Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 08 2017

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Mülheim-Kärlich, Christophorusschule Kärlich 2015-10-31.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Building site of Christophorus school in Mülheim-Kärlich in October 2015
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 19:44, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Pretty casual composition --Moroder 20:52, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
@Moroder: Thank you for this laughable revenge. -- Spurzem 21:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Revenge what for? I'm just giving my opinion and not only to your pictures. I strongly believe that composition is essential for QI and would like some others opinion. So viel musst man schon aushalten ;-) --Moroder 21:25, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Neutral A bit soft, but the composition is fine; closeup shots are needed on Commons too. I'd like to see the categories and description a bit more specific, though, to reflect that this is a construction site.--Peulle 08:33, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done. @Peulle: Pleas look now. -- Spurzem 10:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 Support Better.--Peulle 12:25, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

 Question Not in revenge ;-) what's the UFO top right --Moroder 14:01, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Maybe that it is a part of the crane. I don't know. But I am sure that it is not an UFO. It would be easy to retouch. -- Spurzem 14:57, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
@Moroder: Das Rätsel ist gelöst. Es ist der untere Teil des Zebrastreifenschildes über der Straße – also wirklich kein UFO. -- Spurzem 19:56, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 Comment You should put a note! People are scared by UFOS --Moroder 21:23, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Perspective is distorted, some chromatic aberrations on lantern masts, and overall lacking sharpness. Pretty obviously an out-of-camera-JPEG without proper raw data development. --A.Savin 01:30, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Von A.Savin hatte ich wirklich nichts anderes erwartet und frage mich tatsächlich, warum ich hier überhaupt noch mitmache. Er hatte es mir vor paar Tagen ja schon empfohlen, mich zu verabschieden. -- Spurzem 19:50, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support die Perspektive ist natürlich und ok so. --Ralf Roletschek 21:05, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - I'm ultimately on the "con" side of this, essentially per Moroder and A.Savin: The photo is interesting, but the crop on the right side is distracting. I also don't like the things on the right leaning right and the things on the left leaning left. That is not natural to me. -- Ikan Kekek 03:58, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
The perspective is corrected now. -- Spurzem 13:57, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
I cleared my cache, and in my opinion, it's not, though it's better, nor are the problems with the right crop fixed. -- Ikan Kekek 21:10, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support composition??? Is QI not FP here! --Livioandronico2013 21:57, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 06:39, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Mülheim-Kärlich, Christophorusschule Kärlich 2016-01-26.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Building site of Christophorus school in Mülheim-Kärlich in January 2016 -- Spurzem 19:23, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 19:44, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. The composition looks pretty casual and the hedges up front don't help --Moroder 20:56, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
@Moroder: Thank you for this laughable revenge. -- Spurzem 21:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - I don't love the cropped minibus on the left, but the composition is quite OK, overall, and the quality is good. -- Ikan Kekek 06:11, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The composition is a bit lacking, since parts of the construction is cut off on the left. This shot clearly demonstrates that a better one was possible. It's not the only issue, though: there are green chromatic aberration and the image is tilted CW.--Peulle 08:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
I don't think that the image is tilted but if you mean it must be. ;-) -- Spurzem 08:44, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I think so. I checked the verticals against the crane, the signs and the lampposts.--Peulle 12:28, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done. @Peulle: Would you kindly look once more? -- Spurzem 18:03, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Well, the tilt is better but the other issues aren't fixable.--Peulle 21:47, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
O.K., Basotxerri, ich weiß Bescheid. Schön, dass Du Deine (?) Meinung wenigstens noch bedauerst. -- Spurzem 19:51, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 Comment I'm really not sure what's going on here. I'm really trying to judge an image not a person. And in this image for me the tree in front is very disturbing because the subject is the construction site behind. Others may think differently like Ikan does and that's good because we all have different opinions. But it's not personal. My photos get rejected ocasionally. I try to learn from it and I personally think that I'm a far better photographer than a year and a half ago when I started in QIC. That's the point for me, keep calm and think about it, really. And I insist, this isn't a personal offence, it's only a well-intentioned practical advice. --Basotxerri 20:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 06:42, 7 April 2017 (UTC)