Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 17 2023

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Ruitjesbovist (Calvatia utriformis). 18-07-2023. (d.j.b).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Calvatia utriformis. Focus stack of 10 photos
    --Famberhorst 05:02, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality.--Tournasol7 06:03, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
  • There is a significant amount of artefacts in the background, is it within the limits for a QI? --Njardarlogar 13:27, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. New version. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst 16:09, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Generally looks much better. The exception is the leaf directly to the right of the mushrooms; it has a sparkling and ghostly appearance. :-) Njardarlogar 18:04, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 06:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Травертинові_скелі_над_Дністрм_біля_с.Литячі.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Dnister river kanyon in Ukraine By User:Zysko serhii --Luda.slominska 20:03, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline  Support Good quality --Michielverbeek 20:37, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Oversaturated sky, white borders around the branches and bushes on the right side, partially artifacts in the sky in that area.
  •  Info Unsigned votes are invalid. Therefore I stroke out the opposing vote. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 18:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The sky looks very oversaturated. -- Ikan Kekek 05:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 06:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Volkhov_river_Novgorod_Oblast_2023-06-07_4247.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Volkhov river in Novgorod Oblast --Mike1979 Russia 08:41, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    Strongly need color review. Thank you --Mike1979 Russia 06:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Not done in >1 week --Tagooty 03:13, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
    What should I have done? I asked to evaluate the white balance. --Mike1979 Russia 06:57, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
    Misunderstanding! I've struck out my oppose --Tagooty 03:02, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. I think Tagooty thought you posted a review comment. Thanks. Mike Peel 11:13, 13 August 2023 (UTC)\
  •  Support Looks OK to me. The areas in the distance have somewhat washed-out colors, but that seems normal. -- Ikan Kekek 05:23, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 06:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Schönberg_am_Kamp_Alte_Schmiede-1633.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Summer Recreation Museum, Schönberg am Kamp --Isiwal 05:27, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Question Good photo, but there is color moiré on many bright surfaces, and slight perspective problem with the right building. Is it fixable? --LexKurochkin 10:09, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Perspective fixed, I tried to correct the bright areas. I hope that's enough. Please note that these surfaces are unevenly structured and not uniformly colored --Isiwal 17:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
      •  Neutral  Half done Rather bright pink-green moiré is still visible on several windows and white entrance arch. Let's discuss. --LexKurochkin 06:26, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
        • I have uploaded a new version (CA removed). I only have not understood your first objection concerning "color moiré".--Isiwal 10:59, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
          •  Support Yes, very good now. CA and moiré are different effects. CA is created by lens, and moiré is a consequence of sensor regular structure. It looks different, and the effects I saw in the previous version looked more like moiré to me. --LexKurochkin 15:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
            •  Comment Thanks for review, I never stop learning... --Isiwal 19:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. Lex, you have really good eyes! -- Ikan Kekek 05:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Ikan! :) --LexKurochkin 06:21, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 06:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Front_Young_Male_African_Elephant_Kafue_Jul23_A7R_05198.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Young male African bush elephant (Loxodonta africana) crossing the road, Kafue National Park, Zambia --Tagooty 01:58, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose The subject is not featured very well from this angle, and the crop omits a large part of it. --JPxG 02:35, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
    •  Info The intent is to show flaring of ears and raising trunk. Other images (being posted) show the complete elephant. --Tagooty 03:03, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support QI to me.--Ermell 22:13, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Ok for me. --Rjcastillo 03:35, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Ok for me too. --Fabian Roudra Baroi 01:06, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 06:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Landersheim,_l'église_Saint-Cyriaque_IMG_5535_2023-05-08_14.26.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Landersheim in France, church: l'église Saint-Cyriaque --Michielverbeek 06:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support I'd brigthen it a bit, but still ok, I guess --Poco a poco 17:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose. Please don't blame me; but that's not what a quality picture taken at midday looks like. And if a heavy thunderstorm was brewing, causing the dark mood, then it would have been good to wait until after. To me, the picture looks totally underexposed, no matter what it is caused by. please discuss -- Spurzem 19:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
    •  Comment It was very dark that day and in the evening it started to rain --Michielverbeek 20:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support If you display the picutre at full size, you will not see brightness issues. --Sebring12Hrs 07:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Its ok for me too Bijay Chaurasia 07:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Hallo Michielverbeek, the question is whether a picture is worth an award simply because the external conditions were bad. I keep thinking about planning to photograph a black cat in a dark basement with no light. Best regards -- Spurzem 14:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Underexposed and rather noisy. --Smial 16:49, 8 August 2023 (UTC) Lothar, lass das mit den spitzen Bemerkungen, es bringt nichts ausser schlechter Laune.
Hallo Smial, wenn ich sehe, wie hier bewertet wird, kann ich solche Beispiele wie das mit der Katze manchmal nicht unterdrücken. Man muss halt mitunter ein bisschen übertreiben, damit die Leute verstehen, was gesagt sein soll. Denn es ist nicht auszuschließen, dass Außenstehende die Bilder anklicken, das Qualitätssiegel sehen und aus dem Staunen nicht rauskommen. Viele Grüße -- Spurzem 18:55, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too dark IMO.--Ermell 22:17, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unfortunately underexposed. --Аныл Озташ 22:30, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 06:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Maennolsheim,_gemeentehuis_IMG_5548_2023-05-08_14.51.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Maennolsheim in France, townhall --Michielverbeek 06:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)br />
  •  Oppose. This is image is too dark too. Can you not brighten it? -- Spurzem 19:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
    •  Comment It was very dark that day and in the evening it started to rain --Michielverbeek 20:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support The brightness is acceptable. --Sebring12Hrs 07:20, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Brightness is acceptable for rainy day, but the upper part of the building and the roof are out of focus and slight perspective correction is needed. --LexKurochkin 10:30, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Ok for me. --Fabian Roudra Baroi 01:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too dark. A slight brightening and some s-curving to increase the contrast in the middle tones a bit would help. --Smial 14:28, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 06:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Wierum_(Noardeast-Fryslân),_10-07-2023._(d.j.b)_14.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Wierum (Northeast-Fryslân), View of the clouds above the seawall.
    --Famberhorst 05:09, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 06:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose WB off, noisy, posterization. --Kallerna 09:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
    Remark: the photo has no noise, but the veil clouds are (deliberately) pulled apart by the long opening time (2.5 sec).Do you think the WB is too cold?--Famberhorst 15:51, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
    The noise can be seen even in the thumbnail-size. The photo is way too red. --Kallerna 04:06, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
    ✓ Done. Correction WB.e.d. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst 05:13, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Question Is the color of the water accurate? -- Ikan Kekek 08:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Answer: it is low tide, the mud is almost dry. The color of the wet mud can be seen through the water.--Famberhorst 15:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support OK. I think some of the land looks overexposed if zoomed in out of context, but as a full picture, this looks quite good. -- Ikan Kekek 05:42, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Low detail in full resolution and obviously tilted cw. --Milseburg 16:29, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. Horizontal correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst 16:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Nice shot (even if it looks more painted), but unfortunately low LoD, it also may be tilted. --Аныл Озташ 22:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 06:48, 16 August 2023 (UTC)