Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 23 2020

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Embraer_KC-390,_Paris_Air_Show_2019,_Le_Bourget_(SIAE0805).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Embraer KC-390 at Paris Air Show 2019 --MB-one 09:52, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality -- Spurzem 10:10, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too noisy - need some more reviews. --PtrQs 00:33, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support A bit noisy, but OK for an object in motion and at this distance.--Peulle 07:32, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:53, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Vilnius_Cathedral_25.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Entrance Façade of Cathedral Basilica of St Stanislaus and St Ladislaus in Vilnius --Scotch Mist 06:06, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    Its not centered, which is a bit painful. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 06:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
     Comment Agree image not 'perfect' but have nominated as QI not PI!:)? --Scotch Mist 11:10, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
    Sure, so its just a comment :) --Andrew J.Kurbiko 18:11, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
    Perhaps others have a view as to whether lack of 'centering', or other factors, determine that this image is not QI? --Scotch Mist 08:02, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
     Comment For me, it is centered enough. Perhaps the trees on the left or the column shades create the impression of asymmetry. I would crop a bit of the building edges on both sides, thereby geting rid of the dark trees. --JiriMatejicek 10:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support --Moroder 06:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I don't get what caused this to go to CR, but that said: Problematic right crop, somewhat noisy sky, but good quality, overall. -- Ikan Kekek 08:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

File:New_yam_08.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination New Yam Festival. By User:Walter Shine Anani --Andrew J.Kurbiko 08:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Comment Why so much white space? --Podzemnik 09:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
     Comment Because of that face is right in the center of the frame. Do not think it is possible in any other way. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 09:37, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
     Oppose Faces are typically only centered if the picture is from the neck up. If a portrait photograph (or painting, for that matter) also includes the upper body, the face is almost never centered (see for instance Portrait photography, also Image guidelines.) I think it's a beautiful photograph that I would happily vote for as QI, but as it currently stands there's too much empty space at the top, sorry. ReneeWrites 13:06, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
     Comment Thanks! Can you check the crop i made? I might try to nominate it instead, but dont want to waste time if its still bad. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 13:57, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
     Support I disagree. To reject an otherwise very good photo simply because the composition does not follow the usual design clichés does not correspond to the spirit of the quality image process. --Smial 14:35, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
     Comment I think the cropped version is a lot better. I think you can change this nomination instead of making a new one, but either way you'll have my vote for QI. ReneeWrites 15:14, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support QI for me.--Ermell 20:19, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

File:OutDoor_2018,_Friedrichshafen_(1X7A9910)_(cropped).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Ortlieb backpack, OutDoor 2018 --MB-one 09:36, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
    I think that DoF is an issue here, going down to f/2.8 was not a good decision for this kind of shot I'm afraid --Poco a poco 20:08, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
    The wide aperture was necessary due to the lighting situation (it was worse than what it looks like). IMO the DoF is still fine. Please send to CR if you disagree. --MB-one 08:47, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
    Ok, I will stay put and we ask for a third opinion. I wouldn't have gone down to f/2.8 and rather have tried a longer exposure and/or higher ISO --Poco a poco 06:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Poco --Moroder 17:39, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Poco --GRDN711 13:33, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:55, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

File:2020-01-10_Women's_Super_G_(2020_Winter_Youth_Olympics)_by_Sandro_Halank–113.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Lina Knific, Women's Super G at the 2020 Winter Youth Olympics in Lausanne --Sandro Halank 20:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose too blue --Charlesjsharp 11:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Seven Pandas 22:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support White balance is fine, blue colour on snow is real sprayed and expanded by skiing. --Stepro 21:49, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good image quality --Tagooty 15:34, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Charlesjsharp. --Fischer.H 17:06, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
@Fischer.H: I'm curious - If the organisers would have sprayed pink pathes in the snow, would you decline it with the reason "too pink"? --Stepro 15:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Background color can be approved by my very own photos there (example). DerHexer 18:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support WB is OK (see white helmet) --PtrQs 23:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Overexposed and/or oversaturated with colour channel clipping in wide areas. --Smial 10:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:57, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Palūšė_04.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Mallard duck (Anas platyrhynchos) in contemplation at end of jetty in Palūšė, Aukštaitija National Park, Lithuania --Scotch Mist 06:11, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Moroder 20:11, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
     Oppose Not sharp enough for such an easy bird --Charlesjsharp 11:47, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Completely sufficient sharpness and very nice composition. The photographer did not do anything wrong, especially he did not try to pretend a stronger sharpness by excessive post-processing. Of course you can count pixels in the duck's feathers, but this is not a duck portrait here, but a scene in which the bird is shown in a larger context. --Smial 07:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
     Comment @Smial: Appreciate your kind comments and understanding that the photo is not only about the duck! --Scotch Mist 14:07, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Beautiful and good quality -- Spurzem 10:07, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Charlesjsharp. I also dont think that the surrounding shown is enough for a quality image. The main subject is the bird, which isn't sharp enough. --~~
  •  Support as this picture has an acceptable sharpness. What rather confuses me are 1982 characters of file-description, wich are in null/nada/zero connection to the subject of the picture. I maximally expected the name of the pond and/or the duck. But this is a full text for a Wikipedia page about the history of what-was-it's-name? Sorry - overloaded short term memory ;-). --PtrQs (talk) 23:30, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
     Comment Thank you for your support and feedback - in response to your question, as most of the photos/images that I upload are "connected" to places that friends and relatives may not be familiar with (countries they have never visited) I generally provide additional background information and history of the place/country with links to further information if sought. Of course categories and captions provide additional details, and it is not compulsory to read an 'extended description', but some people find it helpful!:) --SM1 (talk) 05:59, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 22:00, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

File:02018_0218-001_CzestochowaPride-Parade.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Equality March 2018 in Częstochowa. By User:Silar --Andrew J.Kurbiko 08:20, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Moroder 04:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose composition esp crops --Charlesjsharp 11:50, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Charles. --Peulle 16:39, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support The overall composition is very good. You could object to the left crop, but since this isn't a posed photo, it's unavoidable: cropping out the partially cropped people on the left would result in other partially cropped people. I think it's more important that your eyes can move around the picture frame well, and secondarily that it's a colorful scene and marchers have interesting facial expressions. -- Ikan Kekek 00:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Ikan and Moroder. --PJDespa talk 14:34, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Charlesjsharp --Cvmontuy 18:36, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support ok for me.--Ermell 06:04, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 22:01, 22 August 2020 (UTC)