Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 08 2024

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Ermita_de_la_Virgen_de_Puyal,_Luesia,_Zaragoza,_España,_2023-01-04,_DD_03.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Hermitage of Our Lady of Puyal, Luesia, Zaragoza, Spain --Poco a poco 12:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --MB-one 14:04, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Please don't take it against me: In my opinion, a photo with such a distorted church tower and a squashed bell cannot be a quality image. -- Spurzem 14:27, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Fully agree with Spurzem, the distortion is weird, and like this the picture is anything but QI. Could be possible to fix it though. --Plozessor 07:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment New version Poco a poco 09:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Weak support New version is definitely better. Still looking a bit weird but way better than before and IMO acceptable. --Plozessor 11:44, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment. At least now it's better than before. I cannot judge whether the bend in the cornice at the top of the tower and whether the slope of the steps correspond to reality. Also, the image below is cropped too tightly. It's still not a quality picture for me. -- Spurzem 12:33, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Anyone who has ever tried to correct wide-angle distortion knows about the problems. Sometimes it just doesn't get any better. Here, however, the solution is quite acceptable.--Ermell 15:39, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Hallo Ermell, verstehe ich Dich richtig: Wenn ein gutes Bild nicht oder nur schwer machbar ist, muss ein misslungenes zwangsläufig als Qualitätsbild bewertet werden? Da denke ich wieder einmal an meine schwarze Katze im dunklen Keller ohne Licht. Viele Grüße und alles Gute für 2024 -- Spurzem 16:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Ich habe mal probiert: Ein kleines bisschen besser scheint es zu gehen. Optimal ist meine Bearbeitung allerdings auch nicht. -- Spurzem 17:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
    •  Comment Ich meinte das es of keinen besseren Standpunkt für ein optimalen Bild gibt zumal in diesem Fall das alte Gemäuer ziemlich schief ist. Deine Bearbeitung in allen Ehren aber die Fertigstellung des Werkes dürfte schwierig werden. Bei Pocos Version stört die Wölbung in Dach und Decke des Turmes. Das kann er ja vielleicht noch nachbessern. Dir auch ein gutes neues Jahr.--Ermell 14:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good job to everyone. --Sebring12Hrs 18:11, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The first version shows the typical problem when architectural shots are taken with an extreme wide-angle lens and these are also digitally verticalised. Even if everything has been done geometrically correctly, absurd perspectives are still created. The second version is crooked. --Smial 15:43, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 Comment And we have lots of these here. Personally I'd prefer a more natural view, like it looked from the photographer's perspective. But I've learned quickly that QI promotion chances for anything not 100 % vertical are near zero. --Plozessor 19:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 Comment Perspective corrections, whether made digitally or optically with a shift lens, are important and often necessary technical means, primarily to compensate for minor imperfections. Unfortunately, however, they are often misused here to compulsively verticalise every, but really every image in order to avoid failing the assessment. Without regard for realistic representation of the conditions on site or photographic design aspects. Images have even been forced into a perfect rectangle, both vertically and horizontally, without thinking about how silly it looks when areas are covered that should actually be visible when looking at a window exactly vertically, for example. Optionally, buildings have no roofs, even though the architect has drawn and planned some. Which in turn makes the frequently used argument that you have to photograph buildings with exact verticals because the architect drew them that way seem absurd. Why doesn't this apply to roofs? Architects draw vertical walls so that the workers can build them vertically. --Smial 21:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
👍👍👍 --Plozessor 05:20, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 12:19, 7 January 2024 (UTC)