Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 30 2017

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:2017-09-14 (125) Bahnhof Neulengbach.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Punktförmige Zugbeeinflussung at train station Neulengbach. --GT1976 09:34, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Berthold Werner 10:30, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The rail behind the Punktförmige Zugbeeinflussung is sharp, but not the Punktförmige Zugbeeinflussung itself. In addition: Please add geolocation.--Capricorn4049 11:43, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Acceptable sharpness, good exposure and lighting. --Smial 10:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support per Smial. --MB-one 10:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for me. --Basotxerri (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Milseburg 11:46, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

File:2017-09-14 (139) Bahnhof Rekawinkel.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Building site at train station Rekawinkel. --GT1976 09:34, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Nothing is really sharp --Capricorn4049 11:37, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support OK 4 me. --Palauenc05 22:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose DoF too small, perspective correction necessary. Sorry. --XRay 07:55, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose washed out details all over the image. Just checked the Review of the Canon Powershot SX 50 over at dpreview and processed RAW-examples myself - use RAW at lower ISOs and you can get beautiful images out of your camera. --Granada 08:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Yes, per others, sorry. --Peulle 13:45, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 11:44, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

File:2017-09-28 (375) Gravel wagons at Bahnhof Stockerau.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Gravel wagons at Bahnhof Stockerau, Lower Austria. --GT1976 11:39, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Ermell 12:40, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose until the tilt is fixed; look at all the posts, it's pretty clear. --Peulle 12:54, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose tilted to the left, quite blurry and not really sharp. I start to believe that the Canon Powershot SX 50 is not the best camera. --Granada 16:26, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment The SX50 isn't the worst camera either, under good lighting conditions images can be relatively decent (regarding the sensor size). In this concrete case, IMO it could be a weak QI if the tilt was corrected. --Basotxerri 18:41, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Yes, but one has to use RAW and process them in post to get good images. The JPEG-algorithms within the camera don't do any good to the resulting images. --Granada 09:03, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment That's true. This camera can shoot RAW and GT1976 should do so for preparing his images adecuately. --Basotxerri 20:09, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose bad leveling, sharpness insufficient, distinctive edge blur --TypeZero 14:51, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 11:43, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

File:N8681M Landing at KCMH 1.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination N8681M Landing at KCMH -- Sixflashphoto 02:21, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:27, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment 90% of the subject in the shadows. Is it really QI ? --Selbymay 12:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment bad crop and underexposed (or do at least try to recover the shadows). --Granada 13:02, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - Acceptable to me. The plane being in shadow actually makes it more easily visible (as a whole, not in details, though those are adequate) because of greater contrast. -- Ikan Kekek 11:06, 21 October 2017
  •  Oppose Still not a QI for me. --Selbymay 06:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC) (UTC)
  •  Oppose still a bad crop and underexposed in the shadows. --Granada 11:55, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose a bit too dark and not enough detail on the plane. --MB-one 11:09, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose exposure not right, sharpness insufficient--TypeZero 14:43, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Thank you for all of your helpful reviews. I do appreciate them. -- Sixflashphoto 17:40, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 11:40, 29 October 2017 (UTC)