Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 25 2024

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Kenotaph_Ludwigs_des_Bayern_(München)_front.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Kenotaph Ludwigs des Bayern (München) front --AuHaidhausen 14:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Lack of details --Uoaei1 05:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
  • I see many details,other opinions? Thank you --AuHaidhausen 11:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Main subject is too dark, windows and chandelier are blown out. Background appears somehow distorted (could be a result of strong NR). Might be possible to improve it with better raw conversion (but there's no information about the camera in EXIF data). --Plozessor 07:07, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
@Plozessor: The picture is not perfect. But why shouldn't it be rated as QI like many others? We are generally very generous here. Best regards -- Spurzem 10:59, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
@Spurzem: Can you explain the point of your comment? Do you think this photo here is good? If so, why aren't you voting? If this is trolling because people disagree with some of your assessments, please remember that you can be blocked for such teasing. Jakubhal 16:13, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
@Jakubhal: It's very interesting that you immediately respond to ironically worded criticism with a threat. Please take a look at the picture above and you'll understand what I wanted to say. -- Spurzem 17:27, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The focus is on the knights in the front and the main part of kenotaph is out of focus and blurred. Minor perspective distortion. Lights per Plozessor --Jakubhal 16:12, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 07:23, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

View of a balcony from the Kasbah of Bouznika

[edit]

  • Nomination View of a balcony from the Kasbah of Bouznika --User:Mounir Neddi 19:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Your verticals are not vertical and there's a tencency to CA's (easy to correct). Furthermore the use of such high F-numbers (29!) may increase the basic DOF but reduces sharpness. And beside that it highlights dust spots (on top of the column) and demands high ISO numbers (1600) wich in turn increases chromatic noise in the dark areas. Can you fix all these effects? --PtrQs 17:30, 9 September 2024
  • Hi, thanks for your valuable comments. I'm not a photography expert, I didn't understand some things you mentioned. I really tried to make the photo look its best given the weather conditions I took it in. User:Mounir Neddi 12:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose There is a link between f-number, exposure time and ISO speed (sensitivity). You used f/29 which gives extreme depth of field (which is unnecessary here), but as that leaves hardly any light to the sensor, you need extremely high ISO speed (ISO 1600) which resulted in extreme noise. For an object in bright sunlight you should use something like ISO 100. With your camera's APS-C sensor, something like f/3 or f/4 would have been enough to have the building sharp, and maybe something around f/12 would have been enough to have both the building and the background sharp. --Plozessor 19:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too noisy IMO. In addition, there is no description. I stroke out the invalid (unsigned!) vote above. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 14:52, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Argh, restored and signed it. Sorry. --Plozessor 19:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --BigDom 00:56, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

File:Országház_(Hungarian_Parliament_Building)(2).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Hungarian Parliament Building (Országház) during sunset. --Lynx1211 16:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose WB is off, left one would be suitable. --PetarM 18:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment I disagree. The left picture was shot during daylight, this picture was shot in the golden hour before sunset. The WB looks like other sunset photos. --Lynx1211 18:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality, beautiful light and I don't understand the WBremark --Michielverbeek 05:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 06:59, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Golden hour. Good quality. --Milseburg 13:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support ++ per others. --Plozessor 04:03, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Per others --Jakubhal 18:11, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 07:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

File:Basu_Bati_Courtyard_05.jpg

[edit]

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 07:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)