Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 03 2023

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:2023-05-19_ALBA_Berlin_gegen_ratiopharm_Ulm_(Play-off-Viertelfinale_3,_Basketball-Bundesliga_2022-23)_by_Sandro_Halank–052.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Deutsche Basketball-Bundesliga 2022/23, Quarter Final of the Play-off-series, match 3: ALBA Berlin vs. ratiopharm Ulm (81:93) – Thomas Klepeisz (ratiopharm Ulm) --Sandro Halank 18:31, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Too noisy, sorry. --多多123 17:34, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support. Very good image! I don't understand the criticism. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 07:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support What noise? Yes, there is some luma noise visible and it could have been avoided by changing the camera setting when shooting portraits (1/800s is a bit fast), but there's no chroma noise and that's what matters. --Granada 07:04, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Four Mpixels are rather on the lower end nowadays, but still acceptable for a reportage photo with available light. And if the available light requires a high ISO setting, you will have more noise, which is completely unavoidable, than with static subjects where you can arrange the lighting yourself and/or choose exposure times of any length. --Smial 13:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:40, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

File:2022-03-28_Empfang_des_Sächsischen_Ministerpräsidenten_für_die_Teilnehmenden_der_Olympischen_Winterspiele_2022_by_Sandro_Halank–101.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Reception of the Minister President of Saxony for the participants of the Olympic Winter Games 2022: Thomas Weise (Head of Olympic Training Center Saxony) --Sandro Halank 13:13, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Out of focus. --多多123 17:25, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support. Sharp enough as I think. We should not overdo. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 20:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support per Spurzem. --Smial 10:21, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Sharpness could be better, but it is good enough --Jakubhal 18:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:39, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Pine_View_Nursery_-_Cactus_-_26.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Cactus at the Pine View Nursery, Kalimpong --Sumitsurai 06:40, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality.--Tournasol7 07:27, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Without categorization, the images are pretty worthless. --Ermell 08:02, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
     Comment Sorry. Category added now. --Sumitsurai 10:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --多多123 16:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose A lower view at the level of the cactus, filling the frame a little more with the plant, would be better here. --GRDN711 15:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support OK to me. -- Ikan Kekek 07:20, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:38, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Hampi_-_Vittala_Temple_-_Left_Gopuram_Relief_-_1.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Hampi / Karnataka - Vittala Temple - Relief on Left Gopuram --Imehling 12:11, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Requires crop on unfinished part of sculpture. --多多123 17:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  • I have done some slight perspective correction but I think the crop is ok. --Imehling 19:10, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I still think it needs a crop at the top where the unfinished part is. --多多123 20:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Sorry, but I don't see any unfinished parts. Let's have a discussion about that. --Imehling 06:00, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  • At the top there are two lines, one slanted and the other adjacent which is at a 180 angle, this is the part I am talking about. It does not serve any purpose in this image. --多多123 21:40, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support I still don't understand this "unfinished parts" thing. The crop would actually be a bit too tight for me, but since I don't know what could possibly interfere around it, I trust the photographer. The lighting leads to quite hard contrasts, otherwise I think the photo is sharp and correctly exposed, therefore "good enough". --Smial 08:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support The composition is quite acceptable and the quality is more than good. I don't really understand what else would need to be done. -- Ikan Kekek 07:26, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality --Jakubhal 18:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:33, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Indian_white-eyes_in_Dehradun_in_August_2023_03.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Indian white-eyes in Dehradun in August 2023. --Satdeep Gill 09:23, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Quality is good but the background too bright, not sure whether you can fix it, difficult. --Poco a poco 12:45, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
  • I have added a newer version. --Satdeep Gill 05:03, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --多多123 16:56, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose not convinced, please, let's talk --Poco a poco 01:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'd support the first version. The rework looks horrible. --Smial 07:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 Comment @Satdeep Gill: I agree with Smial, please return the earlier version. --多多123 多多123 09:51, 29 August 2023 (UTC)~
  • Are the colors in reality as ugly as in the photo? And why was the picture brightened? -- Spurzem 08:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:34, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

File:DFSK_Fengon_500_1X7A6339.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination DFSK Fengon 500 in Esslingen.--Alexander-93 15:12, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Bonnet and windshield too bright, annoying advertising on the car, background not very appealing, especially the SIK advertising is annoying. -- Spurzem 17:07, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support It looks good to me, brightness isn't that bad, and advertisement and background are what they are. Changing to discuss. --Mike Peel 06:16, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support You can't change what something looks like, this is a Wiki and we capture reality not dreams. --多多123 09:56, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Spurzem. Parking lot photo, no composition. --Smial 08:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Advertisements are no problem, but the cars on the left are really distracting to me, and I'm usually pretty liberal about such things. -- Ikan Kekek 07:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:35, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Römermuseum_Heitersheim_09.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Basement of the Villa urbana, Heitersheim, Germany --Llez 07:21, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline  Comment There are some strange green outlines on the upper left. Fixable ? --Sebring12Hrs 19:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
    ✓ Done thanks for the review --Llez 06:59, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Tilt to the right --Grunpfnul 10:05, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
    No tilt IMO, see the bricks of the wall in the background in the upper part --Llez 05:45, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
    even the bricks in the background tilt, if you look closely --Grunpfnul 12:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Very sharp eye. I corrected the minimal tilt, now the bricks are completely horizontal --Llez 20:47, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment. The brickwork does not seem sharp enough to me. I can't judge whether a better composition of the picture would have been possible. -- Spurzem 08:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Background overexposed, fill flash provides contourless illumination of the masonry, at the same time hard drop shadows on this stone table. I don't think this is a good choice for such motifs. The image sharpness is strange, on the right side of the image it is somewhat suitable, but on the left side, especially in the lower left corner, it decreases significantly. --Smial 08:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Question Oversaturated green and green CA in the background on the left? -- Ikan Kekek 07:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Cedar_Falls_(23375).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Trees hanging onto the side of a rock by Cedar Falls in Hocking Hills State Park --Rhododendrites 13:48, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Oppose Focus too high up, IMO it should be just on the ridge or close. --多多123 17:00, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
     Support Focus looks ok to me. --Ermell 22:19, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support. Perhaps a bit oversaturated, but focus is okay -- Spurzem 08:36, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support per others, and the ridge is sharp enough. -- Ikan Kekek 07:35, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:37, 2 September 2023 (UTC)