Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 08 2021

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Rigi_Kulm_cross_20210905.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Wooden cross on Rigi Kulm --Domob 16:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support *Good quality. --Halavar 17:32, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree Too bluish in the distance --Milseburg 10:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'm working out the right WB on another nomination at the moment, and will update this one accordingly once we agree what it should be. --Domob 08:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done I've adjusted the colours now. A bit warmer WB and also reduced blue a bit more. --Domob 10:41, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support I wasn't there, but the white balance seems reasonable enough for me to support now. -- Ikan Kekek 22:08, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Ok for me now. --Milseburg 09:45, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:48, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Zugersee_from_Rigi_panorama_20210905.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Panoramic view of Zugersee from Rigi Kulm --Domob 16:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Halavar 17:32, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Too bluish in the distance. --Milseburg 10:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'm working out the right WB on another nomination at the moment, and will update this one accordingly once we agree what it should be. --Domob 08:06, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done I've adjusted the WB now and made it in particular less blue. --Domob 13:04, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Even still, is the lake that aquamarine? -- Ikan Kekek 22:09, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 Comment I can't guarantee that this colour is 100% what it looked like on the spot, but it doesn't seem very off to me from what I remember. I'm happy to make further adjustments to the WB if you have concrete suggestions, though. --Domob 05:56, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'm not as convinced as on the other one, but good enough to give up oposing. --Milseburg 09:48, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:49, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Cn_Überseering_33a_2020_03.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Hamburg, commercial area City Nord, office building Überseering 33a --Dirtsc 17:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    Please add more sharpness. --Halavar 18:45, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
     Comment I tried a new version. Please take a look. Greetings --Dirtsc 20:39, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
    Sorry, but I do not see a big difference. The building is sharp, but problem is with other parts. Especially right side of the picture is not sharp enough. --Halavar 21:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
     Comment OK, I focused on the building, but I understand your point. The unsharpness at the right side (and at the left side) is due to the perpespective correction. With the trees and their branches you can see this very clearly. I don't think I can get rid of this unsharpness without changing the perspective correction. Feel free to decline the image, maybe I'll send it to CR to have more opinions on this problem. Greetings --Dirtsc 07:11, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
    Yes, I think others should decide. --Halavar 09:01, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
     Comment Halavar did the review and was unsatisfied by the sharpness especially of the trees on the right. I'd like to see your opinions on this topic. As I said above, the perspective correction of the main motiv causes a decreasing sharpness towards the right and left borders of the image. This can imho only be solved if I apply a lesser perspective correction or if I crop the image at the borders. But maybe the image meets the QI criteria. Greetings --Dirtsc 07:08, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Ok for me. --Hillopo2018 08:11, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I believe that the lens used may be decentered. This does not seem to be uncommon with this zoom, as I have seen this and similar imperfections on several images taken with it. I find some remnants of CA on the right edge of the image, but not on the left edge. On the other hand, sharpness is better on the right than on the far left edge. Perhaps the lens is simply not very well suited for architectural shots - in landscapes, close-ups, etc. such a thing is usually less disturbing. You might be able to improve the result by stopping down to f/11 when shooting, but that's a bit borderline with a crop camera because of the diffraction. --Smial 09:50, 30 September 2021 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:52, 7 October 2021 (UTC)