Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 20 2015

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Campilhas July 2015-2a.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination A typical country view of Alentejo, Portugal, with a solitary cork oak and the undulated field. -- Alvesgaspar 16:53, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
  •  Comment Pretty, but the tree is oversharpened Poco a poco 17:48, 12 October 2015 (UTC) --
    ✓ Done You are right, thanks. It is fixed now -- Alvesgaspar 22:44, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support ok now for me --Hubertl 07:55, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support QI Poco a poco 18:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Poco a poco 18:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

File:2015_Kłodzko,_ul._Braci_Gierymskich_6.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination 6 Braci Gierymskich Street in Kłodzko --Jacek Halicki 06:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support Almost QI, but the strong artifacts in the shadow (not fixable, I assume) spoiled it. Sorry, Denis Barthel 09:47, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    Fixed@Denis Barthel:I corrected this--Jacek Halicki 15:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
     Comment Please discussion --Jacek Halicki 21:36, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
    Thank you Jacek. Denis Barthel 08:50, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support IMO OK. --XRay 06:28, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Composition is certainly a key quality factor and the present framing is not good. Alvesgaspar 23:34, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
    •  Question What is bad in the framing, please ?--Jebulon 19:07, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Composition doesn't look right, that is the problem. From this pont of view, maybe a wider framing would hep. In my opinion, composition (of which framing is a component) is a very important part of image quality, usually ignored here in favour of pixel counting: exact verticals, absolute absence of CA and noise, and so on. More and more I feel closer to the classic elements of a good photography: good subject, good composition (and framing) and good lighting. Clear now? Alvesgaspar 20:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Not really, actually. First sentence, you repeat your affirmation. Second sentence, "maybe". For the rest, I strongly agree with you of course, but I have no better explanations regarding the picture. No matter anyway, I'm not interested by this image--Jebulon 22:43, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Sorry but I can't be more helpful. The composition looks wrong and that is enough for me, although I can't explain exactly why. Two possible resaons: the distortion introduced by a small focal distance and the assymetry. Alvesgaspar 10:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Composition is awkward. I can see that the corner of the building is in the center, but it just doesn't work. Move the frame to the left and it is much better. -- RaboKarbakian 02:53, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support --Ralf Roletschek 14:06, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 13:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)