Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 10 2020

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:EBACE_2019,_Le_Grand-Saconnex_(EB190616).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Exhibition stand of Textron Aviation on the Static Display of EBACE 2019, Palexpo, Switzerland --MB-one 10:11, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment There is a disproportion in the aspect ratio --Moroder 11:46, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Better? --MB-one 11:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment No I didn't mean that. If you look at the jet engines of the plane on the left they should be round instead of oval --Moroder 11:14, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Oh, I see. That's due to the ultra wide angle lens. --MB-one 14:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment Certainly, you can correct it streching the image vertically --Moroder 06:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
    That would distort the center, which is worse. --MB-one 08:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Put it on CR --Moroder 11:30, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Let‘s see some other’s opinion --Moroder 08:12, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support - Nice long sight line and good quality to me. -- Ikan Kekek 07:23, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support Some (very) small remains of CA, but technically acceptable. Distortion at the edges of the image is unavoidable with such large image angles and rectilinear projection. They can be avoided by using a fisheye lens, but as is well known, this has the problem that all straight lines that do not pass through the center of the image are crooked. As far as image composition is concerned, I don't think the picture is very well done, but technically, as already mentioned, I don't see really serious flaws. --Smial 10:07, 4 April 2020 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
  •  Comment Please check the guidelines, composition is part of the requirements for QI. --Kallerna 12:31, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 Comment I know the guidelines. But while "composition" rightly plays a very central role in FPC, in my opinion this aspect should be treated less important in QIC. A typical example for a serious mistake in "composition" would be the notorious lamppost or tree in an outdoor portrait, which seems to grow out of the head of the person portrayed. In a photo that shows an overview of a larger scene, as in this case, the informative aspect is more important to me than a brilliant composition. I then weigh up the pros and cons, and this weighing up is not contrary to the guidelines. If you weight differently in such matters of taste, that's completely fine with me, that's why we have consensual review. --Smial 18:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
  •  Oppose Strong distortions. --Kallerna 12:31, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Distortions are hard to avoid with a lens like that.--Ermell 20:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Carschten 09:25, 9 April 2020 (UTC)