Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives February 01 2019

• 
  • Nomination Cemetery, charnel house and parish church Saint Margaret in Sankt Margarethen ob Töllerberg #2, Völkermarkt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 03:09, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 03:33, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Gothic church portal at the porch of the parish church Saint Margaret in Sankt Margarethen ob Töllerberg #2, Völkermarkt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 03:09, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 03:33, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Tympanum of the Gothic western portal at the porch of the parish church Saint Margaret in Sankt Margarethen ob Töllerberg #2, Völkermarkt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 03:09, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 03:33, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Cemetery with romanesque charnel house in Saint Margarethen ob Töllerberg #2, Völkermarkt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 03:09, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 03:33, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Window of the Romanesque charnel house in Saint Margarethen ob Töllerberg #2, Völkermarkt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 03:09, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --King of Hearts 03:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Domestic duck, Palo Alto Duck Pond. --King of Hearts 01:33, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:38, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination California gull landing, Palo Alto Duck Pond. --King of Hearts 01:33, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Bgag 04:43, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Castle of Chambord, Loir-et-Cher, France. --Tournasol7 00:07, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Seven Pandas 00:46, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Castle of Fougeres-sur-Bievre, Loir-et-Cher, France. --Tournasol7 00:07, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Seven Pandas 00:46, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Castle of Selles-sur-Cher, Loir-et-Cher, France. --Tournasol7 00:07, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Seven Pandas 00:46, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination View of the castle of Estaing, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 00:07, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Nicely done. --King of Hearts 03:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Aerial view of Okavango Delta, Botswana --Poco a poco 21:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 00:18, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Makoros in the Okavango Delta, Botswana --Poco a poco 21:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --King of Hearts 03:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination White rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum), Khama Rhino Sanctuary, Botswana --Poco a poco 21:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 00:18, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ćmielów Castle --Jakubhal 21:06, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 00:19, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination From the Plose peak - South Tyrol. --Moroder 18:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 18:37, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The death of Lucretia - Guido Reni --Paris Orlando 14:34, 29 January 2019 (UTC)  Comment Needs a better file description:location of the artwork --Moroder 16:16, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
     Done --Paris Orlando 20:33, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. thanks --Moroder 21:49, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination African peguin at Boulders Penguin Colony, Cape Town --MB-one 14:07, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Paris Orlando 14:35, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination BMW M550d, Mondial Paris Motor Show 2018 --MB-one 14:07, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:24, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Peugeot 5008 Crossway, Mondial Paris Motor Show 2018 --MB-one 14:07, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:25, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:25, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dassies on Table Mountain, Cape Town --MB-one 14:07, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:25, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ring-tailed vontsira (Galidia elegans), Montagne d’Ambre --Charlesjsharp 11:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --MB-one 14:13, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ring-tailed vontsira (Galidia elegans), Montagne d’Ambre --Charlesjsharp 11:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support A little soft but OK IMO. --King of Hearts 03:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination African monarch (Danaus chrysippus orientis), Tsara Komba --Charlesjsharp 11:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 13:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination African monarch (Danaus chrysippus orientis), Tsara Komba --Charlesjsharp 11:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 13:19, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Albatross white (Appias sabina confusa), Andasibe --Charlesjsharp 11:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --MB-one 14:13, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Catopsilia pomona (Emigrant butterfly) male, on an orange Tagetes lucida (marigold), in Laos --Basile Morin 08:21, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality (but not FP) --Charlesjsharp 11:22, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Germany, Greimerath, Oberdorf 9, Window --Berthold Werner 07:41, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 08:22, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Organ loft of the catholic parish church St.Kilian in Scheßlitz --Ermell 07:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Berthold Werner 07:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Angel figure in the parish church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in Memmelsdorf --Ermell 07:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Berthold Werner 07:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Angel figure in the parish church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in Memmelsdorf --Ermell 07:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Berthold Werner 07:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Angel figure in the parish church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in Memmelsdorf --Ermell 07:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Berthold Werner 07:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Altar in the Kath. parish church St. Michael in Marktzeuln with Christmas decoration --Ermell 07:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Berthold Werner 07:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Duck landing in Palo Alto Duck Pond. --King of Hearts 06:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Rock pigeon in flight, Palo Alto. --King of Hearts 06:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination California gull, Palo Alto. --King of Hearts 06:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Juvenile California gull in flight, Palo Alto. --King of Hearts 06:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Panixersee (Lag da Pigniu) above Andiast. rock wall.
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 05:55, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --GT1976 06:05, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Alp Dado Sura above Breil/Brigels. Panorama from the alp.
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 05:55, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --GT1976 06:05, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Alp Dado Sura above Breil/Brigels. Panorama from the alp.
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 05:55, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --GT1976 06:05, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Rain over Beinn Eich, Luss Hills, Scotland --Podzemnik 05:50, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:57, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 84-112 Nithsdale Road, Glasgow, Scotland --Podzemnik 05:50, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 06:36, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 19-25 (Inclusive Nos) Moray Place, 53 Queen Square And 52 Marywood Square, Glasgow --Podzemnik 05:50, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Gatepiers To Queen's Park, Glasgow --Podzemnik 05:50, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --MB-one 14:13, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Gatepiers To Queen's Park, Glasgow --Podzemnik 05:50, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:27, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bark of Picea abies in Bozouls, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 00:12, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 05:03, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 21 place de la Carriere in Nancy, Meurthe-et-Moselle, France. --Tournasol7 00:12, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 05:03, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Impressionen aus dem Naturschutzgebiet "Tönsheider Wald" in Aukrug, Schleswig-Holstein. --Nightflyer 22:12, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ústí nad Orlicí Pardubice-CZ, sculpture: Socha Bubnující legionář --Michielverbeek 20:25, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:50, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Libchavy Pardubice-CZ, church: kostel svatého Mikuláše --Michielverbeek 20:25, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:48, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Tormin Bridge, Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 04:43, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Podzemnik 05:52, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Vihorlatské vrchy --Milan Bališin 20:14, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination Sninský kameň, Vihorlatské vrchy --Milan Bališin 19:40, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --MB-one 14:13, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Skoda Kodiaq RS at Mondial Paris Motor Show 2018 --MB-one 15:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: KLM baggage cart at Schiphol Airport --MB-one 15:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Saint Paul. Detail of the mosaic in Arian Baptistery. Ravenna, Italy --Ввласенко 10:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination Fox River in West Coast Region, South Island of New Zealand. --Tournasol7 00:14, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --MB-one 14:13, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Peugeot, Mondial Paris Motor Show 2018 --MB-one 15:17, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --King of Hearts 03:19, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Crocodrile Farm, Maun, Botswana --Poco a poco 18:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Unfortunate lighting, but still sharp and subject croc is in focus. I find it distasteful and disgraceful that people ignore some images that have no technical errors such as this. --GerifalteDelSabana 01:38, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Mercedes-Benz B-Class, Mondial Paris Motor Show 2018 --MB-one 11:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality, very sharp. --GerifalteDelSabana 01:42, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Miele vacuum robot at Internationale Funkausstellung 2018, Berlin --MB-one 11:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --King of Hearts 03:19, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Steinbogen auf dem Nollen, von unbekannten Erbauer--Fischer.H 17:20, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
    Ich mag das Bild und würde hier sogar das Wort "Komposition" gelten lassen, wo ich mich hier sehr oft schwer tue). Das Bild sieht von den Farben nach einem älteren Prozess aus, würde ich mal neu probieren. Es hat für die Kleingeister zwei Fehler, einmal die Chromas an den Eichenblättern (Kantenbrechungen ist genrell nicht die schönste) und die Blätter ganz oben, die zu klein sind, damit sie eine Bildaussage haben, dafür einfach wie spots aussehen. Beides relativ simpel zu beheben, dann wäre es für mich klar QI--Hans-Jürgen Neubert 17:41, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
    Needs more categories. --MB-one 12:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC) Comment Kategorien wurden zusätzlich eingefügt - in Ordnung??.--Fischer.H 18:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)  Comment There is a formal problem with the image, irrespective of image quality itself. The rules say that it must have been created by a Wikimedian to be eligible. From the Panoramio upload bot data one cannot see if this is the case. Panoramio is discontinued, so we cannot even see who the author was there. --Johannes Robalotoff 21:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC) Comment habe verstanden und danke für die Information --Fischer.H 10:18, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
     Oppose Not the work of a Commoner. --King of Hearts 03:19, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Consensual review

File:Burg-Fuerstenberg-JR-E-921-2011-10-01.jpg

• Nomination Fürstenberg castle, Rheindiebach, Germany. --Johannes Robalotoff 21:30, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
• Decline
  

 Oppose Lacks sharpness. Sorry. --Ermell 22:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Also sorry, because this reason seems to be a bit too simple and kind of irrational to me. Actually the image is sharper than many QI images on this page. Look at the details like fences, wall structure on the tower etc. So if anything disturbs you, this is probably something else. For this perspective, it had to be telephoto with 475mm equiv. focal length with much air between the subject and me. Of course, this has its price in terms of contrast, even if it were a perfect lens, and in terms of color. But the optical imaging of the lens on the sensor is certainly very sharp here. --Johannes Robalotoff 06:55, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose per Ermell. -- Ikan Kekek 09:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done Just uploaded a version with a bit more sharpening. (Don't know if this is enough to make any difference for you.) Anyway, if you don't think this image is QI, I will have to accept it. But I expect at least that someone provides a plausible reason. Just writing "not sharp" for an image, where the lens delivered a resolution (in the center) which is at the limit of what a 15 MP sensor can capture, is not what I would expect form a serious review. (It's cropped from 15 MP to 9 MP.) May be at the root of the problem this might amount to a debate about resolution versus acutance. Or what do you think? --Johannes Robalotoff 20:11, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

 Comment - It's better, but not all of it is sharp enough for me to consider it a QI. Johannes, you're expecting too much if you want an extended technical discourse on everything. We're all volunteers here with limited time, and some of us are just using our eyes and mind to make judgments and might not be able to advise you on what to do differently. If you think that's not legitimate, then you don't respect the right of the viewer to make up his/her mind about what s/he's looking at. That's fine if you only show privately to fellow photographers, but that's not what this Wiki is. -- Ikan Kekek 21:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Oh, I don't expect a discourse. It's just that a few headwords could help what you mean, if the situation isn't too obvious. And I do not expect advice what to do, just an indication what is actually supposed to be wrong. --Johannes Robalotoff 21:21, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Non-image-related controversy discussed on Ikan Kekek's discussion page. Waiting for image-related remarks here (if any). --JRff (talk) 09:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Too much unsharpnesss.--Fischer.H (talk) 14:23, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose Looks completely overprocessed as I'm looking at it now.--Peulle 18:33, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

 Comment This might be why I preferred the version before the last software sharpening. Do you have the same impression for this version too? --Johannes Robalotoff 08:33, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Looking at the different versions, I think they're either not sharp enough or overprocessed. Sadly, I think you were unlucky with the original capture. It happens.--Peulle 15:17, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

OK, thank you for review. --Johannes Robalotoff 20:11, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

•  Support Left side is not perfect but this photo definitely has enough true resolution throughout to meet the 2 MP minimum. --King of Hearts 06:01, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
• Weak  Support A bit noisy, not the finest bokeh, slight blur on high-contrast edges, but compared to other QI good enough. Can be printed on A4 without difficulties and has very good composition and lighting. --Smial 13:04, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 17:41, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Münster,_Domplatz,_Wochenmarkt_--_2019_--_2644.jpg

• Nomination Market in Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 11:16, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
• Promotion
  
•  Support Good quality.--Horst J. Meuter 12:40, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  
•  Oppose The title of the picture is called Markt in Münster. Therefore, the price tag of the goods should be sharply displayed. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 22:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  
•  Support - I disagree. The price tag is readable and the garlic is nicely photographed. -- Ikan Kekek 02:19, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Maybe there are people somewhere in this world, who don't know garlic. Filename and description unsufficiant. --Smial 10:19, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Ich hoffe Dietmar nimmt mir das nicht krumm, jedenfalls musste ich herzhaft lachen, wirklichǃ Die 105er-Brennweite ist eigentlich auch ein Makro (oder nicht?) und XRay "spielt" hier etwas mit ISO und Schärfeverlauf (für f10 irgendwie mehr als ungenügend), mehr noch mit seinem Status. Die Komposition ist so nachlässig, nachlässiger geht eigentlich nicht (sogar mit Tilt im grünem Gemüsekasten), man kann nicht einmal lesen, das es frischer Knoblauch ist...ergo alles eingebaut, was eigentlich nicht geht. So was hatten wir schon öfter, die unsägliche Anzahl an Reifen und Autos in Hallen, gerade letzte Woche mit den beiden (imho echt schlechten Bildern von Hellfreaks). Ergo, also ich nehm´s mit Humor, fühlte mich nur sehr kurz auf den Arm genommen, das ist ein umgedrehter "Dürer malt den Kreis"--Hans-Jürgen Neubert 10:51, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Nein, ich nehme nichts übel. Ein Makro ist die Linse allerdings nicht. --XRay 16:04, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

•  Weak support IMO reasonable use of shallow DoF. To me the price tag doesn't seem relevant. Yes, the description could talk about garlic. --Basotxerri 16:12, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Per Basotxerri--Ermell 11:19, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

 Comment I'm always surprised which pictures are devalued because of the slightest defects in the image design and which, despite considerably disturbing elements, are regarded as a quality image. -- Spurzem 08:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

That's called a difference of opinion. Nothing much to be surprised about, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 03:52, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

•  Support per Basotxerri. --Aristeas 13:49, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose no quality picture for me.--Fischer.H 14:31, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too much of the image out of focus. As composition with intentional shallow DoF not convincing. --Johannes Robalotoff 09:53, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Support für mich QI --Ralf Roletschek 13:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 17:40, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Rinocerontes_blancos_(Ceratotherium_simum),_Santuario_de_Rinocerontes_Khama,_Botsuana,_2018-08-02,_DD_05.jpg

• Nomination White rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum), Khama Rhino Sanctuary, Botswana --Poco a poco 10:26, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
• Decline
  
•  Support Good quality.--Horst J. Meuter 12:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  
•  Oppose Not sharp enough IMO. --Ermell 17:41, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  
•  Support - Very big file. Sharp enough, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 02:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  •  Comment I admit.--Ermell 08:31, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose The head is out of focus. Also, there are purple chromatic aberration.--Peulle 10:13, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
• weak  Support. Sharp enough regarding the high resolution. If people here demand "always full resolution", they have to accept at some point that light optics has its physical limits. The CA is longitudial, which is not easy to remove. The lens has mediocrate bokeh. Composition and lighting are acceptable. I've seen much worse images here getting QI status. --Smial 10:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment  New version with less CA Poco a poco 18:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Good quality. --Fischer.H 18:35, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Head of main subject is out of focus. --Shansov.net 23:17, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Plenty of pixels and nice composition, but the head should be focused, not the ass. Kallerna 11:17, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

  I don't see any ass here. --Poco a poco 20:30, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

•  Support Sharpness is OK given the high resolution. Yes, there is missed focus here, but just because a higher-resolution sensor is more demanding on technique doesn't mean that we should fail such images when we would pass an equivalent image from a lower-resolution sensor. --King of Hearts 06:04, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
• weak Oppose The bit of motion blur and lack of focus on the head compared to the back of the animal can be perceived even when looking at the image at 50% scale. So high file resolution alone does not help. But what are we doing here? Making a good picture a bad one, just because the sensor had too many pixels? I would support if the image were downscaled and resharpened at that scale. I know the rules discourage downscaling. So what to do? Buy a cheaper camera with less resolution and you will achieve QI? --Johannes Robalotoff 10:25, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Head not in focus. Charlesjsharp 12:57, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Charles. --Basotxerri 17:54, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 6 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 21:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)