Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 05 2014

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Alari_flower.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Nerium_oleander flower --Aathavan jaffna 13:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Promotion Not entirely convinced by the detail quality, a second opinion would be good.--ArildV 18:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support Looks like quite a bit of NR but good enough IMHO. --Kreuzschnabel 18:36, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Cccefalon 08:21, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Easter_Lamb_(bread).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Easter Lamb (bread) --J. Lunau 12:01, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Decline Overprocessed. --Cccefalon 12:24, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
     Question
    Thank you for reviewing my photo. Would you please explain more detailed, what "Overprocessed" means? I don't understand, what's wrong with my photo, maybe I can change to better.--J. Lunau 17:58, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
    I made some annotations. --Cccefalon 18:52, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done
    Thank you for your annotations, now I understood and I think, you are right. I have uploaded a less processed version (less USM, correction of high lights). --J. Lunau 19:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

 Oppose Unfortunately the sheep on the right side is blurry. You have now a cyan CA in the photo. The clipped whites are still present. I don't think that the quality of the photo can meet QI criteria, sorry. --Cccefalon 14:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

  •  Oppose I don't find it overprocessed but overexposed background --Christian Ferrer 16:53, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Cccefalon 08:20, 4 May 2014 (UTC)