Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 14 2020

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:View_from_underneath_Exchange_House.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Underneath Exchange House --Bobulous 11:58, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Too dark or too bright --Poco a poco 14:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
    Requesting discussion. It does feel that dark under there even to the human eye, and I think there's sufficient detail in the shadows, and plenty of light on the structural framework. --Bobulous 15:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Large areas blown. I don't understand Poco's remark - too dark or too bright? -- Ikan Kekek 08:16, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose To be precise, too bright in sun-lit areas and too dark in the upper right corner. --A.Savin 15:58, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
    Precisely, that's what I meant. Nothing properly exposed, either overexposed other underexposed Poco a poco 18:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined XRay 17:37, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

File:Pörtschach_Goritschach_Filialkirche_hl._Oswald_S-Ansicht_05012020_7864.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Subsidiary church Saint Oswald in Goritschach, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 03:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:22, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  OpposeThe whites seem to be overblown. --Kallerna 05:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

*  Support shining white, looks ok for me. --Milseburg 11:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Very nice image, but slight overexposure. Clipping in whites and in the wood. 1/3 or 1/2 f-stop darker would help. --Smial 11:48, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree that the overexposure gives the feeling that detail has been lost (such as what appears to be a subtle difference in paint colour along the lower border of the wall), and (unless the building and the benches are both wonky) it feels like the image needs to be rotated about a degree clockwise. --Bobulous 21:06, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done @Kallerna: @Smial: @Bobulous: @Milseburg: The image was reprocessed completely. Hopefully it fits now. —- Johann Jaritz 06:38, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Better. Still QI for me. --Milseburg 12:56, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Acceptable now. --Smial 15:44, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted XRay 17:36, 12 March 2020 (UTC)