly to the left adds tension to the composition. This placement, the bright colours of her clothing and the out-of-focus background make her stand out clearly from the background. For me, this is a good example of an intense, orderly and yet dynamic composition in the middle of the variety of a city centre. – Aristeas (talk) 16:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yeah I think it's great. The colours, the outfit, the sense of movement, all superb. Good street photography. Cmao20 (talk) 18:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 15:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Yann. -- Karelj (talk) 14:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 23:00:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual_snow_sports
- Info created by Granada - uploaded by Granada - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 23:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tupungato (talk) 23:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Tight crop, background isnt so favourable. --Mile (talk) 08:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good sharpness for a pull along shot at that high resolution. --Granada (talk) 10:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Stunning sports photo which conveys an excellent impression of the tremendous speed of the ski jump thanks to the successful panning. The background is good, both for the panning (if the photo was taken against snow, the blue sky etc., we would not see the speed) and for the composition: the crossing diagonal lines make the composition interesting. – Aristeas (talk) 10:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Convincing example of the panning technique. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Agree the quality is rather good for a panning shot. Not as sharp as this one but still very convincing at lower resolution. Question: What are the red and grey ghosts at the lower left corner? -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- A ski jumper is moving their body, legs and arms for correcting their in flight position at all times until the landing, so it's practically impossible to get a ski jumper completely sharp when panning and using longer shutter times. The plane itself does not move all its parts, it's one block of mostly metal parts slicing throug air and it is most probably photographed from further away and not in 2-3m distance as with ski jumpers. --Granada (talk) 18:53, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
AbstainInteresting. It's not an answer to my question, though, right? -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)- Sorry, forgot about that question. That's one of the many wind flags: a grey metal post and a red stripe of fabric. Granada (talk) 06:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks. I wonder if the image wouldn't be more striking vertical. And the position of the skier would be more accurate. However I understand the difficulty here to follow the trajectory and to keep the subject within the frame at the same time. --Basile Morin (talk) 06:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the vote! By vertical do you mean like e.g. this one? To be honest I find these quite boring. They are the easiest to take by just pointing your camera upwards to the ski jumper coming from the take off. This one is not the sharpest as it was also taken at the same event and marks the beginning of a panning shot following the athlete. The moment the athlete comes past me (like in the FPC) she is around 90km/h fast and just 2-3m away. If I only want to asure that the photo is sharp I do it like that example and set the exposure time to 1/1000s or less (depending on weather conditions). Granada (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I wrongly assumed the photo was tilted, but realize now that it's probably not. The other shot, even if "easier" is also very good. For the speed, yes, it makes sense. Still the background would appear more static / frozen than here -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- No worries, therefore we are discussing here. The FPC-shot was made at the steepest part of the ski jumping hill, a few meters above the so called critical point of the hill. The post of that wind flag is mounted perpendicular to the slope of the hill and the image is completely horizontally. If you want to shoot from there you have to walk the stairs up. Granada (talk) 07:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I wrongly assumed the photo was tilted, but realize now that it's probably not. The other shot, even if "easier" is also very good. For the speed, yes, it makes sense. Still the background would appear more static / frozen than here -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the vote! By vertical do you mean like e.g. this one? To be honest I find these quite boring. They are the easiest to take by just pointing your camera upwards to the ski jumper coming from the take off. This one is not the sharpest as it was also taken at the same event and marks the beginning of a panning shot following the athlete. The moment the athlete comes past me (like in the FPC) she is around 90km/h fast and just 2-3m away. If I only want to asure that the photo is sharp I do it like that example and set the exposure time to 1/1000s or less (depending on weather conditions). Granada (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks. I wonder if the image wouldn't be more striking vertical. And the position of the skier would be more accurate. However I understand the difficulty here to follow the trajectory and to keep the subject within the frame at the same time. --Basile Morin (talk) 06:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, forgot about that question. That's one of the many wind flags: a grey metal post and a red stripe of fabric. Granada (talk) 06:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- An insect photographer (talk) 00:00, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 22:24:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Space_exploration#Space_launch_vehicles
- Info created by NASA/Bill Ingalls - uploaded by BugWarp - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 22:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tupungato (talk) 22:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --BugWarp (talk) 01:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Yes, for such photos getting the right moment is everything. Or almost everything[.] – Aristeas (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC) Cut off discussion about technical details to avoid distraction of other voters. – Aristeas (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Discussion about technical details
|
---|
|
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:52, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose A lot of CAs (Green/red) and perspective correction necessary (see especially the pole at the left and the silo and the poles at the right). It is also not very sharp. --Llez (talk) 09:20, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 21:12:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Sky
- Info created & uploaded by Anthony's astro - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 21:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 21:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
* Support --Ermell (talk) 23:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Basile and Giles. --Ermell (talk) 23:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It's of course a beautiful picture at thumbnail but when looking closer at the separation between the sky and land I wonder if the background is real or if it is a photomontage of a sky photographed from another place/angle/time. The file description says the file was taken by putting a camera on a tripod and taking 30sec exposure shots and assembling them, which would mean that the background is supposed to really have been behind that foreground. But the author is the same one than this church picture that was recently delisted for having undeclared photo manipulations (fake background) and having misled votes. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain Explicit abstention in line with Giles' analysis and reasoning. Personally, I'm tired of undisclosed manipulations on this forum, just recently I fell for a manipulation in my nomination of someone else's picture, which the author didn't really admit. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 11:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Giles Laurent. We shouldn't promote any more images from this user given the risk that they could be photomontages. Cmao20 (talk) 16:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- I think we have to judge the picture and not the author. If the author shows us the original raw of this image and that he proves that it's not a photomontage, this picture (and other proven real pictures) should still be able to be promoted in my opinion -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Also this one by "AstroAnthony" is clearly a fake. There might be many other manipulations by this uploader (I don't want to waste hours examining each with a magnifying glass). It is not worth risking another time-consuming delisting process after potential POTY qualification like the previous case. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, if the author could provide the RAWs I would be happy to reconsider, but I think it's fair to assume that images by this user may be photomontages, particularly if they look 'too good to be true', and to vote accordingly. Cmao20 (talk) 02:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Too good to be true. --Thi (talk) 15:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose Per above. Stitching errors. Note added. Ping @Ermell: -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 21:58, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2024 at 11:00:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Aegithalidae (Long-tailed Tits)
- Info created by c - uploaded by Jerzy Strzelecki - nominated by Jerzystrzelecki -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 11:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 11:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Lovely. --Yann (talk) 11:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Although I'm not sure if everything possible has been done with the denoising, I think this is a great photo! --Superbass (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Definitely not, Superbass, I gave it a try, see here, I think that there is room for improvement here. Jerzystrzelecki you are free to offer this version as an alternative or upload it over your version if you like, whatever you like (or do nothing, that's also fine with me). --Poco a poco (talk) 18:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose For now, we need here some kind of improvement, you are of course also welcome to reprocess it on your own. Poco a poco (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Really lovely, excellent posture and composition. But I agree with Poco a poco that the processing should be improved. A new processing from the raw image file (an ARW file in your case) would be the perfect solution (I could help you with this if you want – I have used the same camera and use the same lens). But Poco a Poco’s version (thanks!) is already a solid improvement and even ready for use for you, so it would be the easiest solution. – Aristeas (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Follow-up Comment Jerzy, this is really a lovely and wonderful photo, I (and other users) would really like to become it a Featured picture. We just think that the post-processing is not up to what your photo deserves. Modern tools allow to reduce the image noise greatly without sacrificing details (as old-styled noise removal did), therefore the new tools have rapidly become standard especially with wildlife photos. Just contact Poco a poco or e.g. Radomianin or me if you would appreciate a little help with this. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 10:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks to Aristeas for his engagement. The photo is too beautiful to let this nomination die. SwissTransfer link provided: This version is similar to Poco's (thanks for the edit), but in mine the colors are closer to the photographer's original. However, the degree of denoising and sharpness is similar to Poco's version. If you and the community find the edit acceptable, feel free to use it for an update. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Will support Poco's version, but not this one. Cmao20 (talk) 03:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Jerzy Strzelecki Dear P .T. correctors of other people's photos: I must congratulate you on your effectiveness in warding off potential (+) voters. However, the next time an irresistible urge to correct you strikes, try to wait until the voting is over. I have over 8,000 images in Wikimedia, including some that have been used in dozens of Wikipedias. It's a shame that you chose to paste just the one I wanted to highlight - the friendly, slightly funny “Mustache”. And best leave the author's versions alone even if, in your opinion, they necessarily need improvement. This was supposed to be a bigger project [1]. However, a magpie or jay destroyed the nest with the young. The same thing with the vote on this photo was done by the enhancers. Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 13:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Hello Jerzy, I’m sorry but there seems to be a big misunderstanding. No offence, but your harsh comment deserves an open answer.
- Please take a look at other nominations to understand better how this “Featured picture candidates” (FPC) page works. We do not first vote on a photo and discuss it later, as you seem to assume. We always discuss photos, often into details, and FPC regulars are used to propose improvements when they think a photo could be amended. This applies also and especially to wildlife photographs, and hints and suggestions about improving the post-processing are very common. This is neither derogatory nor impolite, on the contrary: when FPC voters suggest specific improvements, they (i.) confirm that your photo has potential and (ii.) want to help you to realize this potential better. This is actually a service for you. You have received a lot of praise for the photo and only completely constructive comments, two people have even edited the photo for you to help you – frankly, you should consider yourself lucky that you are being offered so much recognition and support.
- You might wonder why people are so particular about the noise/sharpness level. That’s not arbitrary: we discuss this often, especially when it comes to wildlife photos, but often forget to explain this to newcomers. Wikimedia projects need especially sharp and noise-free photos for a special reason: our photos, and a fortiori Commons FPs, are not only viewed as a whole, but must also stand up to being cropped and have details extracted from them for articles, Wikibooks, etc.
- If you have still doubts, ask other people who often nominate photos of animals (e.g. User:Charlesjsharp, User:Giles Laurent, User:Iifar, User:Poco a poco, User:Rhododendrites and many more): they will tell you that their photos are scrutinised and discussed just as closely, often even more closely, and usually without anyone offering to help them improve them. That was a particularly nice offer from our fellows to you.
- Wikimedia Commons is not meant to be a site where people just brag about their photos and praise each other (like Flickr), but one where we work together, and there’s no better way to do that than by discussing how to improve images further. Getting on your high horse and insulting other users by comparing them to envious magpies or jays doesn’t help the poor little bird (for whom I have every sympathy), your beautiful photo, you or the project. – Aristeas (talk) 16:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Definitely per Aristeas. Jerzystrzelecki, I had rather expected a "thank you" to those people you ironically call "enhancers" for dedicating their time to process and upload new versions (yes, improved ones) of your image. Your feedback is instead rude. If you cannot accept criticism to your work, you shouldn't nominate your photos to FP. Here we expect the highest quality and the wow effect. It is a bunch more than likes. Poco a poco (talk) 16:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- [responding to ping] Yes, as Aristeas says this isn't just a vote but a forum where people provide feedback and, at times, even improve each other's images. You are not obliged to accept this help, of course, but it is part of what, in my opinion, makes this a constructive forum. That said, there are particularities among the community here, because of its origin in an encyclopedia, that can be jarring for people used to sharing photos elsewhere -- horizontals/verticals, noise, chromatic aberration, filters/saturation, unconventional crops, unconventional composition, etc. can all result in a failed nomination. There are exceptions, of course, but they're rare. Here, Poco a poco offered to make this adjustment for you. It sounds like that gesture wasn't desired. As a result, this nomination may fail. I've been in such a situation, too, where folks have suggested a crop or edit that I fundamentally disagreed with, and thus my nomination failed. It's frustrating, but that's the way it works. Just know that, for many people, they want to help you to get an image promoted rather than oppose and say nothing. You have to decide if you want that help, but remember it comes from a good place. — Rhododendrites talk | 17:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 20:19:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
- Info Man dressed as the pagan god Veles at the traditional Rękawka festival in Kraków. All by me -- Jakubhal 20:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Jakubhal 20:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support I'm captivated by this unusual portrait. If you compare it to similar ones from the series in the category, it really is the best. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Appealing mask portrait in good quality. – Aristeas (talk) 16:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 19:46:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Automobiles
- Info Abandoned Ford E-Series van by Gerritsen Creek in Brooklyn, New York. I like the mix between urban waste and nature at the edge of a city. I was torn which to nominate, this one or this wider view that includes a glimpse of Manhattan, but I think making the van the subject probably works best. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 19:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 19:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Distracting branches. This derelict vehicle with graffiti has its own charm, but as FP, the unbalanced tight crop at the right, cluttered by branches interfering with the composition in the foreground, make the viewpoint awkward, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Basile Morin, sorry but I do think the branches are distracting, great subject but unsure about composition Cmao20 (talk) 01:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Before nominating, I uploaded a version with the branches removed, but wound up reverting as it seemed like a bit much. — Rhododendrites talk | 01:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment For me, this is an interesting image that I would support without the branches. I took the liberty and created a proposal from the revision at 19:35 on 25 November 2024. Please see the SwissTransfer link. Modifications made: fixed retouching remnants on the top right. From the left side I cropped 300 px and made a slight level adjustment to give the sky a bit more weight. This is just a suggestion that you are welcome to use for an update if the result is acceptable for you and the community. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 11:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Alternative
[edit]- Info This is the retouched version, with branches on the right removed, as edited by Radomianin (thanks!). I uploaded it as a separate file to allow for an alternative. Pinging other voters so far: @Basile Morin and Cmao20: — Rhododendrites talk | 14:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 14:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support The image not only conveys the problem of environmental pollution, it also has an "apocalyptic aftertaste". Thank you for the alternative upload, I personally find this crop the most appealing. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:28, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support this one is much better. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support IMHO this one works perfectly. – Aristeas (talk) 11:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 10:52:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Alopochen
- Info Quite a common bird these days in Europe. FPs of an adult's head and of a chick. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as long as not sufficiently COM:CAT'egorized --A.Savin 16:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why don't you just let the one do it whose job it actually is? --A.Savin 15:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please explain the reason for the continued oppose vote A.Savin. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Das behalte ich mir bei falscher und/oder unvollständiger Kategorisierung Ihrerseits auch weiter ausdrücklich vor. --A.Savin 15:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Google translate says this means I reserve the right to do so in the event of incorrect and/or incomplete categorization on your part. But I have no idea what is wrong now. Can ANYBODY help please? Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:26, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Your vote is stopping promotion. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:26, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Google translate says this means I reserve the right to do so in the event of incorrect and/or incomplete categorization on your part. But I have no idea what is wrong now. Can ANYBODY help please? Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Das behalte ich mir bei falscher und/oder unvollständiger Kategorisierung Ihrerseits auch weiter ausdrücklich vor. --A.Savin 15:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please explain the reason for the continued oppose vote A.Savin. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why don't you just let the one do it whose job it actually is? --A.Savin 15:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
And what is wrong?Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)- Support What a lovely composition. I would also like to know what is wrong with the categories as this might help me in future nominations, it isn't clear to me what is wrong with this at the moment. Cmao20 (talk) 01:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice light and composition. Category Ducklings added. Interesting mirror image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping. I have replaced ducklings (=ducks; not geese) with another category. It is worth noting that the category structure of this species uses the word feral which is incorrect. Most of these geese are wild from introduced birds and are not feral. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your update and sorry for my confusion. It's the idea of "juvenile" that I wanted to introduce and I was also thinking that you would easily find the relevant subcategory. But it's a different branch and you're more than expert :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 14:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Rbrechko (talk) 17:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful and charming family photo. – Aristeas (talk) 20:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 23:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:45, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support So nice family and reflect composition An insect photographer (talk) 23:30, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Bukchon-ro 11-gil street with hanok houses at blue hour in Bukchon Hanok Village Seoul.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 07:56:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#South Korea
- Info created & uploaded by Basile Morin - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Interesting but lacking that special thing to make it extraordinary IMHO --Poco a poco (talk) 08:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thank you very much, Tomer T, for the nomination. It's a pretty street surrounded by authentic hanok houses in Seoul, and I was lucky that evening to find it deserted after a sunny day -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:12, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support To be honest I know what Poco means. I don't much like the fact that the road has been tarmacced over. Nevertheless, interesting enough for FP and nice light. Cmao20 (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 09:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:25, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
File:British Columbia Regiment 1940.jpg, featured
[edit]Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2024 at 16:01:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1940-1949
- Info created by Claude Dettloff, restored, uploaded, and nominated by Yann
- Support Notable historical image with its own article. This was a delicate restoration. It was heavily damaged. Apparently the print was scratched with a sharp tool. All copies on the Net have the same defect. -- Yann (talk) 16:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Historical or not, this is an atrocious image. Wolverine X-eye 18:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think it's lovely Cmao20 (talk) 01:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Happy end :-) I checked the restoration work and find it well handled, given the difficulty.
- Photographically the focus is wrong (and the crop tight at the left), it's a shame, but this image has its own story (and yes, also own article on en-wiki). It has become an iconic photograph. We should take this into account.
- Finally, a reminder about the voting process. COM:FPC: The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations... -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nomination, per Basile. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nomination, per Basile. – Aristeas (talk) 15:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:18, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 20:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Contestations en cours
[edit]Featured picture candidates
[edit]Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 15:42:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Cemeteries#Poland
- Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Pudelek (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 09:20:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
- Info created and uploaded by Claude TRUONG-NGOC, nominated by Yann
- Info French political historian who specialized in Russian history. From 1999 until her death in 2023, Hélène Carrère d'Encausse served as the Perpetual Secretary of the Académie Française, to which she was first elected in 1990. She was also a member of the European Parliament. She received numerous honors and awards. She is known for having predicted the breakup of the Soviet Union.
- Support Professional quality portrait of a notable writer. -- Yann (talk) 09:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 05:42:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#India
- Info Sri Prasanna Anjaneya Gudi, a small temple dedicated to Lord Hanuman, located on Hemakuta Hill in Hampi, c/n/u by iMahesh (talk) 05:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 07:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 02:11:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Nevada
- Info: Aztec Sandstone outcropping in the Valley of Fire; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:13, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 02:11:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Utah
- Info: Mount Spry and the East Temple; second nomination - redeveloped to improve fidelity. All by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- iMahesh (talk) 05:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:13, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 23:06:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Noctuidae (Owlet Moths)
- Info Caterpillar of the variegated banded owl (Noctua fimbriata) on a Muehlenbeckia. Focus stacking of 10 frames. All by me. -- Ermell (talk) 23:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ermell (talk) 23:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 07:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Very nicely done though I'd reduce the saturation a bit. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 20:10:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Windows
- Info Beyond installation, the works of Ólafur Eliasson often have elemental qualities that invite human interaction. Many people come to the ARoS Aarhus Art Museum and take the elevator to the fifth floor just to walk the spectral circle of Eliasson's panorama looking out over Aarhus to see the city in a different way. While there are many images of sections of Your rainbow panorama, this one best shows human interaction with this architectural art piece overlooking the city. c/u/n by GRDN711 -- GRDN711 (talk) 20:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- GRDN711 (talk) 20:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: per COM:FPC and COM:I: "Images should have at least 2 real megapixels of information"-- Basile Morin (talk) 22:59, 2 December 2024 (UTC) | 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. |
- I withdraw my nomination Thank you, Basile. Still like the image but I should have caught that. GRDN711 (talk) 03:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 16:13:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#United_States
- Info created by, - uploaded by - nominated by -- Don (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Don (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Currently {{Uncategorized}} and JPG is a more compatible format -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I had tried to list Cats twice, but it was not saved?? I did 2 just now. As for the format a TIF is far higher res then JPG and was native for this shot. Are you suggesting I down res. the photo for this nomination?? --Don (talk) 05:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The colours are really nice and vibrant. However, I'm not sure whether 3:2 is the best aspect ratio here; there is a lot of negative space with lines (boat trails) leading away from the main subject, quite distracting IMO. Would like to see a different crop and reconsider. BigDom (talk) 06:25, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 11:28:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Motorsports
- Info 1961 Cooper T53 in a historic race at Donington Park in 2023. A very good panning shot with with beautiful and harmonious background. Created and uploaded by Julian Herzog. Nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 11:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ArildV (talk) 11:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support A clear Wow! -- Radomianin (talk) 12:52, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Excellent motion control -- George Chernilevsky talk 12:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support Old vehicle, panning effect, light and quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:37, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support and thank you for the nomination! — Julian H.✈ 20:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Don (talk) 05:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support One of Vulcan's favourite! Everyone can feel the speed of historic racing! –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good. --BigDom (talk) 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Perfect panning, cute car. – Aristeas (talk) 14:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 09:11:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
- Info created & uploaded by DanielTahar - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The left eye is not quite sharp, which could perhaps be improved a little with software. Overall, however, very expressive and balanced. --Superbass (talk) 21:19, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Two holes and green leaves on the bark of a tree trunk in the forest in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 05:38:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Others
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 03:13:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Others
- Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 03:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Janeklass (talk) 03:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Focus stacking issues. Images notes added. Fixable, in my opinion, like here. Possibly also chromatic aberration -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is very complicated stacking (because the object is very thin) - The stacking step is 1-2 micrometers. There may be some stacking errors in here due to the complexity of this work. Chromatic abstraction can also be , it comes from the peculiarities of the microscope objective. By the way, this work is the winning work in the microscope category of the science photo competition. Janeklass (talk) 05:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Here < is also a "winning work" (first prize) that would be straight rejected at FPC per COM:I.
- "Chromatic problems also come from our standard lenses and are usually easily fixable in post-treatment. I made a try on Lightroom with this picture and got spectacular improvement. The result is of course available on request.
- These stacking issues are fixable in my opinion (like were the others similarly supposed to be "impossible"). The goal is to promote the best images, here, not all the interesting photos. It may take some time of extra work, only.
- Possible also to start with COM:QIC (easier) before FPC.
- Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 14:32:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Luxembourg
- Info A really nice church interior of a smaller church with some beautiful art and lovely golden light. Also a Christmas tree to get us in the mood! created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice catch, thank you! Poco a poco (talk) 15:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:19, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice light which shows all details of the ornate altars etc. – Aristeas (talk) 14:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Secretario (Sagittarius serpentarius), parque nacional de Amboseli, Kenia, 2024-05-23, DD 13.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 13:57:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes
- Info Secretarybird (Sagittarius serpentarius), Amboseli National Park, Kenya. Note: we have no FPs of the whole family Sagittariidae. c/n/u by Poco a poco (talk) 13:57, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:57, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Really nice: I've never managed to get a good shot of the secretary bird. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great composition and expression, and per Charles, difficult shot Cmao20 (talk) 14:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Question A juvenile? Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- According to this information "...juveniles have brown under-coverts and black colouration on the tips of the shoulder feathers", which I cannot see here, but I'm obviously no expert. Poco a poco (talk) 07:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Me neither, but the article you reference does state that 'The colour of the bare skin is yellow in juveniles rather than red or orange as seen in adults.' Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Where do you see bare skin here? Sorry, I'm lost. Poco a poco (talk) 09:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Around the eye. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 14:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 13:56:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Paris
- Info Basilica of the Sacred Heart, Paris, France. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 13:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Outstandingly beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 14:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Bottom crop deliberate ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it's, I thought that I rather show the border than a cropped window. Poco a poco (talk) 15:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Blurry, though -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:20, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great. Almost 20 years ago I wanted to buy a postcard of the dome interior there – but all postcards showing the interior were mediocre or even blurry. This photo would make not only a wonderful postcard, but also a wonderful poster. – Aristeas (talk) 14:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 12:17:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1950-1959
- Info created by Arthur Sasse / International News Service, uploaded and nominated by Yann
- Support One of the most reproduced and parodied pictures of Einstein, according to reports, Einstein liked the photo so much that he requested International News copies of them for personal use as gifts. -- Yann (talk) 12:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:37, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- An insect photographer (talk) 00:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Famous image of the mad scientist. Crazier than here -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 21:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Solid reproduction of this iconic photo. – Aristeas (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 10:43:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Fulgoridae (Planthoppers, Lanternflies)
- Info One FP of another species in this genus. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:01, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support Excellent level of details. Terragio67 (talk) 19:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The stacking error at the front leg should be fixed.--Ermell (talk) 22:27, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- True, and I will happily support this fantastic creature when the issue is fixed -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done Oops, cloning error sorted. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for fixing the bug, Charles! -- Radomianin (talk) 12:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cool creature, beneficial light from the side. – Aristeas (talk) 13:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 06:45:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Printed#Magazine_and_newspaper_illustrations_in_color
- Info created by J.C. Leyendecker - uploaded by SDudley - nominated by PDMagazineCoverUploading -- PDMagazineCoverUploading (talk) 06:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Excellent high-quality reproduction of a rare unpublished Leyendecker illustration. PDMagazineCoverUploading (talk) 06:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks for the nomination! I would also support this. :) --SDudley (talk) 17:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 20:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Namdae stream water reflection of colorful clouds from Wolhwagyo bridge in Gangneung South Korea.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 06:09:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Reflections
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful sky and reflection; while the cityscape itself is not extraordinary, the many tents add much charm to it. – Aristeas (talk) 13:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 19:20:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#United States
- Info created by Superbass - uploaded by Superbass - nominated by Superbass -- Superbass (talk) 19:20, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Superbass (talk) 19:20, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Excellent Cmao20 (talk) 03:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wonderful mirror image with great colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Großartig! -- Radomianin (talk) 15:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Skyscrapers, trees with autumn colours, a beautiful sky and the reflection of all these things – almost too good for a single photo ;–). – Aristeas (talk) 20:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 20:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 04:55:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
- Info Chief Raoni Metuktire of the Kayapó people with an indigenous leader from other countries in Abya Ayalam (during the National Movement of Indigenous Peoples that takes place in the capital of Brazil). Created by Xakriaba - uploaded by Xakriaba - nominated by Zquid -- Zquid (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Support -- Zquid (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 12:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Maybe overprocessed, like this one? -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Invalid vote. Newly created account can't vote, sorry. Please read the guidelines -- Basile Morin (talk) 17:56, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Very expressive, strong image. I wonder a bit about the noticeable noise. I would not mind it at all if this was a photo taken under difficult circumstances at high ISO speed, but acc. to the Exif data this photo was taken at ISO speed rating 180 with a Nikon D3200, therefore I would expect a very low level of noise. Strange. – Aristeas (talk) 20:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with Aristeas, in my opinion it looks like the noise has been artificially added. Sometimes photographers do this to either simulate "analog grain" or to mask blur/shake. I took the liberty of creating a denoised version: SwissTransfer link If you and the community are fine with the result, please feel free to use the file for an update. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 22:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the effort. In my opinion, there could be also artificial shadows or blackness (like in the picture linked above), strong color enhancement and/or clarity -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Right, the photographer wanted to emphasise the two women. That's why he probably blacked out unimportant surrounding elements. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Man and woman, I think. How do you guess these intentions by the author? I don't find them on the file page. These elements may be important. In the background but perhaps also on the subjects, with painting brushes. Without RAW we have no idea about how looks like the initial work -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out. You're certainly right, it's
probablydefinitely a man. I just suspected, as I did, that the author wanted to black out something he thought was unimportant. But without a raw file, I can only guess, not know. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 07:31, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, Raoni Metuktire is definitely a male (at least, by his chromosomes:-)) After further observation, I can confirm the background is artificial. There are clear cut marks around the hair and feathers -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:41, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Basile Morin I think you are right about the cut marks... I did't see it when I made my choice. But I read comments for my suggestions, and learn different things to look for. This was another one. Thank you! // Zquid (talk) 02:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Understood. Thanks. In this case, I also regret that the resolution is only 3,016 × 2,121 pixels, about four times smaller than what the sensor of this camera is capable of. Probably downsized image, then, which is against COM:I -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks again to Basile, I hadn't checked the link at first. Sorry, of course Raoni Metuktire is a man. Too bad we couldn't rescue the nomination, because the motif is really impressive. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out. You're certainly right, it's
- Support - An insect photographer (talk) 23:08, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above and {{Retouched}} missing. Not one of the finest images of the website, in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Thank you all, for your time and thoughts! Zquid (talk) 02:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Ramsau bei Berchtesgaden (DE), Milchstraße über Hochkalter & Hintersee -- 2024 -- 1018-50.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 03:05:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Sky
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by me -- A. Öztas 03:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- A. Öztas 03:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
OpposeDifferent from this fake but artificial too. Painted brush in the center -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)- What is supposed to be artificial about it and what kind of painted brush are you writing about? A. Öztas (talk) 04:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's supposed to be natural :-) And please, assume good faith, it's your work. You should know (better than us) what you've done in the sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You brought it up, so I'm interested in what you consider being "artificial" in the sky. Is it about emphasising the structure of the Milky Way (high/low or white/black)? I don't understand, assuming good faith, what you're getting at. A. Öztas (talk) 04:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. "Emphasising the structure". "High / low, white / black" -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Will you also explain why you quote it like that or do you want me to guess? A. Öztas (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You guessed well and put words (your own words) on the issue mentioned above -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I honestly don't think a painting brush was used, the milky way has brighter borders on each side that can naturally be captured by long exposure photos -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Giles Laurent: , thanks for your comment. Please take a look at the 3 versions in the history. Resize them at the same size, and superimpose them, each separately. Then you realize very clearly that yes, a painting brush was used. Moreover, it's very possible also that the initial upload was already more or less heavily edited. In this version, the center of the sky is too dark, and certainly not faithful -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't know exactly what you mean by painting brush - it's the first time I've heard the term in this context - but if you mean masking, I've already commented on this with regard to the white and black levels. I'm just surprised at the astonishment, as this is a common process in image processing. Or are we talking at cross purposes? A. Öztas (talk) 13:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- "Painting brush" is the official name on many software editors, isn't it? Usually an icon with a "painting brush" 🖌. Now there's a 4th version uploaded. Not yet observed. But If you darken selectively some areas here and there, while the sky is supposed to be a giant uniform surface, it makes it fake -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying, what you mean. By your reasoning, wouldn't most photos then qualify as "fake", not only on FP? We can discuss this matter on my talk page, if you want. This would not only apply to (even slight) HDR images but also to those where, for example, a building is subtly emphasized. If you set the threshold for "fake" at any adjustment that doesn’t globally affect the entire image, then so be it — at least that's a clear position. As for the term "painting brush", as I mentioned earlier, I wasn't familiar with it in this context. In the software I use, this tool is called "draw mask". Either way, I hope we’ve now discussed this topic thoroughly. --A. Öztas (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Discussion continues below and I'm also interested in talking with other participants, having different points of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying, what you mean. By your reasoning, wouldn't most photos then qualify as "fake", not only on FP? We can discuss this matter on my talk page, if you want. This would not only apply to (even slight) HDR images but also to those where, for example, a building is subtly emphasized. If you set the threshold for "fake" at any adjustment that doesn’t globally affect the entire image, then so be it — at least that's a clear position. As for the term "painting brush", as I mentioned earlier, I wasn't familiar with it in this context. In the software I use, this tool is called "draw mask". Either way, I hope we’ve now discussed this topic thoroughly. --A. Öztas (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- "Painting brush" is the official name on many software editors, isn't it? Usually an icon with a "painting brush" 🖌. Now there's a 4th version uploaded. Not yet observed. But If you darken selectively some areas here and there, while the sky is supposed to be a giant uniform surface, it makes it fake -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I've just checked the picture on my computer (I was previously on my phone) and it seems you were right that a painting brush was used.
- However I don't think the result is very different at first sight from adjusting curves/exposure adjustments, which is something a lot of people do and the result doesn't look unatural to me (especially if you compare it to something really unnatural like this). But perhaps the center of the milky way was darkened too much (it's not supposed to be that much darker) and perhaps the brighter part shouldn't have been brightened with a paiting brush but with a global exposure/contrast adjustment because looking at thumbnail we see the brushstrokes and comparing it to the previous version, the brighter parts changed shape and were extended, which in the end changed a bit the shape of the milky way and is something that shouldn't happen.
- Also, there's one other new thing I've noted now, there's a strange change change of exposure in this zone that might be improved -- Giles Laurent (talk) 17:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't know exactly what you mean by painting brush - it's the first time I've heard the term in this context - but if you mean masking, I've already commented on this with regard to the white and black levels. I'm just surprised at the astonishment, as this is a common process in image processing. Or are we talking at cross purposes? A. Öztas (talk) 13:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Giles Laurent: , thanks for your comment. Please take a look at the 3 versions in the history. Resize them at the same size, and superimpose them, each separately. Then you realize very clearly that yes, a painting brush was used. Moreover, it's very possible also that the initial upload was already more or less heavily edited. In this version, the center of the sky is too dark, and certainly not faithful -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I honestly don't think a painting brush was used, the milky way has brighter borders on each side that can naturally be captured by long exposure photos -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You guessed well and put words (your own words) on the issue mentioned above -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Will you also explain why you quote it like that or do you want me to guess? A. Öztas (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. "Emphasising the structure". "High / low, white / black" -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You brought it up, so I'm interested in what you consider being "artificial" in the sky. Is it about emphasising the structure of the Milky Way (high/low or white/black)? I don't understand, assuming good faith, what you're getting at. A. Öztas (talk) 04:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's supposed to be natural :-) And please, assume good faith, it's your work. You should know (better than us) what you've done in the sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Should be fixed, both. --A. Öztas (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain Painting brush removed. @Giles Laurent: there's a noticeable difference between the second-third-fourth and the fifth version, and in the previous ones, there was no reason to darken artificially some zones in the sky so as to create strong and unnatural contrasts. Thanks for pointing this out, and for confirming the manipulation was not only my subjective impression. The sky is supposed to be flat. So the normal processing in this case is not local touches but should be global, yes -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Weak supportI don't think this is a picture that had strong editing, I actually think the result out of the camera is close to what we see in the picture (contrarily to this picture), but the top of the picture is perhaps a bit too dark compared to the rest? -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)- I agree with you there, I've lightened it up a bit at the top. A. Öztas (talk) 13:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you tor the improvements, moving from weak support to Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with you there, I've lightened it up a bit at the top. A. Öztas (talk) 13:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Ignoring the brush discussion, I just don't think the milky way ever looks like this in Europe. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Well if you would try astrophotography you would see that it looks like this, even in Europe. First you need the perfect weather conditions: 1) no clouds; 2) new moon phase : extremely important because as soon that the moon illuminates the sky, you lose easily 80-90% visibility of the stars; 3) as low as possible light pollution (so you have to be far enough from big cities); 4) be late enough in the day because often until midnight there's still remains of the sun light polluting the sky in summer. Then you also need the right equipment: 1) a tripod; 2) a lense with small f number (like F1.4). And finally you need to find the right parameters (manual focus, multiple seconds exposure, not hesitating to increase ISO, etc.). Once you combine all that, the camera can capture a milky way that looks like this. But of course what the camera sees is different of what the naked eye sees because the naked eye can not do a multiple seconds exposure on the contrary of a camera. This means the naked eye will always see a much much darker sky -- Giles Laurent (talk) 19:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation, but you do agree that the Milky Way never looks like this to the naked eye. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- The exposure time of this was 30 sec at F1.8 and ISO 640. You almost couldn't even see the outline of the mountains with the naked eye at that time. This is what it looked like there taken with a smartphone. A. Öztas (talk) 10:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation, but you do agree that the Milky Way never looks like this to the naked eye. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well if you would try astrophotography you would see that it looks like this, even in Europe. First you need the perfect weather conditions: 1) no clouds; 2) new moon phase : extremely important because as soon that the moon illuminates the sky, you lose easily 80-90% visibility of the stars; 3) as low as possible light pollution (so you have to be far enough from big cities); 4) be late enough in the day because often until midnight there's still remains of the sun light polluting the sky in summer. Then you also need the right equipment: 1) a tripod; 2) a lense with small f number (like F1.4). And finally you need to find the right parameters (manual focus, multiple seconds exposure, not hesitating to increase ISO, etc.). Once you combine all that, the camera can capture a milky way that looks like this. But of course what the camera sees is different of what the naked eye sees because the naked eye can not do a multiple seconds exposure on the contrary of a camera. This means the naked eye will always see a much much darker sky -- Giles Laurent (talk) 19:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Surprisingly good image quality given the circumstances of darkness. I like the water reflections of the milky way galaxy --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 20:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Magnifico --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 19:02:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Uzbekistan
- Info created and uploaded by Humoyun Mehridinov - nominated by Красный -- Красный wanna talk? 19:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Красный wanna talk? 19:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Is there some chromatic aberration at full size? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, and sharpness could be better too. I'm honestly not sure about this one. I made this downsample which is 8.5 megapixels and better but still corner sharpness isn't great. But the motif is really cool so unsure how to vote, will think about this one. Cmao20 (talk) 01:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Noticeable CA and low level of detail, probably due to the lens. It is a common effect according to the Wikipedia article Canon EF-S 18–55mm lens -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 13:15:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#United_States
- Info Walking path underneath the Hell Gate Bridge on Randall's Island (New York). all by — Rhododendrites talk | 13:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 13:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 20:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Pretty photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support An impressive sight; great quality, light and composition Cmao20 (talk) 01:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice light and composition. Crop perhaps a bit tight at the bottom under the lamppost, but the vanishing point with Matryoshka doll effect is cool -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Weak supportGreat image, but maybe needs perspective correction a bit. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 02:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I think you're right -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think it's distorted. The front and exterior sides of the pylon are wedge-shaped, so what looks like the sides tapering in is actually the wedge tapering back. — Rhododendrites talk | 15:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry Rhododendrites, but I think Екатерина Борисова is right here. I had the same impression as you at first sight, but after comparison with your other photo File:Under Hell Gate Bridge on Randalls Island (60101p).jpg taken from further point of view, it becomes obvious that the perspective should be fixed. These arches are not leaning in reality. Note added. I will remove my support otherwise, because it's also architecture -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support-- by others.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Iwaqarhashmi: I think you were just trying to copy a vote, but you copied in a separate nom :) — Rhododendrites talk | 18:54, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, my bad. Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 18:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 19:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 23:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:27, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Weak supportGreat image, but like Екатерина and Basile I think your other photo shows that a slight perspective correction is advisable and would further improve the image. – Aristeas (talk) 20:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)- New version uploaded - First, I uploaded a version with a perspective change with the resulting empty triangles in the corner filled in, but I couldn't find a fill that worked well so the current version is just a crop. Pings: @Aristeas, Radomianin, Poco a poco, Ermell, Iwaqarhashmi, Famberhorst, Agnes Monkelbaan, Llez, Basile Morin, Cmao20, Екатерина Борисова, and Harlock81: — Rhododendrites talk | 02:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Much better (or "even better"). Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the update. The new version is a clear improvement. -- Radomianin (talk) 04:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- by others, Thank you.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Greatly improved. Thank you! Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 07:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with the comments above Poco a poco (talk) 07:58, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well done, thanks. --Harlock81 (talk) 15:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per others, full support now. – Aristeas (talk) 18:26, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--ArildV (talk) 11:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support without any doubt now, thanks for inprovement. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 02:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 11:31:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Germany
- Info Aerial view of the Vexier Chapel in Reifenberg. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 11:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ermell (talk) 11:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice composition. Appealing viewpoint -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:56, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very simple motif and very beautiful image. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 02:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Екатерина Борисова and Basile. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:08, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support The church nicely stands out from the green background, excellent quality. – Aristeas (talk) 16:39, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support by others.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Support -- Smallworldclick (talk) 11.01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Invalid vote. Newly created account can't vote, sorry. Please read the guidelines --Basile Morin (talk) 18:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 19:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Rolf Kranz (talk) 11:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 19:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:009 Greater flamingos male and female in the Camargue during mating season Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 10:38:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Phoenicopteridae (Flamingos)
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 11:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 12:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support for composition, details, colors, and quality. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 15:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Of course. Cmao20 (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support A piece of art. The shape of the beak, naturally twisted, which fits almost perfectly into the free area like a puzzle piece! And the level of detail is fantastic -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 08:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin and Basile. Congrats! – Aristeas (talk) 10:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Support -- Smallworldclick (talk) 17:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Invalid vote. Newly created account can't vote, sorry. Please read the guidelines --Basile Morin (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 23:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support Excellent level of details. Terragio67 (talk) 19:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 10:12:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Morocco
- Info Main courtyard of Bou Inania Madrasa, Fez, Marocco. My shot. -- Mile (talk) 10:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mile (talk) 10:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not loving the shadow. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:34, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, the harsh shadow doesn't seem to be a feature here. So just a tourist shot in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ikan Kekek (welcome back, have missed your comments round here). Sorry Mile, I like it overall but the light conditions are just too harsh for me and the big black shadow makes it less than FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Ikan Kekek. -- Karelj — Preceding undated comment was added at 14:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 03:23:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Class : Ostracoda (Ostracods)
- Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 03:23, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Janeklass (talk) 03:23, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support - could use a bit of a right crop — Rhododendrites talk | 12:41, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out. I agree that it could be more centered and I've made the changes. Janeklass (talk) 04:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Support – Aristeas (talk) 16:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Honestly I am confused by the discussion below, therefore I suspend my judgement until I can study the image myself in the detail (not enough time right now, sorry). – Aristeas (talk) 10:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)- Oppose Underexposed for my personal taste. It's not an asteroid, so the subject could be better presented.
Some details look interesting at the bottom, buttoo dark, I can't make them out -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- + After increasing the light on Photoshop, I also notice focus stacking errors. Image notes added -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree about the lighting and I won't change it. I made the background darker. Janeklass (talk) 04:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- It's slightly worse now, and you also changed the crop, so my image notes have been displaced. I think you should notify everyone who already voted -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- + The author created the image to be viewed as you see it. It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer, make changes in Photoshop, and then find errors. If you don't see errors right away, then there are none. You can ruin any image in Photoshop, but the author doesn't create the image so that someone can edit it in Photoshop. Janeklass (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- What?! "make changes in Photoshop, and then find errors"? I would be the last person to do that. And it's very clear from the file page that you are the sole and only uploader. You're of course free to do what you like with your pictures, but for me it's a similar case to this one or that one nominated last week. Sorry to be allowed to review here... When I read Ikan's review below ("I do see details well"), I had the impression it was a mirror of my comment (now crossed out) above ("Some details look interesting"). I got curious and then noticed the stacking issues. Please fix these errors like in this nomination. By the way, where do you find that "It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer"? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You downloaded the image to your computer, increased the light in Photoshop, and then you saw the errors. The "errors" you pointed out do not disturb or affect the image. I am very sorry, but I think your assessment is unfair and is not given because they somehow affect the photo, but because you just want to scold. Janeklass (talk) 05:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You darkened the image, not me ("background made darker" in your summary). And you made this change without notifying a (weak) supporter writing "Definitely too dark for me", nor other participants who could also find the image (really) too dark now. Photoshop helps to find potential issues like wrong embedded color profiles (which can make the appearance vary from a computer to another, example here). This was done to help you. It was a tool. But the stacking issues (now located) also appear in the current version -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You raised the light and only then did you see errors that were otherwise not visible. For me, they do not affect the image and the problem does not exist. If you add light, you can see all sorts of things. As an author, the light is set the way I want it and it is not intended to be changed by anyone else. Janeklass (talk) 06:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You darkened the picture (for everyone, not only for me). Proof in the history of the file page and in the summary you left. Given the critics (here and elsewhere by other participants), it would have been more judicious to brighten the picture instead of the contrary. Otherwise it's like you want to hide the mistakes. You also hide the whole content in this blackness.
- No, my first impression was : "Some details look interesting at the bottom". But because it was dark, it could be a wrong impression. Confirmation (I mean denial of "interesting details") comes now, yes. Same as here. I think light should be adjusted and FS problems resolved -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Your words " + After increasing the light on Photoshop, I also notice focus stacking errors. Image notes added". I'm referring to the fact that you didn't see the errors before you increased the light. So you amplified the errors yourself, which are otherwise not so visible and they don't affect the overall impression of the image. But okay, I added a little more light and I won't change this file any more Janeklass (talk) 07:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You darkened the image, not me ("background made darker" in your summary). And you made this change without notifying a (weak) supporter writing "Definitely too dark for me", nor other participants who could also find the image (really) too dark now. Photoshop helps to find potential issues like wrong embedded color profiles (which can make the appearance vary from a computer to another, example here). This was done to help you. It was a tool. But the stacking issues (now located) also appear in the current version -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- What?! "make changes in Photoshop, and then find errors"? I would be the last person to do that. And it's very clear from the file page that you are the sole and only uploader. You're of course free to do what you like with your pictures, but for me it's a similar case to this one or that one nominated last week. Sorry to be allowed to review here... When I read Ikan's review below ("I do see details well"), I had the impression it was a mirror of my comment (now crossed out) above ("Some details look interesting"). I got curious and then noticed the stacking issues. Please fix these errors like in this nomination. By the way, where do you find that "It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer"? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- + After increasing the light on Photoshop, I also notice focus stacking errors. Image notes added -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment If my eyes are good, there is no difference in the light between the first version and this one? And your words "It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer"... and worse: "the author doesn't create the image so that someone can edit it in Photoshop." Apologies, but this idea "If you don't see errors right away, then there are none" sounds a bit clumsy, according to the ton of similar nominations where errors / stitching problems are detected in the middle or even at the end of the voting period. A bunch of examples available in the archives. Currently the focus stacking errors are still present. Thus I don't change my vote -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Editing an image to amplify small flaws that aren't actually visible is very strange behavior to me. Janeklass (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Very visible now, even in the darkness. And also at the top right.
- Could be fixed / uploaded by someone else (not necessarily you).
- Alternative could be proposed. At least for the FS issues. Then it's a democratic choice. Could be also delisted and replaced by a more accurate version later. If you change your mind, or if someone else improves your image.
- Like it or not, that's how it works, actually. And how divergent opinions offer chances to improve.
- It's a mistake to believe that the purpose of increasing the light was "to amplify flaws". Certainly anyone else would / will do the same as observer or re-user, because it's very dark, then trying to evaluate the content fairly and see it under more favorable conditions is useful and / or necessary. The FS flaws popped up at this moment, and were not expected. Most of the users here are happy to meet the opportunity to correct their own images -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I am happy to correct mistakes when I see that the criticism is relevant. At this moment, I feel that the criticism has been overdone and criticized for the sake of criticizing. These "mistakes" are not visible in the picture and do not spoil the picture. Janeklass (talk) 11:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- These mistakes have just been revealed a few hours ago. And first reaction, you darkened the image, which had the effect of making the situation worse, and lengthening the discussion for everyone. It would undoubtedly be wiser to fix the issues like here or there. See also this interesting case -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't darken the image because of your alleged "errors". I cropped the image and at the same time noticed lighter areas in the background and thought that the background would be better completely black. Janeklass (talk) 14:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... noticed something, too? For the record, you said "If you don't see errors right away, then there are none.". You changed the crop? You changed the light? Twice, already? Yes, things happen / appear in the light of a discussion, like in the light of a (well-exposed) photo -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- You can keep your opinion. I'll stick to my position and won't fix alleged errors that aren't actually visible and don't affect the image. Besides, this picture's value lies elsewhere for me (and for Wikipedia). What we actually see in the picture is much more important here - whether it ranks among the best is secondary. In my opinion, Wikipedia isn't Instagram, and I add pictures that have genuine informative value. Janeklass (talk) 03:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- 🛑Stop it now. "You can keep your opinion" and other derogatory comments written above are against COM:CIVIL. All various and subjective opinions here are welcome and encouraged on this section, per the guidelines at COM:FPC "A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate". You don't like criticisms, this does not give you permission to be disrespectful to those who don't share your view. You voted above, fine, we all respect your choice, did not contest anything. Do the same, please. Now enough. It's an open project. -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Is the author's position not important, or do you always have to agree with criticism? If so, I will try to improve myself in the future and will not engage in further discussion.
- For now, this discussion is over for me. Janeklass (talk) 05:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Very good. -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- 🛑Stop it now. "You can keep your opinion" and other derogatory comments written above are against COM:CIVIL. All various and subjective opinions here are welcome and encouraged on this section, per the guidelines at COM:FPC "A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate". You don't like criticisms, this does not give you permission to be disrespectful to those who don't share your view. You voted above, fine, we all respect your choice, did not contest anything. Do the same, please. Now enough. It's an open project. -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- You can keep your opinion. I'll stick to my position and won't fix alleged errors that aren't actually visible and don't affect the image. Besides, this picture's value lies elsewhere for me (and for Wikipedia). What we actually see in the picture is much more important here - whether it ranks among the best is secondary. In my opinion, Wikipedia isn't Instagram, and I add pictures that have genuine informative value. Janeklass (talk) 03:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... noticed something, too? For the record, you said "If you don't see errors right away, then there are none.". You changed the crop? You changed the light? Twice, already? Yes, things happen / appear in the light of a discussion, like in the light of a (well-exposed) photo -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't darken the image because of your alleged "errors". I cropped the image and at the same time noticed lighter areas in the background and thought that the background would be better completely black. Janeklass (talk) 14:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- These mistakes have just been revealed a few hours ago. And first reaction, you darkened the image, which had the effect of making the situation worse, and lengthening the discussion for everyone. It would undoubtedly be wiser to fix the issues like here or there. See also this interesting case -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Editing an image to amplify small flaws that aren't actually visible is very strange behavior to me. Janeklass (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Definitely too dark for me but still interesting Cmao20 (talk) 01:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice composition, and I do see details well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It is too dark for my eyes. I thought I could see stacking errors online. When I download the file and brightened it, the the stacking errors become more obvious. It is worth doing this in case your eyes deceive you. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Pictures of the Sun by ESA Solar Orbiter
[edit]Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 21:24:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page
-
The Sun in UV light of 17.4 nanometres, taken by Solar Orbiter's Extreme Ultraviolet Imager (EUI) instrument, assembled from multiple images taken on 22 March 2023.
-
A magnetogram of the Sun that shows the line-of-sight direction of the magnetic field on the Sun's disc, measured by the Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023.
-
The velocity map of the Sun that shows the line-of-sight speed and direction of movement of material at the Sun's visible surface, measured by the Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023.
-
The Sun Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023, at a wavelength of 617 nanometres.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Stars
- Info Created by ESA & NASA/Solar Orbiter/EUI Team, Image processing by Emil Kraaikamp (ROB) - uploaded by Artem.G - nominated by David Osipov -- David Osipov (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- David Osipov (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Procedural oppose I think some of these pictures are great but I don't see how they represent a valid or complete set. They are just unconnected pictures of the Sun by the same spacecraft, there is no governing theme for how they make sense together and complement each other. You should nominate the best ones separately and let us review them. Cmao20 (talk) 03:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I understand your viewpoint. Let me try to explain a bit better why I see it as a complete set. It's like, when we look at the Sun, we shouldn't just see a bright ball of light. We need to see all its sides, like with a cube, to truly grasp it. The magnetogram, the velocity map, the UV picture—they all reveal a different face of the Sun, helping us understand its power and complexity.
- Looking at the Sun in only one wavelength is like seeing a single face of a Rubik's Cube. Each face shows a different color arrangement, but only by observing all sides do you understand the puzzle's complete pattern. Similarly, different wavelengths reveal unique aspects of the Sun, and only together do they provide a comprehensive view. Showing just one picture is like showing just one square of a cube - it doesn't represent the whole picture.
- I think representing the Sun in its full complexity needs more than just one image. The rules, while important, shouldn't limit our ability to represent complex subjects like the Sun fully. David Osipov (talk) 06:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Invalid set and poor quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment According to the European Space Agency, The PHI images are the highest-resolution full views of the Sun's visible surface to date, including maps of the Sun's messy magnetic field and movement on the surface.(European Space Agency. (2024, November 20). New full Sun views show sunspots, fields and restless plasma.) So I just can't comprehend how you could comment on their poor quality. They are literally the highest-res pics of the Sun to date with 92.16 Megapixels res, composed of a stitched mosaic of 25 pics each, taken with a space quality lenses. --David Osipov (talk) 08:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Stitching issues. And this one also from ESA has 196 Megapixels with stitching issues too. But the main problem here is the set, which does not fit the guidelines -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Info Hacker news thread on the pics --David Osipov (talk) 08:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 19:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
- Info created by Олександр Воропаєв - uploaded by Олександр Воропаєв - nominated by George Chernilevsky -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Info Transfiguration Cathedral in Odesa. On July 23, 2023, the cathedral was severely damaged by a Russian missile attack. This is UNESCO World Heritage site in Ukraine -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very sad and high quality, I think it's a bit of a shame that we have the distracting shadowy figure of the second workman in the doorway, but not enough of a drawback not to support. Cmao20 (talk) 03:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Due to its high documentary value, the picture is worthy of promotion. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Rbrechko (talk) 12:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 14:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20 and Radomianin. – Aristeas (talk) 16:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--ArildV (talk) 21:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per others, but I think there's CA on the right, especially the upper right on the edges of bricks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:39, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per others, --Famberhorst (talk) 05:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very important documentation and good quality. I think the worker in the dark does not disturb at all, as it covers an ongoing process which makes the photograph more authentic --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:07, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 16:22:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Corvidae (Crows, Jays and Magpies)
- Info created by Charlesjsharp - uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 21:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thank you for the nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful bird, good posture, composition and quality. – Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Punk on a branch :-) Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Aristeas. Very vivid, great facial expression. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 07:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Support --Smallworldclick (talk) 11:10, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Invalid vote. Newly created account can't vote, sorry. Please read the guidelines --Basile Morin (talk) 18:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 08:18:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Bubulcus
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Crazy eye :) --Rbrechko (talk) 12:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 13:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:08, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 02:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:47, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:34, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very high resolution and excellent level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 06:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 06:11:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons_(Graubünden)
- Info S-charl, bridge over the fast-flowing mountain stream Clemgia, a tributary of the Inn. The autumn colours are at their peak at S-Charl in Switzerland (altitude 1810 metres).
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 11:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Autumn colors make this photo spectacular. --Rbrechko (talk) 12:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 02:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support I just love when the European larch take these colors in autumn -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:45, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 12:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Giles Laurent. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Giles. – Aristeas (talk) 16:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 05:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice composition --Don (talk) 23:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 03:37:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Kazakhstan
- Info created and uploaded by Максат79 - nominated by Екатерина Борисова -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Great composition but I think the colours are a bit oversaturated Cmao20 (talk) 18:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 20:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 02:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Somehow. Despite i think sky colors are more fake. But that structure make it pass and Kazakh could be more represented. --Mile (talk) 10:37, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 12:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive, great structure. Probably a bit overprocessed, but when comparing misc. photos from the WWW I get the impression it’s not completely unrealistic. – Aristeas (talk) 16:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Cmao20 and Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral per Cmao20 and Mile -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 05:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 03:23:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Others
- Info created and uploaded by Radomianin - nominated by Екатерина Борисова -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 03:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 03:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the nomination, Екатерина Борисова. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- I love this picture, it shows the photographer's talent to see beauty and grace in an ordinary street scene. This is the wow factor for me. The color combination is also wonderful here. Thank you for sharing this little masterpiece. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 16:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Many thanks for the appreciation, Екатерина Борисова. The picture was a real snapshot, we were first in a record store and then, as I recall, in a store next door, which we left with the friendly woman in red. During our walk through SF, my camera was always ready for spontaneous snapshots. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Busy background, nothing special. Yann (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Yann --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support When we want to show people walking on a city street the background will usually be busy; somehow the variety of the city must be included – if the background consists just of windows reflecting the sky or a wall we would not get the feeling that we are in the downtown. The vanishing lines of the row of cars on the left and of the buildings on the right, which converge above the centre of the picture, bring order to the composition; the woman seems to be walking towards this vanishing point, her placement slightly to the left adds tension to the composition. This placement, the bright colours of her clothing and the out-of-focus background make her stand out clearly from the background. For me, this is a good example of an intense, orderly and yet dynamic composition in the middle of the variety of a city centre. – Aristeas (talk) 16:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yeah I think it's great. The colours, the outfit, the sense of movement, all superb. Good street photography. Cmao20 (talk) 18:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 15:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Yann. -- Karelj (talk) 14:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 23:00:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual_snow_sports
- Info created by Granada - uploaded by Granada - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 23:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tupungato (talk) 23:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Tight crop, background isnt so favourable. --Mile (talk) 08:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good sharpness for a pull along shot at that high resolution. --Granada (talk) 10:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Stunning sports photo which conveys an excellent impression of the tremendous speed of the ski jump thanks to the successful panning. The background is good, both for the panning (if the photo was taken against snow, the blue sky etc., we would not see the speed) and for the composition: the crossing diagonal lines make the composition interesting. – Aristeas (talk) 10:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Convincing example of the panning technique. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Agree the quality is rather good for a panning shot. Not as sharp as this one but still very convincing at lower resolution. Question: What are the red and grey ghosts at the lower left corner? -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- A ski jumper is moving their body, legs and arms for correcting their in flight position at all times until the landing, so it's practically impossible to get a ski jumper completely sharp when panning and using longer shutter times. The plane itself does not move all its parts, it's one block of mostly metal parts slicing throug air and it is most probably photographed from further away and not in 2-3m distance as with ski jumpers. --Granada (talk) 18:53, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
AbstainInteresting. It's not an answer to my question, though, right? -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)- Sorry, forgot about that question. That's one of the many wind flags: a grey metal post and a red stripe of fabric. Granada (talk) 06:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks. I wonder if the image wouldn't be more striking vertical. And the position of the skier would be more accurate. However I understand the difficulty here to follow the trajectory and to keep the subject within the frame at the same time. --Basile Morin (talk) 06:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the vote! By vertical do you mean like e.g. this one? To be honest I find these quite boring. They are the easiest to take by just pointing your camera upwards to the ski jumper coming from the take off. This one is not the sharpest as it was also taken at the same event and marks the beginning of a panning shot following the athlete. The moment the athlete comes past me (like in the FPC) she is around 90km/h fast and just 2-3m away. If I only want to asure that the photo is sharp I do it like that example and set the exposure time to 1/1000s or less (depending on weather conditions). Granada (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I wrongly assumed the photo was tilted, but realize now that it's probably not. The other shot, even if "easier" is also very good. For the speed, yes, it makes sense. Still the background would appear more static / frozen than here -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- No worries, therefore we are discussing here. The FPC-shot was made at the steepest part of the ski jumping hill, a few meters above the so called critical point of the hill. The post of that wind flag is mounted perpendicular to the slope of the hill and the image is completely horizontally. If you want to shoot from there you have to walk the stairs up. Granada (talk) 07:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I wrongly assumed the photo was tilted, but realize now that it's probably not. The other shot, even if "easier" is also very good. For the speed, yes, it makes sense. Still the background would appear more static / frozen than here -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the vote! By vertical do you mean like e.g. this one? To be honest I find these quite boring. They are the easiest to take by just pointing your camera upwards to the ski jumper coming from the take off. This one is not the sharpest as it was also taken at the same event and marks the beginning of a panning shot following the athlete. The moment the athlete comes past me (like in the FPC) she is around 90km/h fast and just 2-3m away. If I only want to asure that the photo is sharp I do it like that example and set the exposure time to 1/1000s or less (depending on weather conditions). Granada (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks. I wonder if the image wouldn't be more striking vertical. And the position of the skier would be more accurate. However I understand the difficulty here to follow the trajectory and to keep the subject within the frame at the same time. --Basile Morin (talk) 06:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, forgot about that question. That's one of the many wind flags: a grey metal post and a red stripe of fabric. Granada (talk) 06:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- An insect photographer (talk) 00:00, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 22:24:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Space_exploration#Space_launch_vehicles
- Info created by NASA/Bill Ingalls - uploaded by BugWarp - nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 22:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tupungato (talk) 22:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --BugWarp (talk) 01:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Yes, for such photos getting the right moment is everything. Or almost everything[.] – Aristeas (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC) Cut off discussion about technical details to avoid distraction of other voters. – Aristeas (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Discussion about technical details
|
---|
|
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:52, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose A lot of CAs (Green/red) and perspective correction necessary (see especially the pole at the left and the silo and the poles at the right). It is also not very sharp. --Llez (talk) 09:20, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 21:12:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Sky
- Info created & uploaded by Anthony's astro - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 21:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 21:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
* Support --Ermell (talk) 23:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Basile and Giles. --Ermell (talk) 23:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It's of course a beautiful picture at thumbnail but when looking closer at the separation between the sky and land I wonder if the background is real or if it is a photomontage of a sky photographed from another place/angle/time. The file description says the file was taken by putting a camera on a tripod and taking 30sec exposure shots and assembling them, which would mean that the background is supposed to really have been behind that foreground. But the author is the same one than this church picture that was recently delisted for having undeclared photo manipulations (fake background) and having misled votes. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain Explicit abstention in line with Giles' analysis and reasoning. Personally, I'm tired of undisclosed manipulations on this forum, just recently I fell for a manipulation in my nomination of someone else's picture, which the author didn't really admit. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 11:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Giles Laurent. We shouldn't promote any more images from this user given the risk that they could be photomontages. Cmao20 (talk) 16:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- I think we have to judge the picture and not the author. If the author shows us the original raw of this image and that he proves that it's not a photomontage, this picture (and other proven real pictures) should still be able to be promoted in my opinion -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Also this one by "AstroAnthony" is clearly a fake. There might be many other manipulations by this uploader (I don't want to waste hours examining each with a magnifying glass). It is not worth risking another time-consuming delisting process after potential POTY qualification like the previous case. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, if the author could provide the RAWs I would be happy to reconsider, but I think it's fair to assume that images by this user may be photomontages, particularly if they look 'too good to be true', and to vote accordingly. Cmao20 (talk) 02:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Too good to be true. --Thi (talk) 15:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose Per above. Stitching errors. Note added. Ping @Ermell: -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 21:58, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2024 at 11:00:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Aegithalidae (Long-tailed Tits)
- Info created by c - uploaded by Jerzy Strzelecki - nominated by Jerzystrzelecki -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 11:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 11:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Lovely. --Yann (talk) 11:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Although I'm not sure if everything possible has been done with the denoising, I think this is a great photo! --Superbass (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Definitely not, Superbass, I gave it a try, see here, I think that there is room for improvement here. Jerzystrzelecki you are free to offer this version as an alternative or upload it over your version if you like, whatever you like (or do nothing, that's also fine with me). --Poco a poco (talk) 18:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose For now, we need here some kind of improvement, you are of course also welcome to reprocess it on your own. Poco a poco (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Really lovely, excellent posture and composition. But I agree with Poco a poco that the processing should be improved. A new processing from the raw image file (an ARW file in your case) would be the perfect solution (I could help you with this if you want – I have used the same camera and use the same lens). But Poco a Poco’s version (thanks!) is already a solid improvement and even ready for use for you, so it would be the easiest solution. – Aristeas (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Follow-up Comment Jerzy, this is really a lovely and wonderful photo, I (and other users) would really like to become it a Featured picture. We just think that the post-processing is not up to what your photo deserves. Modern tools allow to reduce the image noise greatly without sacrificing details (as old-styled noise removal did), therefore the new tools have rapidly become standard especially with wildlife photos. Just contact Poco a poco or e.g. Radomianin or me if you would appreciate a little help with this. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 10:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks to Aristeas for his engagement. The photo is too beautiful to let this nomination die. SwissTransfer link provided: This version is similar to Poco's (thanks for the edit), but in mine the colors are closer to the photographer's original. However, the degree of denoising and sharpness is similar to Poco's version. If you and the community find the edit acceptable, feel free to use it for an update. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Will support Poco's version, but not this one. Cmao20 (talk) 03:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Jerzy Strzelecki Dear P .T. correctors of other people's photos: I must congratulate you on your effectiveness in warding off potential (+) voters. However, the next time an irresistible urge to correct you strikes, try to wait until the voting is over. I have over 8,000 images in Wikimedia, including some that have been used in dozens of Wikipedias. It's a shame that you chose to paste just the one I wanted to highlight - the friendly, slightly funny “Mustache”. And best leave the author's versions alone even if, in your opinion, they necessarily need improvement. This was supposed to be a bigger project [2]. However, a magpie or jay destroyed the nest with the young. The same thing with the vote on this photo was done by the enhancers. Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 13:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Hello Jerzy, I’m sorry but there seems to be a big misunderstanding. No offence, but your harsh comment deserves an open answer.
- Please take a look at other nominations to understand better how this “Featured picture candidates” (FPC) page works. We do not first vote on a photo and discuss it later, as you seem to assume. We always discuss photos, often into details, and FPC regulars are used to propose improvements when they think a photo could be amended. This applies also and especially to wildlife photographs, and hints and suggestions about improving the post-processing are very common. This is neither derogatory nor impolite, on the contrary: when FPC voters suggest specific improvements, they (i.) confirm that your photo has potential and (ii.) want to help you to realize this potential better. This is actually a service for you. You have received a lot of praise for the photo and only completely constructive comments, two people have even edited the photo for you to help you – frankly, you should consider yourself lucky that you are being offered so much recognition and support.
- You might wonder why people are so particular about the noise/sharpness level. That’s not arbitrary: we discuss this often, especially when it comes to wildlife photos, but often forget to explain this to newcomers. Wikimedia projects need especially sharp and noise-free photos for a special reason: our photos, and a fortiori Commons FPs, are not only viewed as a whole, but must also stand up to being cropped and have details extracted from them for articles, Wikibooks, etc.
- If you have still doubts, ask other people who often nominate photos of animals (e.g. User:Charlesjsharp, User:Giles Laurent, User:Iifar, User:Poco a poco, User:Rhododendrites and many more): they will tell you that their photos are scrutinised and discussed just as closely, often even more closely, and usually without anyone offering to help them improve them. That was a particularly nice offer from our fellows to you.
- Wikimedia Commons is not meant to be a site where people just brag about their photos and praise each other (like Flickr), but one where we work together, and there’s no better way to do that than by discussing how to improve images further. Getting on your high horse and insulting other users by comparing them to envious magpies or jays doesn’t help the poor little bird (for whom I have every sympathy), your beautiful photo, you or the project. – Aristeas (talk) 16:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Definitely per Aristeas. Jerzystrzelecki, I had rather expected a "thank you" to those people you ironically call "enhancers" for dedicating their time to process and upload new versions (yes, improved ones) of your image. Your feedback is instead rude. If you cannot accept criticism to your work, you shouldn't nominate your photos to FP. Here we expect the highest quality and the wow effect. It is a bunch more than likes. Poco a poco (talk) 16:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- [responding to ping] Yes, as Aristeas says this isn't just a vote but a forum where people provide feedback and, at times, even improve each other's images. You are not obliged to accept this help, of course, but it is part of what, in my opinion, makes this a constructive forum. That said, there are particularities among the community here, because of its origin in an encyclopedia, that can be jarring for people used to sharing photos elsewhere -- horizontals/verticals, noise, chromatic aberration, filters/saturation, unconventional crops, unconventional composition, etc. can all result in a failed nomination. There are exceptions, of course, but they're rare. Here, Poco a poco offered to make this adjustment for you. It sounds like that gesture wasn't desired. As a result, this nomination may fail. I've been in such a situation, too, where folks have suggested a crop or edit that I fundamentally disagreed with, and thus my nomination failed. It's frustrating, but that's the way it works. Just know that, for many people, they want to help you to get an image promoted rather than oppose and say nothing. You have to decide if you want that help, but remember it comes from a good place. — Rhododendrites talk | 17:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 20:19:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
- Info Man dressed as the pagan god Veles at the traditional Rękawka festival in Kraków. All by me -- Jakubhal 20:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Jakubhal 20:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support I'm captivated by this unusual portrait. If you compare it to similar ones from the series in the category, it really is the best. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Appealing mask portrait in good quality. – Aristeas (talk) 16:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 19:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 19:46:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Automobiles
- Info Abandoned Ford E-Series van by Gerritsen Creek in Brooklyn, New York. I like the mix between urban waste and nature at the edge of a city. I was torn which to nominate, this one or this wider view that includes a glimpse of Manhattan, but I think making the van the subject probably works best. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 19:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 19:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Distracting branches. This derelict vehicle with graffiti has its own charm, but as FP, the unbalanced tight crop at the right, cluttered by branches interfering with the composition in the foreground, make the viewpoint awkward, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Basile Morin, sorry but I do think the branches are distracting, great subject but unsure about composition Cmao20 (talk) 01:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Before nominating, I uploaded a version with the branches removed, but wound up reverting as it seemed like a bit much. — Rhododendrites talk | 01:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment For me, this is an interesting image that I would support without the branches. I took the liberty and created a proposal from the revision at 19:35 on 25 November 2024. Please see the SwissTransfer link. Modifications made: fixed retouching remnants on the top right. From the left side I cropped 300 px and made a slight level adjustment to give the sky a bit more weight. This is just a suggestion that you are welcome to use for an update if the result is acceptable for you and the community. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 11:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Alternative
[edit]- Info This is the retouched version, with branches on the right removed, as edited by Radomianin (thanks!). I uploaded it as a separate file to allow for an alternative. Pinging other voters so far: @Basile Morin and Cmao20: — Rhododendrites talk | 14:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 14:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support The image not only conveys the problem of environmental pollution, it also has an "apocalyptic aftertaste". Thank you for the alternative upload, I personally find this crop the most appealing. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:28, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support this one is much better. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support IMHO this one works perfectly. – Aristeas (talk) 11:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 10:52:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Alopochen
- Info Quite a common bird these days in Europe. FPs of an adult's head and of a chick. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as long as not sufficiently COM:CAT'egorized --A.Savin 16:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why don't you just let the one do it whose job it actually is? --A.Savin 15:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please explain the reason for the continued oppose vote A.Savin. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Das behalte ich mir bei falscher und/oder unvollständiger Kategorisierung Ihrerseits auch weiter ausdrücklich vor. --A.Savin 15:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Google translate says this means I reserve the right to do so in the event of incorrect and/or incomplete categorization on your part. But I have no idea what is wrong now. Can ANYBODY help please? Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:26, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Your vote is stopping promotion. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please justify continued oppose vote or remove it @A.Savin: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:26, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Google translate says this means I reserve the right to do so in the event of incorrect and/or incomplete categorization on your part. But I have no idea what is wrong now. Can ANYBODY help please? Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Das behalte ich mir bei falscher und/oder unvollständiger Kategorisierung Ihrerseits auch weiter ausdrücklich vor. --A.Savin 15:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please explain the reason for the continued oppose vote A.Savin. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why don't you just let the one do it whose job it actually is? --A.Savin 15:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
And what is wrong?Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)- Support What a lovely composition. I would also like to know what is wrong with the categories as this might help me in future nominations, it isn't clear to me what is wrong with this at the moment. Cmao20 (talk) 01:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice light and composition. Category Ducklings added. Interesting mirror image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping. I have replaced ducklings (=ducks; not geese) with another category. It is worth noting that the category structure of this species uses the word feral which is incorrect. Most of these geese are wild from introduced birds and are not feral. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your update and sorry for my confusion. It's the idea of "juvenile" that I wanted to introduce and I was also thinking that you would easily find the relevant subcategory. But it's a different branch and you're more than expert :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 14:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Rbrechko (talk) 17:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful and charming family photo. – Aristeas (talk) 20:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 23:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PaestumPaestum (talk) 15:45, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support So nice family and reflect composition An insect photographer (talk) 23:30, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Bukchon-ro 11-gil street with hanok houses at blue hour in Bukchon Hanok Village Seoul.jpg
[edit]Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 07:56:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#South Korea
- Info created & uploaded by Basile Morin - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Interesting but lacking that special thing to make it extraordinary IMHO --Poco a poco (talk) 08:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thank you very much, Tomer T, for the nomination. It's a pretty street surrounded by authentic hanok houses in Seoul, and I was lucky that evening to find it deserted after a sunny day -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:12, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support To be honest I know what Poco means. I don't much like the fact that the road has been tarmacced over. Nevertheless, interesting enough for FP and nice light. Cmao20 (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 09:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 09:25, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
File:British Columbia Regiment 1940.jpg, featured
[edit]Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2024 at 16:01:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1940-1949
- Info created by Claude Dettloff, restored, uploaded, and nominated by Yann
- Support Notable historical image with its own article. This was a delicate restoration. It was heavily damaged. Apparently the print was scratched with a sharp tool. All copies on the Net have the same defect. -- Yann (talk) 16:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Historical or not, this is an atrocious image. Wolverine X-eye 18:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think it's lovely Cmao20 (talk) 01:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support Happy end :-) I checked the restoration work and find it well handled, given the difficulty.
- Photographically the focus is wrong (and the crop tight at the left), it's a shame, but this image has its own story (and yes, also own article on en-wiki). It has become an iconic photograph. We should take this into account.
- Finally, a reminder about the voting process. COM:FPC: The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations... -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nomination, per Basile. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nomination, per Basile. – Aristeas (talk) 15:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:18, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 20:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Planning (9e jour après proposition)
[edit]Sun 24 Nov → Tue 3 Dec Mon 25 Nov → Wed 4 Dec Tue 26 Nov → Thu 5 Dec Wed 27 Nov → Fri 6 Dec Thu 28 Nov → Sat 7 Dec Fri 29 Nov → Sun 8 Dec Sat 30 Nov → Mon 9 Dec Sun 1 Dec → Tue 10 Dec Mon 2 Dec → Wed 11 Dec Tue 3 Dec → Thu 12 Dec