Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 08 2024

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Zaryadye,_Moscow_-_2024_2.jpg

[edit]

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Plozessor 04:07, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rahmersee_Abendstimmung_08.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Rahmersee in the evening light of an overcast summer day - cloud reflections seen from a berth at the end of Fischergasse in the village Rahmer See, Brandenburg, Germany --Kritzolina 14:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Юрий Д.К. 14:58, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Underexposed, distorded and noisy. Too many issues IMO. --Sebring12Hrs 10:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Sebring12Hrs, plus questionable composition. --Plozessor 05:26, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Others. --Augustgeyler 05:47, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 21:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Pandit_Rajan_Sajan_Mishra_Performing_at_Bharat_Bhavan_Bhopal_04.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Pandit Rajan Sajan Mishra Performing at Bharat Bhavan Bhopal on 38th foundation day 13 February 2020 --Suyash.dwivedi 17:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 16:59, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not sharp enough and poor composition (cut off hands on the left) --Augustgeyler 22:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Augustgeyler. Could probably try to rescue it with better raw conversion and cropping the half person on the left out. --Plozessor 15:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
  •  Weak support Sharpness is acceptable to me. But you need to crop out the hands on the left. --Benjism89 08:17, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Augustgeyler. --Sebring12Hrs 00:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Basile Morin 03:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Liège_BW_2019-08-17_15-07-30.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Belgium, Liège, Couvent des Mineurs --Berthold Werner 14:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Well exposed, but not sharp at full resolution and teh crop doesn't let the image breathe. --Needsmoreritalin 14:56, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support We should not overdo. For me the image is O. K. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 16:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose No issues with the crop, but this picture has extremely unnatural colors (can easily be seen when comparing it to the many other publicly available pictures of the same building). Signatur is missing.--August (talk) 06:19, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose No issues with the crop, but this picture has extremely unnatural colors (can easily be seen when comparing it to the many other publicly available pictures of the same building). --Plozessor 10:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
I wonder how you know what the ‘right’ colours should be. --Berthold Werner 15:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
  • @Berthold Werner: Actually the colors of the sky in your picture are looking strange, that's why I checked at all. Found tons of picture of this building on the Internet, and from those it seems clear that something is wrong with 'your' colors. That should be not too hard to fix though. --Plozessor 16:19, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Temp  Oppose. The image sharpness is completely sufficient for QIC, considering the image resolution. The ancient lens is obviously still easily good enough for good A4 prints if you take care of the CA, which has been done well here. The colours of the building itself are fine, because we don't have direct sunlight here, as in most other photos of the same object, but rather a more or less blue sky, which is particularly noticeable on the roof. A polarising filter could have helped, but on the other hand this probably corresponds to the visual impression at the moment the photo was taken. The only thing that went wrong was with the sky itself, where there are a few strange processing artefacts and it generally appears slightly greenish to me. The treetops also seem to be too saturated in colour. --Smial 16:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello Smial , we usually agree with the assessments. But I can't follow you here. Please take a look at some of the underexposed photos, for example, that we mark as QI and compare them with the picture presented here. Best regards -- Spurzem 10:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Ich hab mal zwei Notizen hinzugefügt. Da sind halt scharfkantige Flecken, die da so nicht hinpassen. --Smial 13:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
@Berthold Werner: Die Farbkorrektur ist jetzt in die andere Richtung gekippt, dann lieber die Originalfarben lassen, Hauptsache die komischen Flecken kommen irgendwie weg. --Smial 13:45, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Ich habe die Flecken retouchiert. --Berthold Werner 16:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Besser ;-)  Support. --Smial 09:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Colors are a bit dull, but sharpness and perspective are ok. --Sebring12Hrs 14:28, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Ermell and Augustgeyler... --Sebring12Hrs 00:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others, the WB is off. Additionally the sharpness is too low, especially on the upper left part of the building. --Augustgeyler 09:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support ok to me. --Ermell 15:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Strong masking errors at the top right. --Ermell 21:33, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Basile Morin 03:32, 8 August 2024 (UTC)