Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 17 2023

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Bonda_from_Kerala_01.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Aloo bonda with chutney from Kerala --Ganesh Mohan T 17:42, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Kritzolina 19:41, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Most of the image is blurry and the composition is questionable. --Jay.Jarosz 04:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose The food is halfway sharp, but everything else is massively OOF. --Plozessor 06:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I see no problem with sharpness and DOF, but composition and lighting are not good enough for food photography. --Smial 09:34, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As per smial, Composition is not good enough. It would get support if there were no distractions beside the plate and if the plate was in the middle of the frame. --Wasiul Bahar 18:36, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --C messier 19:37, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Bronze_casting_in_Kunstgießerei_München_57.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Bronze casting in Kunstgießerei München - pouring the hot liquid bronze into the prepared forms --Kritzolina 20:19, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Nice shot, but unfortunately nothing really in focus.--Alexander-93 20:46, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
    *  Support. Due to the lighting conditions, the photo was taken at aperture 3.6 and 1000 ISO, so the sharpness may leave a little to be desired. Otherwise we tend to excuse major quality defects with external circumstances. Why not here? I would like to discuss whether classification as QI is not possible after all. -- Spurzem 23:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
    *  Oppose Not sure why we should tolerate "major quality defects" when it comes to rating "quality images". This picture is extremely unsharp, it has extremely low detail, it has serious artifacts of noise reduction. If the camera can't take good pictures at ISO 1000 then don't use ISO 1000. With a tripod / a better camera / higher ISO and higher NR / lower ISO and a more steady hand / etc it would have been possible to take a way better picture. --Plozessor 12:38, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Minor issues, difficult lighting situation. Good enough for an A4 size print. --Smial 10:19, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
     Comment Even with 3 MP resolution (recommended for A4 size print), this picture looks very blurred. --Plozessor 12:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Alexander-93 and Plozessor. Sorry. --MB-one 16:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Alexander-93. --Sebring12Hrs 14:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose +1. --Peulle 09:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined   --MB-one (talk) 16:18, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Cieszowa_cmentarz_żydowski_macewy6_21.10.2012_p.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Jewish gravestones in Cieszowa, Poland. By User:Przykuta --Mechanik rowerowy 18:56, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Wonderful! Thanks for bringing this one to Commons! --Mosbatho 21:47, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This is a very valuable photo, but the left tombstone is full of chromatic aberrations --Jakubhal 20:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
     Support Ok, much better after ArildV's edit --Jakubhal 05:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Prompted to look for them, I saw them. You can see them if you look at the sides of anything 3-dimensional, such as the letters. -- Ikan Kekek 09:03, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose Yes, left tombstone appears blurred, though it actually seems to be CA resulting in that impression. CA is also visible as a red halo on the left edge of the left stone. Fix that and you'll get my full support for this picture. --Plozessor 14:50, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Has been fixed, now this is good. --Plozessor 05:44, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  InfoI gave it a shot. New version. --ArildV 20:49, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality to me now. -- Ikan Kekek 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment. Perhaps good quality, but a bit dark and no good composition. The crop below is too tight. -- Spurzem 11:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
    •  Comment New slightly lighter version uploaded. For obvious reasons I cant change the crop--ArildV 14:01, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:15, 16 November 2023 (UTC)