Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 04 2018

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Lalbagh_Fort_(লালবাগ_দুর্গ).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Lalbagh Fort. By User:Syedsazzadulhoque --RockyMasum 09:25, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Kritzolina 09:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Tilted, oversaturated, oversharpened, strange artifacts on the upper right corner. --Basotxerri 12:00, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Bad stitching mistakes in upper right corner, garish colors, posterization, etc. -- Ikan Kekek 03:52, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 18:33, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Guthia_Mosque_02.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Guthia Mosque of Barisal. By User:Azimronnie --RockyMasum 09:14, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Kritzolina 09:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Perspective not corrected, CAs. --Basotxerri 11:58, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Baso. -- Ikan Kekek 03:55, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 18:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Guthia_Mosque_16.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Night view of Guthia Mosque. By User:Azimronnie --RockyMasum 09:14, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support I prefer the day view, but this is also good quality. --Kritzolina 09:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Perspective not corrected, dust spots. --Basotxerri 11:58, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Baso. -- Ikan Kekek 03:57, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 18:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:শহীদ_বুদ্ধিজীবী_স্মৃতিসৌধ,_রায়ের_বাজার_(২).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Martyred Intellectuals Memorial, Rayer Bazaar. By User:Md Rafayat Haque Khan --RockyMasum 05:29, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Kritzolina 20:48, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Perspective not corrected, unsharp. --Basotxerri 14:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Baso. -- Ikan Kekek 04:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 18:31, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:শহীদ_বুদ্ধিজীবী_স্মৃতিসৌধ,_রায়ের_বাজার_(১).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Martyred Intellectuals Memorial. By User:Md Rafayat Haque Khan --RockyMasum 05:29, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Kritzolina 20:48, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Tilted, perspective not corrected. --Basotxerri 14:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Baso. -- Ikan Kekek 04:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 18:30, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:E-Commerce_Building,_Montreal,_QC.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination E-Commerce Place, Montreal --Daniel Case 02:33, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  SupportGood quality. --Bgag 03:15, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  OpposeI disagree. Perspective should be corrected. --Ermell 06:16, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ermell: I have addressed your concerns. Daniel Case 02:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

  •  Comment Looks unnatural but matches the guidelines.--Ermell 08:06, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Question is that some turquoise CA on the top or that building has a turquoise crown? --Trougnouf 10:31, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done It was CA. Daniel Case 21:40, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose in my eyes too strong distortet. --Ralf Roletschek 18:26, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ralf Roletschek: How does it look now? Daniel Case 03:45, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - Shape is a little odd, but looks real. -- Ikan Kekek 04:19, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 18:29, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Trier_St._Paulin_BW_2018-04-07_15-09-21.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Trier, Kirche St. Paulin --Berthold Werner 09:25, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Perspective correction somewhat too strong, or perhaps slight barrel distortion. Church appears smaller at the ground than in the middle. --Smial 11:10, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 Support better now, thx. --Smial 11:28, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment To get a bit more time. --Berthold Werner 13:49, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment There's no rush, you can always resubmit when it's ready. --Trougnouf 10:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality --Trougnouf 10:34, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment Die Kirche wirkt tatsächlich im unteren Teil zu schmal. -- Spurzem 22:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment - The church looks alright but the cars are strangely angled. -- Ikan Kekek 04:27, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 18:29, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Fonc_sa_Sacun_Clitocybe_nebularis_Urtijëi.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Mushrooms (Clitocybe nebularis) in Val Gardena - South Tyrol. --Moroder 17:48, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Looks like there are perspective problems with the trees --Daniel Case 02:17, 27 September 2018 (UTC) Support Alright, I didn't know that as nothing on the image page indicated it. It makes sense now, but it was not obvious that it was shot from above. Daniel Case 04:52, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment I disagree. The photo is taken from above on a steep slope and it is not architecture requiring perspective correction for QIC --Moroder 08:53, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Perspective correction makes no sense in this case. The highlights should be slightly reduced but otherwise the quality is good.--Ermell 07:03, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 04:31, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ermell. --Smial 11:30, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 18:27, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Maison_du_Bailli_in_Gembloux,_Belgium_(DSCF7611).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Maison du Bailli in Gembloux, Belgium --Trougnouf 17:25, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Light isn't good. Sorry --Daniel Case 02:17, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 Comment Why is that? It's a pretty building and nothing is overexposed so I'd rather discuss and experiment. (new version uploaded) --Trougnouf 09:37, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  SupportThere's no technical problem with that for me.--Ermell 06:58, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - The trees aren't so sharp, but the building and sky are fine. -- Ikan Kekek 04:43, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 18:26, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Skulpturenweg_Maulbronn_-_Axel_Anklam_-_Mooka,_2015.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination "Mooka" by Axel Anklam, Stainless steel mesh with frame, 2015, Skulpturenweg Maulbronn --Llez 05:42, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Sculpture is OK but leaves in the background are unsharp and noisy --Daniel Case 02:02, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
     Comment Please discuss, I made a completely new version from RAW --Llez 20:57, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support As the artwork is the main object I find the picture o.k.--Ermell 06:55, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  weak The only thing I find disturbing about the background is a line of CA on the tree trunk. Mooka is nice and sharp. --Trougnouf 10:53, 29 September 2018 (UTC)  Support --Trougnouf (talk) 17:07, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
    ✓ Done --Llez 11:25, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 05:00, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 18:25, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Chiesa_di_San_Bartolomeo_a_Salò_sul_Garda.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination The San Bartolomeo church in Salò --Moroder 05:07, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Noise in the left corner at the roof edge should be removed --Ermell 07:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Thanks --Moroder 13:28, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  CommentI thought downsizing is not allowed. --Ermell 15:37, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment Downsizing is not suggested but it is allowed as long as the pictures have 2 Mp. This has stille a huge size - To prevent pixelpeepers I allow myself to downsize rather than denoise keeping imo a better resolution --Moroder 17:33, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I don't think that's a good solution. The leaves sticking in at the top and the dust spot should also be removed, but that won't be a problem. --Ermell 07:39, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I disagree --Moroder 08:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done --Moroder 08:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, it's still quite big and certainly good quality, but I disagree that it's OK to downsize because of "pixel peepers". Please substitute the full-sized version of this photo, and then I will support. -- Ikan Kekek 23:15, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
  • The original size is much higher then the camara offers. Is it a stitched work? The resolution of the current version is only marginal among the regular possibilities of the camera. I think this is ok. We can´t expect everybody to reach a higher resolution by stitching. Further more we only know that there is a higher resolution since Moroder uploaded it. He has no need to do so. The blurred leaves especially on the top make me hesitate to promote. --Milseburg
  • ✓ Done @Milseburg: I croped the leaves on top --Moroder 07:58, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment Don´t forget the dust spot in the middle.--Ermell (talk) 06:30, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - I still think downsizing because of "pixel peepers" is a bad practice and a violation of the letter of the rules. However, I don't think it's fair for this photo, which is so large and a good one, to simply lose on a single oppose vote. -- Ikan Kekek 05:06, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment @Ikan Kekek: The downsizing was technical as stated above to reduce noise (there are different technics to reduce noise. I think downsizing of huge images is one which I like). I mentioned pixelpeepers which notice noise that in my opinion is irrelevant to the quality of the image. Thanks for your comment anyhow --Moroder 06:33, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Fifty megapixels are just sufficient... --Smial 11:48, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 18:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Ensemble_Ehemalige_US-Offizierssiedlung_Dambach_HaJN_6001.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Ensemble Ehemalige US-Offizierssiedlung Dambach Rondell --Hans-Jürgen Neubert 04:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. Sharpness could be better, but OK for QI. --XRay 11:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Overexposed cloud --Daniel Case 16:54, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - Maybe slightly bright, but I think it's good enough. -- Ikan Kekek 23:16, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Blown sky in the right corner.--Ermell 06:29, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ermell. --Basotxerri 17:32, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 18:23, 3 October 2018 (UTC)