Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 24 2021

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Daniela_Gassmann-Bahr_Montreux-Rochers-de-Naye_2016.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Daniela Gassmann-Bahr at 2016 Montreux-Les-Rochers-de-Naye mountain run --Sigma1498 22:00, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Too tight right crop, sorry. --Peulle 23:23, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Thank for the review and sorry for the tight framing, although it would be impossible to have a larger frame in such situation without another runner in front. In such case, would a crop on the main subject be better ? --Sigma1498 22:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Not done --A.Savin 00:13, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Very good composition for me. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 22:15, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Full  Support Per Spurzem. --Smial 13:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support OK 4 me. --Palauenc05 15:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Milseburg 13:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Jonathan_Wyatt_Montreux-Rochers-de-Naye_2016.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Jonathan Wyatt at 2016 Montreux-Les-Rochers-de-Naye mountain run --Sigma1498 22:00, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Unfortunate bottom crop, distracting background, not a QI to me, sorry --Poco a poco 22:22, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Thank for the review. Would a thigh or waist crop be better ? --Sigma1498 22:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Indeed --Poco a poco 08:54, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Not done --A.Savin 00:13, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Impressive for me. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 22:17, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good, IMO. I don't think cropping out his feet is fatal; we see the context and see his facial expression. -- Ikan Kekek 06:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Full  Support per Spurzem and Ikan. --Smial 13:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Milseburg 13:17, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Lexus_LC_500h_–_f_24062018.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Lexus LC 500h --M 93 18:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Oppose Artefacts on the chromed parts. --Peulle 21:35, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
    *  Support I don't like the very tight cut and the white lisense plate but otherwise it is a good image. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 09:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Yeah, it looks OK to me. What artifacts should I be looking for, Peulle? -- Ikan Kekek 05:22, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment In several places, especially those with very high contrasts, there are contours that look like saw teeth. I've seen this effect many times in the past, usually with power lines or stair railings or the like against bright house walls or sky. I suspect that this is some interaction between sharpening algorithms and demosaicing on Bayer sensors, thus happening at the raw development level. Whether this is caused by the camera's firmware or whether the computer software is to blame, I can't say. --Smial 14:11, 11 January 2021 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
  •  Support Still looks good to me, so provisionally support, in advance of anyone showing me something that looks really bad that I've missed. -- Ikan Kekek 18:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose manipuliertes Nummernschild --Ralf Roletschek 18:34, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ikan--Ermell 07:58, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Christian Ferrer 16:15, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Neutral Quite a clumsy way to obscure the licence plate. --Palauenc05 15:31, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Commonists 21:33, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Milseburg 13:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)