Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 26 2017

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Life_around_jungle.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Lawachara National Park, Kamalganj, Maulvi Bazar. By User:Pallabkabir --Masum-al-hasan 10:06, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. Nominate it for FP also ! --PetarM 10:31, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  OpposeSorry, Nice moment and composition, but the image itself is very unsharp. --Shishir 14:03, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Shishir.--Peulle 17:27, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Shishir. -- Ikan Kekek 07:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Doing better over at FPC because of wow factor however technically not a QI. -- KTC 22:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Shishir. --Sandro Halank 16:07, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined   --Sandro Halank 16:07, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

File:Mont_de_Sëura_Chedul_Pizes_de_Cir_Pizes_Cuecenes_Sela_Gherdëina.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination The Puez-Geisler Nature Park in Val Gardena in the Dolomites - South Tyrol --Moroder 06:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  CommentThe focus seems to be too far in the foreground. The mountains in the middle are not as sharp as they should be.--Ermell 12:48, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Thanks for the comment, what do you want me to do?--Moroder 14:19, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Maybe you could try sharpen it a bit. The motive is gorgeous.--Ermell 16:13, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment I tried sharpening it but didn't like it. IMO it's sharp enough. If you like you could decline it and I'll move it to CR? I don't want to resize it either. Cheers --Moroder 16:47, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Too unsharp IMO.Sorry. --Ermell 20:42, 19 September 2017 (UTC) Very good now.--Ermell (talk) 22:21, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I disagree --Moroder 04:56, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Maybe the lens is just not good enough for such a high-resolution camera? Or maybe image is affected by diffraction because of small aperture used on such small pixels? Photo is nice and looks good on small previews, but blurry on full size view. --Shansov.net 22:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
    •  Comment It's a 2000 Euro Nikon lens 24/70/2,8. The aperture is optimal f/11 (see here) --Moroder 09:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Stitching error on one of the peaks - see annotations. Btw: Could it be, that - spite of your expensive gear - you loose a lot of sharpness and contrast along the stitching process? --PtrQs 17:24, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done @PtrQs: Thanks for the hint. @PtrQs: , @Ermell: , @Shansov.net: I sharpened the RAW files, did a new merge and resized. Hope it looks better now --Moroder 15:15, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
    •  SupportOK now --PtrQs 21:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - Very good. -- Ikan Kekek 21:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support --Ralf Roletschek 21:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --W.carter 08:49, 25 September 2017 (UTC)