Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 18 2017

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Faro_de_Guard_Island,_Ketchikan,_Alaska,_Estados_Unidos,_2017-08-16,_DD_44.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Guard Island Lighthouse, Ketchikan, Alaska, United States --Poco a poco 15:44, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Dear Diego, what happened? Very grainy due to jpg-artefacts everywhere. Fixable? --Llez 16:21, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Well, you know, bad weather, fast moving vehicle, distant subject,...I've uploaded a new version, what do you think? Poco a poco 18:42, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 Neutral For the moment. It is difficult, so I propose to hear other opinions --Llez 05:24, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - At this file size, I'd call it a QI. -- Ikan Kekek 21:52, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I'm leaning the other way; it's a nice image but it just looks so oversharpened.--Peulle 06:36, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
    ✓ New version Poco a poco 18:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Fine! --Palauenc05 21:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support --Ralf Roleček 23:24, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --W.carter 10:57, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Bath_Abbey_during_Christmas.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination A crisp late november evening in Bath, warmed by the Christmas lights in front of Bath's Abbey. By User:Elvbel --Jwslubbock 11:26, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality, nice effect. --Qoan 14:43, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I find this level of ghosting disturbing. Please discuss. Also there are some weird artifacts (HDR merger?) and needs better categories. --C messier 12:56, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support to me its ok. --Ralf Roletschek 19:17, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support I'm not bothered by the ghosts. A bit unsharp but just barely squeezes by IMO. --King of Hearts 06:32, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support The ghosting works for the picture here, you can see the architecture of the place while getting a sense of crowding. --W.carter 08:16, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --W.carter 09:53, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Liparus Sp_1_MHNT.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination , Mating couple of Liparus sp.--Ercé 05:53, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 06:23, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Ercé, il faut ajouter une description. Maintenant, il n'y a aucune. -- Ikan Kekek 08:11, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - J'oppose et change le status (? qu'est-ce que c'est en français?) a "discuter" pour le moment. Quand tu ajoutes une description qui suffit, je vais envoler le vote opposé. -- Ikan Kekek 00:24, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment désolé, c'est une erreur... mais comment corriger le scope maintenant ? --Ercé 10:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment - Pas de problemes. Il faut seulement taper le nom latin de l'espèce et le nom normal en anglais s'il y en a, et le fait qu'ils fait l'amour (pour les animaux, nous disons "mate/mating" en anglais, donc "Mating couple of [nom Latin et nom anglais de l'insecte]." Si tu preferes, fait le description seulement en français, et je peux traduire. -- Ikan Kekek 19:59, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment OK j'ai modifié la première ligne...--Ercé 16:01, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Oû ça? Je ne vois rien dans la ligne "Description". -- Ikan Kekek 22:20, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Tu n'as pas compri. Le probleme est avec la description dans la page du file, et ne pas avec la description du nomination. Ça, c'est pas important. -- Ikan Kekek 22:21, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Merci, j'ai complété la description qui était effectivement vide ! --Ercé 06:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Merci, la description est maintenant excellent! J'ai annulé mon vote contre, mais à plein largesse, rien du tout est clair. Contre ça, le file(? au moins "file" en anglais) est grand. Combien de millimetres longueur sont ces insectes? -- Ikan Kekek 07:47, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment la fleur donne une idée de l'échelle, environ 15 à 20 mm --Ercé 15:57, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - En ce cas, la taille du foto est beaucoup plus grand que les insectes-meme. Bonne qualité! -- Ikan Kekek 19:49, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment je remarque aussi que le moins d'utilisation du traitement du filtre de mise au point a l'air d’atténuer légèrement le bruit ... mes rush sont pire que le résultat ... passez en full screen pour voir ce fameux bruit dont je parle ... je test actuellement l'anti bruit de Neat image ... mais ca prend du temps pour le faire chaque essai !!! --The Photographer 16:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --W.carter 09:55, 13 October 2017 (UTC)


File:Hexensessel_auf_Puflatsch_Kastelruth.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination "Seat of witches" (columnar basalt) on the mountain Puflatsch --Moroder 11:15, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good. But the english name seems to be "witches", not whiches. --Selbymay 13:07, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Overexposed sky, please discuss --Llez 15:03, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now per Llez. When you fix the sky, I'll be happy to reconsider. -- Ikan Kekek 15:54, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment No problem with the sky, but too tight at top IMO--Lmbuga 16:09, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --W.carter 08:54, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

File:2017_-_banner_-_Чорнокозинський_замок.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination The castle in Chornokozyntsi, Khmelnytska oblast, Ukraine. --Moahim 08:13, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. Further more problems with the low resolution. See Commons:Image guidelines#Stitched images, panoramas: Panoramic images need to have a minimum height of 800px. --Milseburg 15:05, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I have uploaded highest resolution. --Moahim 15:18, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Question Is this pano taken again by your EOS 5D? --Milseburg 11:28, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment It is not a pano - it is cropped one-shot image specially for Banner nomanation, which is 7:1, and this part was not downsampled. --Moahim 12:01, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment No one could know your intention. But I'm still not convinced. By stitching several shots you could have achieved the same effect in better quality. Feel free to send it into CR for more opinions. --Milseburg 13:46, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Unfortunately, I have only one photo like this, and I can't remake it as stitched pano. And, as I said, it is full size. --Moahim 14:22, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - Good quality overall, to my eyes. But please upload the full-sized photo the first time, so that we don't continue spending time on problems with lower-resolution downsized images. -- Ikan Kekek 00:31, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ikan Kekek --Tsungam 14:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose white balance far too brownish, underexposed areas, crop at top to tight. Everything is fixable. --Carschten 15:20, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality.--Capricorn4049 23:47, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --W.carter 08:07, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

File:2017_-_Світанок_у_Сидорові.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Sydoriv Castle, Ukraine --Moahim 07:54, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 08:25, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I would like a discussion about the sky, which I find controversial, please.--Jebulon 09:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment If You mean deep blue part - it is polarizing efect from photofilter, and I like such difference on panoramas. --Moahim 11:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Jebulon: The sky is posterized and weird. -- Ikan Kekek 10:15, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Found another problem with the left border and tried to fix both of them. --Moahim 14:05, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment - Posterization lines are visible at thumbnail size. -- Ikan Kekek 02:36, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Polarizing filters should not be used for wide panoramas. -- King of Hearts 06:30, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 Comment It is very controversial. I have another opinion. --Moahim 19:49, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New version uploaded. --Moahim 19:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unnatural sky. --Cayambe 07:25, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --W.carter 08:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Joure. Kerktoren van Westermeer. Geert Knolweg 4 (Rijksmonument) 06.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Joure. church tower van Westermeer. Geert Knolweg 4 (National Monument) --Famberhorst 17:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good Quality but it should have more then one category -- Sixflashphoto 03:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The down crop is not good. The foundation and tombstones are cut. Also perspective correction needed. --Aeou 04:42, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. Small corrections. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst 06:30, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for me. --Basotxerri 20:34, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support No perspective correction needed. --Ralf Roletschek 10:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree with Ralf. --MB-one 14:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Question Can anybody tell me, why Images of architecture should usually be rectilinear. does not apply here? --PtrQs 23:04, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Front vertical (in this case right part of the tower) have to be straight and IMO it needs a small rotation CW or a vertical perspective correction. Btw: the main object is also not really sharp. --Michielverbeek 06:56, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Spurzem 15:58, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Looks funny to me. -- Ikan Kekek 20:09, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Looks funny to me too --Livioandronico2013 19:20, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Need verticals perspective fix, I added a note about this problem allready cited above --The Photographer 19:42, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Note: In my opinion, the center of the window should be vertical. note added.--Famberhorst 05:05, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support I think this tower does not have straight walls.--Ermell 07:01, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Bottom cut is not good --Capricorn4049 23:43, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others, --Cvmontuy 03:08, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 7 oppose → Declined   --W.carter 08:05, 16 October 2017 (UTC)