Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives February 2007
Archive repair
[edit]Nominations that should have been archived from 9th March but seem to have been ommitted. --Tony Wills 11:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Magdalena "Medeah" Stupkiewicz from polish rock band Artrosis. --Lestat 19:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Very clear and close portrait, but monochrome (!) and too dark. a l τ o n .ıl 00:06, 6 March 2007
-
- Nomination Anna Danyluk from Sierra Manta band. --Lestat 11:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Good portrait. I like the body posture and the face expression. There are minor flaws (overexposed and underexposed parts, noise in left arm) but they can be ignore IMO. Alvesgaspar 14:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Modern wind energy plant in rural scenery. --norro 18:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion superb! perfect rxposure, nice colours, beautiful shadows on the wings, centered solitaire composition, shows what it's intended to do. FP after noise reduction? --Ikiwaner 22:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC) I would support.It's a beautiful image. norro 08:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Hidden Caiman crocodilus --Leyo 14:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Nice and illustrative photo. Good quality - Alvesgaspar 14:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Galeries Lafayette --Wouterhagens 08:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline I am not very firm in that, but what about the copyright? Galeries Lafayette isn´t a puplic place, is it? --Simonizer 09:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC). Public or private, the copyright issue (Freedom of panorama) applies for buildings older than 70 years in France. But major stiching mistakes on the left so DeclineDiligent
-
- Nomination many elephants in water --Wouterhagens 08:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Great picture, but there are some strange stains in the upper right. Can you correct that? --Simonizer 09:03, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Goalkeeper --Leyo 19:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Poor photographic quality: too much noise - Alvesgaspar 14:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Colisa lalia --Pharaoh Hound 13:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Clear subject, good quality. Very useful. norro 19:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Plegadis falcinellus --Pharaoh Hound 13:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Good quality. I don't like the flash much and the blown out parts, but this is QIC, not FPC.--Arad 21:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination trains entering Marcy Avenue station, NYC,nominated by User:Dschwen --LadyofHats 10:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Chaotic composition, dark element in high-left corner disturbing me. --Lestat 14:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC), It's a station platform, with its roof. How could I improve the composition? --Dschwen 09:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination nominated by User:Dschwen rush hour on the 7 train --LadyofHats 10:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion The distortion is a bit disturbing, but apart from that very nice. --norro 23:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination A train rolling stock, nominated by User:Dschwen --LadyofHats 10:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion everything allright--Simonizer 11:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination San Francisco street scene, nominated by User:Dschwen --LadyofHats 10:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Meets QI guidelines as far as I can see. --Leyo 16:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination North Beach, SF. nominated by User:Dschwen --LadyofHats 10:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Very good. norro 23:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination China town, SF, nominated by User:Dschwen --LadyofHats 10:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Meets QI guidelines as far as I can see. --Leyo 16:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination osmotic preasure --LadyofHats 10:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Handsome and useful image. Lycaon 15:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Turgor preasure on plant cells --LadyofHats 14:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC) (UTC)
- Promotion Why disturbing and not really needed for any purpose background? --WarX 23:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)-- the background is there to make the image similar to the last one, to help making the image not seeing so empty and to reduce the high contrast against the background -LadyofHats 14:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC) QI for me albeit non-favorable background. --Leyo 10:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Anja Orthodox. --Lestat 15:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline too dark, character not centered, too much space on top, in general bad composition-LadyofHats 07:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Pelican statue on the roof of well in castle in Malbork - Cropped version. --Lestat 15:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Blury and overexposed, with jpg aberrations. -LadyofHats 07:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Macro shot of an oyster. --norro 13:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion i feel it rather overexposed, maybe next time chose a no white background?- LadyofHats 07:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Cymbidium orchid --norro 13:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion is it the back of the flower out of focus or is another flower?-LadyofHats 07:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC) For me it's OK. It can be QI. --Lestat 18:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Thai Ridgeback Dog --Pharaoh Hound 12:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion next time try that it doesnt apear the leg on the back. it anoys the composition a bit.-LadyofHats 07:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Pavo cristatus --Pharaoh Hound 12:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion it is a bit blury , but i think not so much not to be QI-LadyofHats 07:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
End of archive repair --Tony Wills 11:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Original archive
[edit]-
- Nomination Boooooks... or The Archbishopric Library in Eger, Poland. :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Not enough detail (only 72 dpi), and photo overall washed out. --Steevven1 03:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Cape Farewell, NZ - cliffs with arch --Mfield 19:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC) New version without crop top left --Mfield 21:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Nice pic, but it's a pity that in the upper left corner a part is cropped. --Leyo 08:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC) Now it can be. Good perspective. --Lestat 18:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination A composite of three Willie Wagtails perching together --Benjamint444 06:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Part of subject unfocused, tails cropped, distracting and ugly backgroung (including what seems to be stitching stains) - Alvesgaspar 19:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination An Australian Willie Wagtail --Benjamint444 04:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Tail is cut. --Leyo 14:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination another dino --LadyofHats 18:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC))
- Promotion another QI --norro 12:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Pavo cristatus --Pharaoh Hound 12:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion I like this depth of field. QI. Lestat 15:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Hospital of Holy Spirit in Frombork (Poland). --Lestat 20:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline the image is blury, the composition rather dull, and it has jpg aberrations (to see what i mean see the pink and blue colors that form on the cross) -LadyofHats 22:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Young mixed-breed dog --Pharaoh Hound 19:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Well focused, centered, nice colours. I like it. -- Ayacop 17:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination An Australian Pelican --Benjamint444 05:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Certainly seems to meet the technical standards. The cropping is a bit tight for my liking. --Pharaoh Hound 13:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination MG Road, Bangalore, with the public utility building in the background. --Kprateek88 15:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline it misses contrast, but what anoys me the must is the composition. if your central object is the street then you should give it a bit more weight, as it is now the eye floats between the building, the trees and the stones on the front. the image could also be a bit sharp, yet on screen size this problem disapears —the preceding unsigned comment is by LadyofHats (talk • contribs)
-
- Nomination A Richards Pipit nest. --Benjamint444 23:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Excellent. Isn't featured status enough? A.J. 12:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Nanshiungosaurus is a genus of coelurosaurian dinosaur --LadyofHats 15:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion I'm still not sure how to apply the guidelines to such illustrations, but for me it's a quality image. norro 10:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Singapore Airline fleet at Changi airport --Jnpet 05:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Very poor image quality, washed-out colours, horizon tilted - Alvesgaspar 13:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Sunflower garden at Changi airport --Jnpet 05:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Poor composition, distracting background, flowers unsharp - Alvesgaspar 12:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Procyon lotor --norro 16:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion personally i miss the tail, but one cant have everything-LadyofHats 09:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination I love this idyllic scenery. --norro 16:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion nice mood, well composed with the bird on top --Ikiwaner 18:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC) For me a FP candidate -- Simonizer 13:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC) It already has been, Simonizer. norro 10:55, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Tourist-telescope on Mount Diablo, Bay Area, USA (dark blotches are dragonflies, lots of them) --Dschwen 18:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline the picture is sharp. but mises real contrast, there is much of the image that is out of focus, i would have gone for a version with less background. the problem with this image is maily of composition -LadyofHats 09:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC), Fair enough, but I think you are overly strict with the composition argument. This is not FPC after all. And I was aiming to show distant wide open spaces. --Dschwen 13:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Bondhusbreen - ice & rock --Kirq 11:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline bad light together with bad composition, the image is from a great subject, but could do with a bit more of quality-LadyofHats 09:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination View from Gr. Feldberg/ Taunus Mount./ Germany --Falense 20:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion i supose the blury effect comes from the weather. it is an impresive view.-LadyofHats 09:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC))
-
- Nomination Medieval handicraft presented on celtic festival in Będzin. Ver. 2 - more light. In fact subject isn't cut - this is main part of subject. --Lestat 20:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion not the must interesting subject but i think it is ok now-LadyofHats 09:43, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Very dynamic. --norro 16:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Too blurry and grainy. --Pharaoh Hound 13:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)- Yeah dynamic! The boarder and the camera as well. There are two possibilties to make dynamic photos. The first one is move the camera with the subject. Then the boarder would be in focus and the enviroment is blurry. The second way is to let the camera static, and subject is moving through the picture. Then the enviroment is in focus and the boarder is blurry. But at this picture both things are blurry. Additional there is heavy noise -- Simonizer 13:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Gargoyle on the cathedral roof in Frombork. --Lestat 20:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Decline i dont lie saying i thougt long about this one. in fact the picture isnt bad. but the jpg compresion has given a very anoying pink shadow to the bricks,and some edges of the gargole are overexposed :P. this was so close...-LadyofHats 14:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination I love this picture for its expression. --norro 16:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Far too small, blurry. --Pharaoh Hound 18:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC) agree with decline but it's quite good. Panning is well done and head is sharp. Just the motion blurred body is too much. --Ikiwaner 19:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination European Larch (Larix decidua) - cones. Przykuta 09:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Depth of field problems: the tips of the cones are very distractingly out of focus. --Pharaoh Hound 13:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Leaf of Birch (betula pendula). Przykuta 09:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Similar problems to the larch cones. Even the few parts that are in focus appear to be a bit blurry. --13:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC) —the preceding unsigned comment is by Pharaoh Hound (talk • contribs)
-
- Nomination Rudbeckia laciniata - a flower Przykuta 09:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline DOF issues. Only a very small part of the flower is actually in focus. --Pharaoh Hound 13:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Old church in Gamla Uppsala. --Lestat 17:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline overexposed and sligtly blury, things like white decoration on the building are burn out of detail--LadyofHats 10:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Clear photograph of Ducula bicolor spilorrhoa --norro 16:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion it is a tic overexposed, but otherwise a good image-LadyofHats 10:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Marek Przewłocki. Ver. 2 --Lestat 16:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion yeap that is what i meant.-LadyofHats 16:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Trithemis annulata in Italy --AngMoKio 17:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline there is many information lost becouse of focusing, both the head and tail are blury-LadyofHats 10:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Loligo vulgaris, a common squid from the North Sea -- Lycaon 13:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Excellent detail and quality - Alvesgaspar 13:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Iguana delicatissima, a rare Caribean iguana from Dominica, W.I. -- Lycaon 13:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Doesn't seem delicate at all to me !... Aprove photo quality but don't like the shadow at right and the rock at left. I would try a crop - Alvesgaspar 13:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Sunset Norway. My first QI nom. Feel free to slap me if the picture is not special/hiquality enough -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Beatiful sky but poor image quality in full resolution (might improve with downsampling and/or noise removal). Like it is, composition is also a bit booring, misses some "central" subject. I would try a crop. Try again... Alvesgaspar 22:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Clear photograph of Hypolimnas bolina --norro 16:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Nice picture, unusual composition, no obvious flaws. Alvesgaspar 22:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Illustration of geological structures associated with a receding glacier --Lycaon 22:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion aren't glaciers receding rather in U-shape than parallel? --Ikiwaner 19:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC) Illustration is very good for what it wants to illustrate. --Ikiwaner 21:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Glass house in Lalbagh, Bangalore. --Kprateek88 11:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline good composition but badly overexposed sky --Ikiwaner 19:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Fatehpur, India, --Kprateek88 11:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline interesting image with detail in the shadows, quite hard barrel distortion that could be removed --Ikiwaner 19:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi --Kprateek88 10:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline no perspective correction, overexposed sky, flat composition --Ikiwaner 19:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Zalmoxes was a genus of dinosaur from the Late Cretaceous --LadyofHats 07:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Decline There are some black stains between the legs and the arms. They should been removed. Otherwise nice drawing -- Simonizer 09:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Aucasaurus was a medium-sized Argentinian theropod dinosaur of the Santonian stage-LadyofHats 16:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Decline There are some black stains in front of the last dinosaur in the back and between the legs of the middle one. They should been removed. Otherwise nice drawing -- Simonizer 09:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Fatehpur, India, --Kprateek88 11:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Image blurred and unfocused due to exposure settings - Alvesgaspar 12:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination the cell membrane bilayer--LadyofHats 07:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion This is a quality illustration. norro 11:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Sculpture in WPKiW. --Lestat 16:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Underexposed, misses contrast. i would support an edited version-LadyofHats 03:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Crab spider Xysticus sp. created and uploaded by Olaf Leillinger Fantastic picture! Nominated by --Jnpet 06:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Very nice. norro 11:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination steam lokomobile --norro 23:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion you seem to prefer straight foward compositions --LadyofHats 03:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination salame --norro 23:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion not my favorite subject, but i must admit that there is certain dificulty in it. -LadyofHats 03:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Episyrphus balteatus --norro 23:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion i would have liked it more if the tail was on focus. but the detail you achieve from the head is amazing. will you try doing it FP - LadyofHats 03:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination three Willow catkins. --norro 23:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion a very nice image- LadyofHats 03:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Caterpillar of Deilephila elpenor --Przykuta 20:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline the first one was much better done. this one is rather noisy-LadyofHats 08:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Lilium. --Lestat 16:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion i like the intensity of the colors. -LadyofHats 08:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Wet type human earwax on swab. --Gmaxwell 14:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion I don't like this photo, but quality is very good. Lestat 17:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Review From a technical point of view, it's a great photo. I wouldn't hang it on A1 canvas in my hall, though. Anthony cfc 18:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Supermarine Spitfire XVI --norro 16:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion still a bit noisy but much better than the original--LadyofHats 08:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination He is handome. --Ltshears 19:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Decline he is handsome but moved the head when the phto was made. specially the eyes and nose are blury in full view-LadyofHats 07:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Two-lined monocle bream. Scolopsis bilineata. --Jnpet 05:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Decline is there a way to increase a bit the contrast in this picture? it is not a bad image but it would need a bit of help.LadyofHats 08:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Caterpillar of Euthrix potatoria --Przykuta 20:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Wonderful, but not sure about the resolution. norro 23:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)--i would say it is on the edge of the allowed resolution. specially concidering the subgect —the preceding unsigned comment is by LadyofHats (talk • contribs)
-
- Nomination Main altar in church in Panewniki. --Lestat 19:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline overexposed and blury -LadyofHats 08:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination The Lincoln Memorial, south wall interior. The engraving of the Gettysburg Address centered in the image.--Gmaxwell 19:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Excellent, good job. Arjun 23:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC) Comment: a pity that the lighting of the fresco painting is not good - Alvesgaspar 12:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Malachite --Luc Viatour 11:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion it has some jpg aberrations on full view, but still it has enough to be QI-LadyofHats 22:43, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination A Karst Shepherd --Pharaoh Hound 13:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline unfortunate illumination--Simonizer 10:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination A female satin bowerbird --Benjamint444 01:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Blurry, grainy, the DOF is too narrow (the beak should be in focus), purple fringing on the top of the beak. --Pharaoh Hound 13:22, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Macrolepiota procera A.J. 13:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Background is a little disturbing in my opinion, otherwise good picture--Simonizer 10:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Female Red-winged Blackbird --Pharaoh Hound 13:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion though a bit small, sharp where it matters. Lycaon 18:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination A Belgian Tervuren --Pharaoh Hound 12:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Bad perspective A.J. 11:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Medieval beggar. --Lestat 16:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline The lower part of the subject is cut off. Don't you need authorization in Poland for taking picture of someone? the approval of the "beggar" should be mentionned on the picture's info. --Diligent 09:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC) Yes but subject is a friend of photographer ;) --WarX 14:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Anser anser --Pharaoh Hound 13:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Overexposed parts. --Lestat 19:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Harpia harpyja --Pharaoh Hound 13:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Cut one wing. --Lestat 19:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Cygnus buccinator --Pharaoh Hound 13:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Needs white balancing to bring out the texture. Otherwise good quality. norro 19:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Agelastica alni --Pharaoh Hound 13:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Great picture, but resolution is too small for QI --Simonizer 08:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC) - Please respect the size of the animal - and this is already a macro shot using special equipment! -- aka 17:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nomination Horseracing at Churchill Downs --Pharaoh Hound 13:28, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Promotion Very good capture --AngMoKio 16:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Consensual Review
[edit]- Nomination Stanford's Clark Center --Starwiz 08:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Good composition, nice and sharp. But the overexposed parts must be fixed. Alvesgaspar 10:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
First of all overexposure isn't something that could be fixed. Especially at night with artificial lights partial or full exposure is something that can't be avoided completely. The contrast of a lamp in the dark is too high both for a camera and for a human eye. In this case I like the composition and that there is no perspective distortion because the photographer climbed up on the balcony. It's perfectly sharp for a shutter speed of 25 s! Overexposure in all RGB channels is limited to smaller areas which is very good under these circumstances. --Ikiwaner 21:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with Alvesgaspar. even if it is a night shot and there is a hard contrast to be expected. there is a proper midle point. Meaning, a point in wich you win the maximum in usefull detail. in the case of this picture, being less exposed would mean to loose detail the trees in the background and some of the windows at the sides. but would also mean to win detail on the midle. and on the floor at the front. from the point of view of composition this elements "weight" more and should be payed more atention to. in resume i also decline this nomination -LadyofHats 13:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
1 Support 2 Oppose ---> Not Promoted
- Nomination Another version was nominated before. This one is in focus. We don't have much pictures of Infants on Wiki. And this one is artistic (the baby's face) and encyclopedic. --Arad 13:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Decline Poor technical quality, unfortunate composition, distracting background - Alvesgaspar 12:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think it qualifies for QI (in technical part). If possible give me some opinion of how to improve. --Arad 00:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with Alvesgaspar. Blurred, not QI. Lestat 18:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- how to improve it: if it is a "film" camera a higer iso would have helped. in general more light would have allowed a shaper image. also about 90% of blury effect comes from a shaking hand and in this case a moving baby. to place the camera in a stable position, with a higer speed.
as for the background, we maybe it would have not been so distracting if it was in focus :P but that is a matter of taste .-LadyofHats 08:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
0 Support 2 Oppose ---> Not promoted
- Nomination Karpecki square in Mikołów. --Lestat 10:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC) 10:33
- Decline from the point of view of composition there is no really any central point. the eye goes back and foward between the tree and the house. there is also no clear reason why did you chose such a composition. there is slight noise in full view. but i find the composition problem more anoying -LadyofHats 23:08, 29 January 2007
- I dont find the composition that bad. Only thing on this picture that disturbs me ist the cut off woman at the bottom left side. But the quality is ok in my opinion. I would promote it for QI. -- Simonizer 11:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- as i said before from the point of view of the photograph it is tecnically well done. the composition is what i find too dull and non concentrated. if you still want to promote it. then go ahead, i have not a trong oposition in this case -LadyofHats 08:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think there are other issues wich prevent the picture to be QI: the quality (grain and sharpness) is poor, which is most visible in the darker parts of the building; there is an annoying tilt in the building; motion blur makes the leaves a green amorphus mass. Alvesgaspar 12:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- You are right, i overlooked that. I watched only on the composition -- Simonizer 13:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
1 Support 2 Oppose ---> Not promoted