Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 18 2021

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:RelojCucu11AM-CarlosPaz.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Cuckoo clock of Villa Carlos Paz, Argentina playing at 11AM --Ezarate 23:11, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --Tagooty 08:47, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
     Oppose Perspective is not good. --Sebring12Hrs 16:59, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
     Oppose Due to the perspective. SHB2000 08:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Roncq_la_mairie_annexe_(2).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination : Annex town hall of Roncq, Nord Hauts-de-France.--Pierre André Leclercq 10:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --Commonists 11:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
     Oppose I disagree. The photo is not sharp and has JPEG atifacts. --Steindy 18:29, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree. It looks like a mobile phone shot.--Peulle 08:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Image composition and lighting are quite decent, but unfortunately strong image noise and strong noise reduction fought hard against each other. And both lost. Sorry, even phones can do that better nowadays. --Smial 10:46, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek 00:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Steindy --Sandro Halank 10:04, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:27, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Cimetière_de_Wiltz_–_Jardin_du_souvenir.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Cremation plot in the cemetery of Wiltz, Luxembourg. --Cayambe 05:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality --Llez 05:45, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
     Oppose I disagree. The picture looks overexposed to me. There are some visible CAs in the twigs. Sorry. --Zinnmann 16:05, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Zinnmann. SHB2000 10:02, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 Comment CA reduced and tone mapping improved. Please check again. --Cayambe 15:00, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 Comment I'm afraid the highlights are still blown. Take a look at the bark of the birch on the right side. If you have the RAW file at hand, you could try to redevelop it with e.g. -0.3 EV. Furthermore I would try to reduce the color cast. --Zinnmann (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Bright light, but I find the quality solidly acceptable now. -- Ikan Kekek 00:26, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I have reworked the image from the RAW-file, the exposition has been reduced. Please check again. Thanks in advance. --Cayambe 13:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

  • That looks good. -- Ikan Kekek 00:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
  • You're welcome. In theory, it would make sense for you to ping the people who already voted and may no longer be following this thread, but in practice, pings don't work on QIC, so... -- Ikan Kekek 08:44, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 11:27, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

File:20180327_UEFA_Euro_2019_Qualifiers_AUT-MKD_Jovan_Popzlatanov_850_5145.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Jovan Popzlatanov. By User:Granada --Andrew J.Kurbiko 10:02, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --Sandro Halank 18:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
     Oppose Not sharp enough IMO. --Ermell 19:08, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ermell. --A.Savin 18:07, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose +1. --Peulle 08:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Steindy 21:49, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

File:'t_Hof_van_Brussel_(DSC_1869).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination 't Hof van Brussel during golden hour. Castle in Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Belgium --Trougnouf 23:15, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Sorry! Outblown sky and chromatic noise on the door (left). --Steindy 00:24, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
    The sky wasn't blown (in either RAW or post-process). Still, I lowered its exposure a bit so that the gradient is more visible. I can't find the CA you are talking of, can you make a note? --Trougnouf 09:10, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose Sorry: Disturbing luminance noise in the dark areas and visible violett chromatic aberration at the top right. --F. Riedelio 07:07, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done I've increased CA removal strength which gets rid of those purple branches and increased denoising threshold on everything that's not the castle. --Trougnouf 20:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support IMO good quality now. --F. Riedelio 06:16, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Strange vertical lines in the lower left on the trees and door. Not currently a QI. -- Ikan Kekek 21:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Indeed. I couldn't see them on the door (different monitor and/or because the actual doors seem to have vertical lines) but they were definitely visible on the trees here. These lines were impossible to get rid off, turns out I pushed the dynamic range farther than the camera could handle trying to show details that shouldn't be visible so I toned it down significantly and they seem to be gone. Let me know if that's not the case. --Trougnouf 22:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I still see them, particularly in the trees, though much more subtly. -- Ikan Kekek 07:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Question Do you think it'd be better to remove the lines completely by making the trees darker or the lines are subtle enough that it's better to keep the details visible? --Trougnouf 14:52, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Maybe make them just enough darker? Does anyone else have an opinion? -- Ikan Kekek 06:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I think that helped, I can't see them no matter how hard I squint, and I fixed a corner that didn't get cropped properly with the perspective correction. --Trougnouf 22:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Thanks, I think this is good enough now, yes. -- Ikan Kekek 22:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 19:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Okay now, good quality. --Steindy 11:36, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  • @Steindy Just FYI: if you don't change the "Nomination" text here to "Decline" or "Promotion", the image will remain in CR.--Peulle 11:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Steindy 21:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Cabbage_white_in_Central_Park_(25672).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Cabbage white in Central Park --Rhododendrites 16:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Knopik-som 21:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
     Oppose not with the shadows --Charlesjsharp 19:02, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Very good quality and no loss of quality in the shadows. -- Ikan Kekek 14:51, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Charlesjsharp. --Fischer.H 17:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Steindy 23:00, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for me. --Palauenc05 07:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Charlesjsharp.--GRDN711 12:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Weak support Good enough for me as a QI. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 13:02, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Charlesjsharp --Tagooty 15:43, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose the shadow on the bottom left doesn't really work out well for me. SHB2000 10:04, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ikan Kekek --Espandero 22:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support. A bit overexposed, so some small burnt highlights, but colours still appear natural in the bright areas. Lighting and resolution are acceptable, good sharpness and composition. --Smial 11:28, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ikan Kekek --Sandro Halank 20:26, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 8 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Promoted   --Steindy 21:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Kiha40-500_Tadami-line.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Kiha 40-500 series diesel train on the Tadami Line. --MaedaAkihiko 03:55, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Oppose Good composition, but very low resolution for this kind of photograph and IMO not sharp enough. Possibly a VIC. --XRay 04:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support Over 5 mp is big enough for me, sharpness just acceptable, but an English file description would be fine. --Palauenc05 07:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I withdraw my support vote as there is no reaction to my request. --Palauenc05 06:54, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I added an English description from the existing data (including an automated translation of the Japanese description). --Robert Flogaus-Faust 09:16, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  CommentThank you for the translation.--MaedaAkihiko 05:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Compression artefacts. --Peulle 14:26, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Weak support I see no compression artefacts. What I see is the heat in the air form the diesel engine. --Steindy 22:41, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Weak support by Steindy. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 09:16, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support A little small, but straightforwardly good quality to me. MaedaAkihiko, do you have a larger version of this file? -- Ikan Kekek 21:26, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  CommentI've updated it with the largest image possible, but there's nothing bigger.--MaedaAkihiko 05:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Much appreciated. Larger and still solid quality to my eyes. Please upload your other photos in full size. -- Ikan Kekek 07:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Some sharpening atrefacts, but very good for compact, i thought its DSLR camera. --PetarM 07:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --PetarM 07:54, 16 August 2021 (UTC)