Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2017 at 14:20:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Desierto de Lut, Irán, 2016-09-22, DD 44-49 HDR PAN.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Desierto de Lut, Irán, 2016-09-22, DD 44-49 HDR PAN.jpg
Info Panoramic view during sunset of Dasht-e Loot, in English "Emptiness desert", located in the provinces of Kerman and Sistan-Baluchistan, Iran. This place is pretty special for being the spot on the Earth where the highest temperature was ever measured (70 °C or 159 °F) and since July 2016 a UNESCOWorld Heritage Site. All by me, Poco214:20, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Excellent panorama, best at full size. I really like the ripply dunes and the interesting rock outcroppings. The pastel colors of dusk complete the package. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2017 at 16:52:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Eberstein Hochfeistritz Pfarr-und Wallfahrtskirche Unsere Liebe Frau 19062017 9688.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eberstein Hochfeistritz Pfarr-und Wallfahrtskirche Unsere Liebe Frau 19062017 9688.jpg
Support It's not the most "wow"-like image, but one thing that is usually difficult when shooting churches is to get the whole building from wall to spire sharp without distortions. That's done well here. Composition is good, depth is good - the only real issue with it is that the light is a bit boring. Next time, tell God to line up a sunset perfectly for you exactly when you need it. ;) --Peulle (talk) 10:10, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Your comments about the lighting conditions comply one hundred percent with my thoughts about the situation of the image. Hopefully it will occur one day that I will be there shooting at sunup or sundown. I started my prayers to God asking Him for compliancy. ;) -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 10:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2017 at 17:25:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:HVB-Tower Munich, June 2017.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:HVB-Tower Munich, June 2017.jpg
Info Worm's-eye view of HVB Tower, an administrative building of the HypoVereinsbank in Munich. I know, not the "easiest" nom probably. I find the various triangles in the left third of the image pretty interesting. The rather neutral light helps accentuate the high-rise's distinctive shapes and typically 1970's features. All by me, --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:25, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
SupportBig wow factor here. :) I'm not super happy with the detail on the right side tower, but I'm following the guidelines: "Given sufficient "wow factor" and mitigating circumstances, a featured picture is permitted to fall short on technical quality.". --Peulle (talk) 16:31, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2017 at 20:25:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Portrait of Henry VIII of England (Holbein).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Portrait of Henry VIII of England (Holbein).jpg
InfoHenry VIII (28 June 1491 – 28 January 1547) was King of England from 21 April 1509 until his death. Henry was the second Tudor monarch, succeeding his father, Henry VII. Henry is best known for his six marriages and, in particular, his efforts to have his first marriage, to Catherine of Aragon, annulled. His disagreement with the Pope on the question of such an annulment led Henry to initiate the English Reformation, separating the Church of England from papal authority and appointing himself the Supreme Head of the Church of England. Despite his resulting excommunication, Henry remained a believer in core Catholic theological teachings.Hans Holbein the Younger (German: Hans Holbein der Jüngere) (c. 1497 – between 7 October and 29 November 1543) was a German and Swiss artist and printmaker who worked in a Northern Renaissance style. He is best known as one of the greatest portraitists of the 16th century.He also produced religious art, satire and Reformation propaganda, and made a significant contribution to the history of book design. He is called "the Younger" to distinguish him from his father, Hans Holbein the Elder, an accomplished painter of the Late Gothic school. All by LivioAndronico(talk)20:25, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2017 at 16:12:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Після грози ).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Після грози ).jpg
Oppose It seems to be a spectacular picture but this is ps gone too far for me. Will absolutely support a more "modest" (and hopefully larger) version. -- KennyOMG (talk) 16:42, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sorry, summer thunderstorms in the mountains, in "regime time" they are so... -- Swift11
Support Thanks for the size upgrade. There's little EXIF info but I assume this was shot with your D80 which explains why this cropped photo is still only 5MP. I'm a bit skeptical that some of the scene owes to processing rather than reality, but assuming not, then it really is too fantastic a view to oppose over minor technical issues. Could you please add an English description to the file page? -- Colin (talk) 11:44, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's beautiful and all, but the technical issues stand in the way of an FP for me; there seems to be some chromatic aberrations by the top of the trees, then there's the compression issues/grain in the grass near the camera as well as in the fog on the near left.--Peulle (talk) 10:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2017 at 21:41:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Матка 03.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Матка 03.jpg
Support - the ripple effect in the water's reflection, the scene, the composition, the light refraction that makes it all seem unrealistic - love it. Atsme📞20:40, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now The noise is unavoidable when shooting fog (I know!) but the "fluorescent lamp" WB is not doing this photo any favors. I did a version taking the WB from the paint on one of the boats (it's in my dropbox) and this revealed a lot more detail in the mountains. It also gave the pic more depth since it shows that there is sunshine beyond the mists in the gorge. I could support such a version. --cart-Talk10:05, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2017 at 15:35:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Elvis Presley, Delbert Sonny West, and Jerry Schilling meeting Richard Nixon.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Elvis Presley, Delbert Sonny West, and Jerry Schilling meeting Richard Nixon.jpg
Support Grainy, but cannot be retaken... I think this one is the best picture of the meeting. I did very little restoration. Please tell me if you think more is needed. -- Yann (talk) 15:35, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It has a certain wow factor, but the grain is disturbing. I know it was 1970, but the technology back then wasn't good enough to get a decent shot inside the White House? It just looks like the guy grabbed any old camera and took a snapshot rather than preparing with a proper camera and a flash. I'm not opposing because of said wow factor, but I just can't bring myself to support it either.--Peulle (talk) 12:02, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the Oval was as ell lit during the everyday business as you'd think it was, meaning for simple hand held shots they had to use fast films -> grain. Also if you compare it to the Elvis-Nixon pic this clearly is a significantly better scan as well. -- KennyOMG (talk) 14:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2017 at 19:39:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Tugboats Boss and Svitzer Hymer leaving Lahälla 4.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tugboats Boss and Svitzer Hymer leaving Lahälla 4.jpg
Info Tugboats Svitzer Hymer and Boss in Brofjorden setting out to assist a tanker entering the fjord and the oil port at Preemraff oil refinery. The fjord is so deep that the tankers have no problem going right up to the berths and cliffs along the shore, but when the wind is strong (as it was this day), an empty tanker lying high in the water can drift when it's going at a low speed. That's where the tugboats come in. The tugboats are stationed at Lahälla, across the fjord from the oil port. I was there to photograph Ryxö island for sv-wiki, so I had a front row seat and camera ready when the boats set out. I got a whole series of shots and I like this one best because of the relatively clean background and also because the distance from the camera makes the two boats appear in more similar size in the photo. There is something very wow-y seeing such powerful boats making good speed across the water, even if you can't hear the sound in the photos. All by me, -- cart-Talk19:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't use the {{weak oppose}} or similar templates as the Bot can't count these. Use the piped version of {{o}} and {{s}} instead. I have fixed that for you now. :) As for the focus, well, in this case it was either sharper boats when they were closer but with a cluttered background, or boats further away with better background but softer focus. See the series on the file page. I chose the better compo. --cart-Talk12:24, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Photographers don't often take a stern view of boats (I guess they like them too much ). Good for you for making this one work so well. And how helpful that one of them has its IMO painted on its stern! Daniel Case (talk) 20:03, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The stern is sort of the "business end" of a tugboat so more interesting than the bow. I also like the "going away on a mission" feeling you get from a stern view. --cart-Talk20:18, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2017 at 14:09:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Aciagrion occidentale-Kadavoor-2017-05-08-001.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Aciagrion occidentale-Kadavoor-2017-05-08-001.jpg
InfoAciagrion occidentale, Green striped slender dartlet, is a species of damselfly in the family Coenagrionidae found in India, Sri Lanka. This is a small and slender damselfly. They are extremely slim compared to the length 22-24mm; that's why this genus is called "Slims". But, in spite of their delicate build, they enjoy migration by rising high in the air and takes advantage of its lightweight in air currents. All by Jkadavoor -- Jee14:09, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but it is too dark. Additionally the black background above the head and thorax is very disturbing me. The dragonfly almost merges with it. --Hockei (talk) 16:51, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2017 at 00:46:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Pronghorn Yellowstone.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pronghorn Yellowstone.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2017 at 21:38:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:San Gennaro's chapel - Dome (Naples).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:San Gennaro's chapel - Dome (Naples).jpg
Info Domenichino completed the majority of the frescoes in the chapel. He painted the four pinnacles: Pledge made by the Neapolitans in 1527,Meeting of Saint Gennaro with Christ in the Heavenly Glory, Virgin intercedes for Naples and Patronage of Saints Gennaro, Agrippina and Agnello Abate. He also painted the story of the life of San Gennaro in the three lunettes (1633) and in the arches. The four large altarpieces painted with oil on copper by Domenichino represent: the Beheading of Saint Januarius, the Miracle of the infirm healed by the oil lamp, the Infirm at the tomb of the Saint and Resurrection of a dead man. Domenichino died suddenly on April 6, 1641. A few months later, he was replaced by another follower of Carracci who was then in Rome, the Emilian, Giovanni Lanfranco. All by LivioAndronico(talk)21:38, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2017 at 21:09:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Παναγιά Σκοπιανή 1957.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Παναγιά Σκοπιανή 1957.jpg
Comment This is my favorite photograph of mine from Serifos. The whitewashed chapel with the characteristic blue dome with a sandy beach at the background, is IMHO what could summarise the islands of Cyclades the best. I hope that you find it beautifull enough to overcome the unsharpness caused by the (inevitable) heat haze (it was more than 30°C hot, with the camera pointing downhill).
Sorry, not a big improvement to my eyes and certainly not enough to change my vote. I can understand an unsharp background and can even tolerate unsharp foreground in a great macro photo of some small insect, but this is a landscape photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Not sufficiently wowed by the composition. It is a bit random whether one's favourite memories translate to photos that others pick up on. -- Colin (talk) 21:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2017 at 18:19:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Orisol - Ermita de Santikurutz 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Orisol - Ermita de Santikurutz 01.jpg
Oppose The composition doesn't have wow for me, the light is flat, contrast is low and I'm not seeing a whole lot of detail.--Peulle (talk) 13:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Mostly per Peulle though I disagree about the contrast. There's an awful lot of leaves and stones which makes it busy. I'm not sure including this much tree-leaves is great for the composition. And some golden light would help compare to midday. -- Colin (talk) 21:35, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2017 at 22:00:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Question- And why are images of a random and also quite common animals as nominated here then something "special"? Thence, I cannot see the criteria to be honest.--Joobo (talk) 08:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you don't mind if I paraphrase your argument to reflect how I read it: "Since other pictures that I didn't object to at the time are in my opinion as random and unspecial as this one, you should vote to feature this photo." Not a very strong argument or likely to convince anyone who's on the fence. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:06, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looking at the photos in the category this came from, there are portraits of people with much more interesting expressions. This guy looks far more fierce and he is only holding a pen, not a gun. Not to mention the spirit and spectacular element of fire in photos like this. --cart-Talk09:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2017 at 06:17:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Eristalinus quinquestriatus 1783.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eristalinus quinquestriatus 1783.jpg
I withdraw my nomination - If even Vengolis can't be bothered to support his own photo, I don't see much point in continuing to try to get other supporting votes that aren't forthcoming. I get that most viewers here don't like the composition enough to support a feature. Thanks to all who participated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:08, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2017 at 16:11:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Bilbao - Museo Marítimo - Cadena 02.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bilbao - Museo Marítimo - Cadena 02.jpg
Oppose Sorry, I've been thinking about this for a while and much as I love the chain and the clouds, the cut crane in the background spoils the composition for me. --cart-Talk09:53, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin Falbisoner, unfortunately I haven't shot more (while I should). So I'll have to get there again, hope for bad weather (which is quite probable in Bilbao) and take that from another angle. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:14, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 03:19:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Bolt on a pump LR.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bolt on a pump LR.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2017 at 17:26:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Arara Azul no Pantanal.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Arara Azul no Pantanal.jpg
Support New category: macro-bird-photography! (Focal plane seems to be a bit closer than the eyes but because of that most of the body feathers are in perfect focus and show wonderful detail so it's not a prob I think.) -- KennyOMG (talk) 18:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Regretfully since it is a great photo. But it has been saved with ProPhotoRGB colourspace, which is totally unsuitable for JPG or internet use (see User:Colin/BrowserTest for why the majority of our users -- mobile -- will see extremely bad colours). The halo noted seems I guess to be a crudely applied mask perhaps to reduce sharpening-noise or to apply NR or increase exposure, and which is overlapping the edge. I think we would expect our regulars to do that more carefully. -- Colin (talk) 20:28, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Colin Just changed the colour space to sRGB. There is no mask applied to this photo, let alone crudely done. I believe the halo you refer to is the way the leaves are arranged in the background, or the vignette created by the lens. Either way, I like it. -- LeonardoRamos.
User:Colin It took me almost 2 years, but I finally realised what you mean by "halo". It's called a shadow. Look it up. It's quite common to see shadows underneath objects that block sunlight, like a bird's wing. Thanks for the support though.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2017 at 20:45:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Beech and ferns in Gullmarsskogen.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Beech and ferns in Gullmarsskogen.jpg
Info After a few days of rain during the first weeks of summer, this county almost explodes with fresh new green plants and even a natural area like Gullmarsskogen nature reserve looks like something from a garden catalogue. However, that will not last. Depending on how the summer turns out, it will all grow wild or dry up completely. I like the layers of fresh new leaves in this picture, with plants typical for a southwest Swedish forest. All by me, -- cart-Talk20:45, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I deliberately set the aperture to f/5.6 and focused on getting the central branch of beech leaves sharp so that it would pop out from a softer background of greenery. Going for a higher aperture and getting everything sharp would have ruined the sense of layering it has now. An additional layering is made from the contrasting shapes and textures of the various foliage. --cart-Talk13:48, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support *sigh* Forests. Normal me loves them, but for photographer me it's more like a nemesis – seems like I just can't figure out how to translate what I see into a picture. And then you come along and make it look so easy. Somehow you managed to bring structure into the chaos: vertical trunks in the top half; at the bottom the horsetails, the ferns and the foreground twig make some nice diagonals … Chapeau! --El Grafo (talk) 14:15, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per El Grafo. It is like the plants were arranged to give a pleasing combination of sizes and textures. -- Colin (talk) 17:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is actually a feature that has helped to "arrange" the plants; it's called "a stream". :) The ferns grow in one side of it, obscuring it, and the beeches on the other side. Glints of it are visible in this photo. Water is a great organizer in nature. --cart-Talk17:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love that silvery sylvan light in the foreground ... so often one sees that in the woods but it is so difficult to capture. Looks, as I think I've mentioned to you before, not unlike the slope northern-hardwood forests at lower elevations in the Catskills, just with American beech instead of its European cousin. Daniel Case (talk) 05:01, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2017 at 17:33:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Capivara(Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Capivara(Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris).jpg
Support Excellent capture. Noise is not a big thing here and I think this is the perfect example of mitigating reasons. --Code (talk) 06:27, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others - the capybaras aren't too noisy. I admit to a bit of bias, in that I had pet guinea pigs as a child, so I like rodents, especially cute ones. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:52, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree, it's a bit noisy, but you cannot find such an scene in your garden posing for you. Great composition and acceptable quality for a 500 mm shot. Poco212:05, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2017 at 13:00:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Carretera al monasterio Noravank, Armenia, 2016-10-01, DD 55-59 PAN.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Carretera al monasterio Noravank, Armenia, 2016-10-01, DD 55-59 PAN.jpg
Info Panoramic view of the vanishing road through the Amaghu valley near the 13th-century monastery of Noravank, Armenia. The narrow gorge, located near Yeghegnadzor and 122 km from the capital, Yerevan, was eroded by the Amaghu River. All by me, Poco213:00, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Peulle: if the reason why you opposed were the artifacts, they are gone. That's an easy fix. Thanks for the hint, I didn't see them. Poco217:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, everything else about the photo is wonderful, but for FP I feel the sky should not have these. Sadly, I still see them scattered in bands across the sky, although it's not as bad as the first version. I'm not sure what caused them or how it can be fixed completely.--Peulle (talk) 15:41, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sorry, there is still banding in the sky (I had the same problem in some of my panoramas and I didn't succeed in removing it, even with new stiching. At the moment I have no solution to propose, perhaps someone other can help you). --Llez (talk) 05:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Llez: I've uploaded a new version to address the banding. Please, let me know what you think. I applied 2 filters on the sky, a scatter (could have been a noise filter too) and a gaussian blur filter. Poco211:34, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2017 at 07:45:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Colaptes auratus auratus, female, Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin (crop).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Colaptes auratus auratus, female, Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin (crop).jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2017 at 08:30:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Detail of Wasserglockenbrunnen, Munich, June 2017.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Detail of Wasserglockenbrunnen, Munich, June 2017.jpg
Info Detail of Wasserglockenbrunnen, also known as Wasserpilzbrunnen on Frauenplatz, Munich, at night. It was designed by Bernhard Winkler in 1972. I'm absolutely sure pretty much nobody in Munich could identify this fountain as it's neither important nor spectacular - though situated very prominently. I also had to google its name(s). What I like about the picture is its abstract, almost graphic concentration on details, accentuated by its selective focus range and tight crop. Note that although the image may appear deliberately desaturated, it is in fact not. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:30, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose due to light management (the brighter areas are gone), the subject is original, but the composition not stricking (I know that spot) and only one item is in focus Poco211:12, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, of course the lights are "gone". I mean we're talking about illuminating, bright spotlights. In the night. There wouldn't be anything left to rescue in post at all, not even by applying HDR techniques. I guess it's, as always, a matter of taste. I like both the chiaroscuro as well as the limited DOF. I'd also like to defend the composition that concentrates on one element, the sharp one in the front, but also presents its "natural habitat" in the background. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:01, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - agree with Jee in that it's interesting! ++ for creativity and level of difficulty in capturing a technically challenging image. Atsme📞15:54, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2017 at 06:01:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Blue hour shot of the south west facade of Berliner Philharmonie (concert hall). The architecture of the concert hall was always a little bit controversial here in Berlin but I somehow like it, especially when we have such a perfect blue hour as it was when I took this photograph. This is a multirow HDR panorama made of 63 single exposures. Before I decided to take a photograph of this view I was walking around the building several times. It was a little bit challenging to find the right perspective because it was very crowdy that evening and there were cars all around the building and I had to search quite a while until I found a place to avoid both the cars and the people to appear in the picture. The east side of the building is even more interesting to photograph but there are construction works going on and as usual in Berlin you never know when they will end or even if they will be finished at all. --Code (talk) 06:01, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I'm impressed. The noise in the sky is not worth mentioning, but are the dark spots in the sky in some cases dust spots? I don't know. But I'm willing to feature the photo as is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:22, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Ikan Kekek. I don't think there are any dust spots left. In my workflow I remove the dust spots first in each RAW file and then stitch them together (it's even harder to remove them in the final picture). In larger cities there appear differences in the brightness of the sky which are caused by different light sources all around. They can look like dust or clouds, I think. --Code (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support fine picture! I know the building's illuminated with yellow light but could it be that the WB here is just a tiny bit too yellowish? Not a dealbreaker anyway. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Martin. I was playing around with the WB for a while and in the end I think this version was the most true. Cooling the WB down any more would make it look very blueish and the sky would change to a cyanic tone. --Code (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A nice one. I have though the impression that it would benefit from an adjustment of the aspect ratio. It looks a bit squeezed everywhere (not only the cars on the left, that's obvious). Poco211:58, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: Thank you, Poco. I think you don't mean I should change the crop, do you? The picture is equivalent to a ~5mm lens in a rectilinear projection, that makes each sides look somewhat stretched of course. I could change the projection but then the proportions wouldn't be true any more. Any other idea? --Code (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm not talking about the crop or the type of panorama projection, but rather about the aspect ration (relationship between height and width) of the whole picture. If, let's say, 70% of the picture is squeezed in the vertical axle then an overall aspect ratio could help, I guess. It's is just an idea. The picture is anyhow really nice. Poco213:45, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2017 at 12:37:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Praha Spanish Synagogue Dome 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Praha Spanish Synagogue Dome 01.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2017 at 21:57:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/Image:DR 50 3552.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DR 50 3552.jpg
Oppose Quite interesting motive and assume that the camera was moved during the take but the image is unfortunately blurred.--Ermell (talk) 07:04, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the idea of a panned train, but apart from the blurring of the train noted by Ermell the top crop is way too tight and I think it would work with the whole locomotive. Daniel Case (talk) 15:02, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2017 at 14:54:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support - The flower isn't too clear, showing that you can't have everything in life, but this is one of the clearest pictures of an entire dragonfly that I've seen on this page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2017 at 16:12:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2017 at 14:30:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Heiligengrabe, Kloster Stift zum Heiligengrabe, Heiliggrabkapelle -- 2017 -- 0008-14.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Heiligengrabe, Kloster Stift zum Heiligengrabe, Heiliggrabkapelle -- 2017 -- 0008-14.jpg
Support - Very nice. It would be good to specify in the file description what the wooden structure is called. I actually don't know off-hand, myself, though of course I've seen them in churches. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:49, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right. May be. But there was nothing really interesting. I tried this while taken the photograph. And a shorter focal length would result in more distortion. And yes, it was a difficult decision. --XRaytalk14:18, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2017 at 18:40:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Maroon Bells at sunrise, Aspen Colorado.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Maroon Bells at sunrise, Aspen Colorado.jpg
Oppose The foreground needs some more brightness, otherwise a good photo. The description is completely missing and a geotag is needed, too. --Code (talk) 06:19, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the way the shadows work to frame the reflection in the water. It's a difficult enough shot to not blowout the sky while still capturing the reflection. Kudos. Atsme📞13:47, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I don't get this attitude towards shadows. Shadows are dark, that's what they are. Sometimes I question whether people look at images full size ot just say "too dark" based on thumbnails (which are always much darker than the image itself). Anyway Neutral because quality is not the best. -- KennyOMG (talk) 14:20, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thanks so very much for the nomination MB298 Info about the shot, it was sunrise, with much of the landscape in shadows so in post-processing, I kept it that way. When I looked up other photos of Maroon Bells shots there were a lot that were over processed. I was going for a lighter touch for what it looked like at the time. I do take mild exception to the "not the best" comment though KennyOMG.The quality of your comment is not the best, not helpful & not productive. None-the-less appreciate all the comments & taking the time to take a look and comment! (LashaullLashaull (talk)
@Lashaull: Thank you for giving some information about the picture. I think very little brightening of the shadows were needed to improve it. Could you consider adding a location tag of the place and some technical information about the shot to the description page? Regards --Code (talk) 04:53, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Lashaull: , if you're quoting me please do so by the letter: "not the best". If you want to get offended at an objective observation, well, I guess that's our prerogative but that doesn't help anyone. You should also note the fact that I voted neutral on your pic as I actually like it enough not to oppose on the issue of general softness and lack of details in the shadows. -- KennyOMG (talk) 22:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 07:52:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Thorn, lantaarnpaal met de Abdijkerk RM35490 op de achtergrond foto6 2017-05-10 16.14.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Thorn, lantaarnpaal met de Abdijkerk RM35490 op de achtergrond foto6 2017-05-10 16.14.jpg
Oppose Sorry but for me it is a completely usual shot. I think millions of people everyday are taking (or are cabale of) such shots when they are walking in their districts surroundings or parks. QP title is perfect fit for it. -- Pofka (talk) 10:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This motif doesn't speak to me, as I find the village in the background much more interesting than the lamppost that more or less dominates the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:25, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 21:56:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Big Chair at Little Island Park LR.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Big Chair at Little Island Park LR.jpg
@Ikan Kekek: Fair enough. I don't think I should move the wood. It's a public park. Maybe one day if I'm there and the lighting is better and I Lightroom out the wood, it'll look better. I don't know if you noticed on the file page, but it's about 8 feet (2.4m) from the top of the chair back down to the sand. I find it a fascinating a fascinating subject. Thoughts? PumpkinSkytalk10:54, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think it might be OK to crop so that the big sticks aren't in the foreground. This motif does not fascinate me, but because it fascinates you, I think you will come up with a really good depiction of it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:30, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ikan Kekek I've uploaded a cropped version so we can see what it looks like. Thanks for the "vote of confidence", but I'm not so sure. I think the Goddess of Photography has decided I'm destined only for QI. The only reason I have one FP is because Cart saw a photo of mine and told me to retake it with the big leaf in the middle. PumpkinSkytalk18:03, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah well, now the grass is distracting me. Sorry about that. You could try pinging everyone who voted to see what they think, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, such an extraordinary piece of furniture need something that will give the viewer a sense of just how big it is. I think I've seen this chair with a dog in it somewhere (although I think a dog lounging under it would be better). And there is of course the grass in the foreground. I don't think this need to be shot full frontal, maybe some angle gives it a better/calmer surrounding. --cart-Talk19:27, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 20:04:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Crooked Creek landscape, Ivvavik National Park, YT.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Crooked Creek landscape, Ivvavik National Park, YT.jpg
Comment In honor of our good neighbors to the north celebrating their 150th today, I have decided to nominate the first of several pictures I believe to be FP quality I took two years ago on a week-and-a-half whitewater-rafting trip down the Firth River in Ivvavik National Park, way up in the northwestern corner of Canada. It is said (and it's very probably true) that fewer people visit Ivvavik, which will hopefully someday soon become part of a World Heritage Site inscription, each year than climb Everest, so for those of you who attach increased value to a nominee because it's a hard picture to get access to to take you can consider this (and it is hard to get access to, as you can only get there by plane or (sometimes) boat).
I hope, whether you support or not, you find these landscapes as interesting to look at as I did to visit and camp out in them. This is a different Arctic, far wilder than the ones we have seen in the many excellent pictures from Arctic Scandinavia nominated by Ximonic and some others here, a place I felt privileged to be and grateful to Parks Canada and the outfitters and guides at Nahanni River Adventures for the opportunity to take these pictures and share them with everyone here. Daniel Case (talk) 20:04, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Nice landscape but a few (week) dust spots in the sky should be removed and the quite blurry sides need some sharpening.--Ermell (talk) 21:14, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Mild/moderate Support - I really like this composition. I wish the trees in the middleground were a bit clearer, and I previously thought I might have seen a bit of a magenta tinge on some of them, but I'm mostly seeing a mix of green and brown now, as would be expected. But that's a little pixel-peepish, and the overall picture is great. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:07, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For me the composition is just not remarkable enough, sorry. It's too flat, and with too much empty sky. -- King of♥♦♣ ♠ 04:00, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry Daniel, a lot of artefacts around the tree-tips due to oversharpening, well visible in full resolution, best visible in the region I annotated, but also elsewhere. The previous version was better in my opinion. --Llez (talk) 08:03, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ermell, Llez, Jebulon, and Martin Falbisoner: Let the other image (which I am so embarrassed by as to have overwritten it on my hard drive) stand as a warning about what happens when you try to fix this with a brush in the small hours of the morning when you should be going to bed. But at least I learned something ...
I went back to square four, as it were, and started over by using the radial filter and not laying it on so thick. Also, I got rid of some more faint dust spots I saw and tuned up the color to account for the sharpening. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As much as I'd like to support this nom for its depiction of a truly remote place - and also for its pleasant composition of course - I can't come to terms with its technical quality. What's going on here? At 100% the image almost looks like a Bob Ross painting. Sorry. ;-) I mean it's totally oversharpened and there's still a lot of artefacts. Maybe you should try and redevelop it from scratch. There's definitely FP potential here. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:46, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination I am heartened to read all the support for the composition, and I think when my vacation is over in a few days I will take Martin's suggestion. I have learned a lot more about processing these Arctic landscapes since this one; the more I read here the more I think I'd be better starting completely from scratch. Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2017 at 09:02:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Giant tiger land snail (Achatina achatina).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Giant tiger land snail (Achatina achatina).jpg
Oppose Per others. Using a flash totally makes sense in this environment, but it's a bit too much/direct for me here. I guess that's why some people come up with (and lug around) stuff like this ;-) --El Grafo (talk) 07:19, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Flash alone may not be the issue here; but flash combined with ISO 800. Flash is very sensitive; so anything above ISO 400 is not good with it. Jee03:32, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2017 at 15:03:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Comment So what? This was neither the sense nor the goal of this photo. F13 is a good choice of a picture like this. --Hockei (talk) 18:51, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017 at 07:54:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Кованска Река.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Кованска Река.jpg
Oppose I can accept images with slow shutter speed to create the water effect, but something must have sharpness.--Peulle (talk) 16:52, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2017 at 13:05:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Théâtre (façade) de La Roche-sur-Yon.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Théâtre (façade) de La Roche-sur-Yon.jpg
Oppose per others. A well-done front view, but there are so many other neoclassical buildings with colonnades and pediments that this would have to be a very exceptional example to make FP purely as a front view. Daniel Case (talk) 04:23, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2017 at 11:26:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
mild oppose I don't know. The image appears overly dark/underexposed, the WB is too cold, and colors are too saturated. Maybe you can rework the file from your raw? --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:12, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - it's a beautiful image - the long exposure works really well on the cascading waterfalls, but at a nominal cost of the foreground. Atsme📞15:44, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose WB too cool, per Martin (waterfalls should not be tinged blue in the absence of a blue sky above, and even then not this much) and background is too unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 15:36, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 17:12:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Аквадукт, Скопје, 2014.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Аквадукт, Скопје, 2014.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2017 at 09:23:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Areca and Vanilla DSC 1306.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Areca and Vanilla DSC 1306.jpg
+1, I missed that since I was only looking at the photo on a white background. Silly me, thanks Wolf for noticing. --cart-Talk12:19, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Request Thanks Wolf im Wald, cart for noting that. Could you advise if I can upload a new version of the same file (the file is already a QI and I wonder if this affects overwrite policy). I have a slightly rotated and cropped version without the white showing that I can upload as new version.-- Shankar Raman (talk) 12:55, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Shankar Raman: please go ahead and upload as a new version of the same file, that's absolutely no problem in this case: "The image creator may make minor changes where they feel this would be uncontroversial wrt the promotional status (for example, removing dust spots or fixing a minor tilt)". --El Grafo (talk) 13:40, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict)No problem. :) It's ok to overwrite the file since this is a small thing that only improves the picture. It should have been noticed at QIC, but the reviewer was probably too wowed to see it, just like me. Congrats on a fantastic photo! BTW, a geotag would be very nice, please. --cart-Talk13:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm sure all those people who like to make these blurred-forest pics that are all the rage will find this one very interesting to work with. Daniel Case (talk) 04:56, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2017 at 05:46:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2017 at 04:04:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Krah HDPE pipe instalation in Mexico.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Krah HDPE pipe instalation in Mexico.jpg
CommentMartin Falbisoner, got about square, and I do a lot of squares (from my days of Mamiyas), but this time I wanted the amplitude of the shot, to convey the feeling of being inside the pipe. And yes, same construction site. The interesting here is the type of pipe and its application within the world of sewers, the pipe technology, etc. 5 miles of 120" diameter plastic pipe for a low pressure application. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:37, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Because of the cables and the man, the off-center landscape format works. I'm a bit tired of that all round subjects "should be" centered in a square frame, it gets boring after a while. Here you get a sense of space inside this huge pipe. --cart-Talk09:58, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Question - As others have said, this is a very good photo. One question: Is there a halo over the nearest worker's helmet, or is that just a natural reflection? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:20, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2017 at 12:29:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Nørre Vorupør beach, 2017-04-14 4.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Nørre Vorupør beach, 2017-04-14 4.jpg
The "cottagey stately home" is truly bizarre... I really admire Parr. Not only because he's in a position to canonize his own collections). Unlike other artists like Roger Ballen, Parr always achieves to identify and make tangible a bright side in everything absurd and ugly, taking a huge part of the sting out of it. I'm really looking forward to visiting a major exhibition in Munich this fall. But that's off-topic... ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:56, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The overall impression of a picture. Basically quality, composition, subject, originality. Not so much the usefulness for a certain project. I find much of what a makes good picture here. The quality is very high, the picture gives a good impression of the size of the beach, the composition is more than average (look at the coastline, the clouds, the people and the two ships). It's very documentary because it shows the Danish beach the way Danish beaches usually look like (colours, weather and so on) as far as I can remember from my childhood. Certainly one of our finest pictures. We recently promoted some pictures by Martin Falbisoner (which deserved the star of course). They also were nothing but "a photo of a beach" and you didn't complain. I don't really understand your voting pattern. --Code (talk) 06:22, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cropping so the horizon is at the 2/3 point means that the sky contains a greater proportion of cloud and loses much of the blue sky above. I'm not sure the proportion change affects the composition one way or the other much, but the loss of so much blue makes the picture less sunny. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have put them together to judge. I do appreciate crop suggestions, and often make them myself, so I know a picture can be made stronger by removing parts. But here I think it changes the sky from "blue with some clouds" to "cloudy with some blue" and that's not the mood I want to suggest nor does it best represent the weather conditions at the time. -- Colin (talk) 12:54, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2017 at 08:49:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Victor Hugo buste marbre Musée Rodin S.00464 Paris.pngCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Victor Hugo buste marbre Musée Rodin S.00464 Paris.png
Support A not so big, but stunning work of art. This is a marble head of Victor Hugo, sculpted by Auguste Rodin, 1889. As it is very detailed, one ca n see how the artist worked. On display at the Musée Rodin in Paris, France. Original and transparent background versions available in file page, where one can find a complete description as well.-- Jebulon (talk) 08:49, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support The quality is very good but I'm not sure about "wow" factor. Should be interesting to see if anybody opposes because of that.--Peulle (talk) 16:26, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I thank you for support, but I'm not sure I appreciate the comment. Maybe you should not ask for oppose votes this way... It is just the bust of one of the most famous writers in the world by one of the most famous sculptor in the world. I find it excellent, very powerful and dynamic. That's my own wow factor. We don't have many FP of sculptures here in Commons, and I don't want to nominate my "Thinker" you can judge in QIC...--Jebulon (talk) 23:58, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. I find it odd to see a certain lack of appreciation for Rodin in this thread; my father considered him one of the greatest sculptors of all time. For whatever it's worth, so do I, and the Musee Rodin would appear in a group of museums just under the greatest multiple-artist museums (the Louvre and the Orsay) if a friend were asking me for recommendations of art museums to visit while in Paris. A photo that clearly shows these kinds of details is valuable and fully comparable to photos of great paintings that we've featured. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've always been bugged by the low forehead of his "Thinker". A true thinker should have a high and broad forehead...like this chick I know... DaphneLantier05:38, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. But in all seriousness, I'd no sooner criticize the content or execution of Rodin's compositions than those of Michelangelo, Donatello, Brancusi or Giovanni and Andrea Pisano - the very best sculptors whose names I can think of (of course, there were equally great ones in ancient Rome, Greece, Egypt, China, etc., etc.). To me, it's like saying Beethoven should have done something other than what he did in any of his symphonies - I just wouldn't think of suggesting that. Instead, I love them as they are and try to understand them through analysis and just listen and appreciate them. Rodin's politics are another matter, as he was unfortunately and shockingly an anti-Dreyfusard. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:17, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When I stated that "I'm not particularly fond of neither Rodin nor Hugo," it was in fact politics that I had in mind. But this is not the place to elaborate on that. ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:21, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
He was lucky he didn't get syphilis. Amazing how many men of culture patronized prostitutes in those days, when syphilis was incurable and the attempts at treatment - with salts of white mercury - were sometimes worse than the disease. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know as author, I can say that it is whatever you want, but a "standard studio photo of a sculpture"... by the way, have a look to the same object photographied by the museum (link in file page), and compare ! For me, no tripod, through a glass, complicated background etc... Respectfully, the reviewer completely missed the point (but cannot admit this anymore, of course it is to late now...) and no mater our tastes about Rodin and Hugo as persons--Jebulon (talk) 22:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of my fondest memories of any visit to an art museum was the special reception for attendees at Wikimania 2015 at the Soumaya, which started (as most visits to the Soumaya do) with the sixth floor and its largest collection of Rodins outside France. So having a featured picture of a Rodin here on Commons, taken by a Wikipedian, brings this full circle.
Yes, by itself, it's just a nice picture of a bust. But digitizations of great art here on Commons done by us instead of the institutions (which may not always be free images) have not always worked out, and for Jebulon to have done as well as he did with a three-dimensional bust as opposed to a painting or other two-dimensional work is in my opinion worthy a featured status. Daniel Case (talk) 04:08, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I may not adore the bust itself (he looks a bit mean), but making such a striking photo of a totally white sculpture in the scant light of a museum deserves an FP. --cart-Talk09:36, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2017 at 21:00:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Neutral I think you take the noise reduction in the sky a few steps (way) too far. I do understand why (comment after comment about noise on a 30+ mp image) but this looks like you have just cut the sky and put in some generic image with 1/4th the resolution of the rest. I, for one, would love to see a noisy sky with a much more natural look. One more thing I wanted to ask is the dark dark grey aura around the building, especially visible around the tree on the left. Is that due to your HDR process? Or somehow the denoise? Something else? Regardless one thing that def should be fixed is the horizontal perspective, currently the left side is "closer" than the right. -- KennyOMG (talk) 21:36, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Is denoising causing the subtle blotches of different shades of blue in the sky? In any case, the photo is big and pretty, so I think it's an FP, regardless. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WeakSupport. The facade is a bit overexposed in the red channel, but I know night shots like that are hard to get right without making it a dull grey. -- King of♥♦♣ ♠ 06:03, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2017 at 21:01:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Καινούργιο Χωριό Κρήτης 2216.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Καινούργιο Χωριό Κρήτης 2216.jpg
Comment I find something irresistible with this otherwise ordinary abandoned house lying in mainland Crete, which features of an exterior oven. It also feels like it can tell a short history of the Greek countryside, which was largely abandoned after the first post war decades and only recently there has been a try to return, which fell on to the economic crisis (depicted here by the unfinished renovation work).
Oppose per Colin. Too much going on to really be able to focus on one aspect, and the light's kind of dull. Maybe a tighter frame on just some of it might work. Daniel Case (talk) 16:40, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2017 at 18:56:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Пелистер 02.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Пелистер 02.jpg
Comment Undecide her because the image is very nice, def FP material BUT the selective desaturation resulted in quite annoying posterization in the clouds. Sad thing is tihs would work just as well, if not better, in b&w. -- KennyOMG (talk) 20:30, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Christmas in (almost) July! I like the composition. The sky is a bit blotchy, but the blotches are so subtle, I don't mind them much at all. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:34, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2017 at 05:13:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Hondsrug, De Strubben-Kniphorstbosch 004.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hondsrug, De Strubben-Kniphorstbosch 004.jpg
Weak support Nothing very special as mentioned before by others but the view and colors and definitely pleasant here. -- Pofka (talk) 11:09, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 12:09:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Palace Pier March 2017.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Palace Pier March 2017.jpg
Support - While looking at this photo, I feel a little bit like I'm being compressed from above, but so what? This strikes me as a really good classic photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:05, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2017 at 00:43:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Yellowjacket on a bougainvillea.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Yellowjacket on a bougainvillea.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 23:13:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Ottawa youth breakdance during Canada 150 celebrations.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ottawa youth breakdance during Canada 150 celebrations.jpg
Oppose Thanks for your nom. Maybe you'd like to redevelop your photo? Currently it's very noisy and there are many CAs. The composition's also a bit random, although the facial expressions are great. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:11, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Original, Withdraw for technical modifications. Will remove CAs, vibrance, and denoise. Cyali (talk) 16:58, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2017 at 18:58:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Ugolin et ses enfants Musée Rodin S.1427 Paris.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ugolin et ses enfants Musée Rodin S.1427 Paris.jpg
SupportUgolino and his children -big size-, by Auguste Rodin. This bronze group is on display in the basin of the garden of the Hôtel Biron, now the Musée Rodin in Paris, France. It shows a scene from the Inferno, by Dante, about w:Ugolin della Gherardesca.-- Jebulon (talk) 18:58, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per KoH & Mile: I can see this being a QI, VI, or possibly Wikipedia FP, but for Commons FP it's lacking a bit on the WOW side of things for me. The statue itself is interesting, but it was captured in a way that really isn't that special (I guess that's what Mile means with "touristic shot"). I've never been there, but the location (were you really standing in the water, btw?) looks like there would have been some room for you to step back a few more metres and use a longer focal length for better subject-background separation?--El Grafo (talk) 07:01, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Mild Support - Great sculpture. The light could be better on a different day, which is what causes me to hesitate a bit, but I think the depiction of the subject is clear enough to feature, at least until a greater version comes along. The background is simply what's there and doesn't bother me, and it's deliberately faded. The green water isn't that attractive, but again, that's what's there. You have to deal with the scene before you, and when all these things are incidental to the depiction of a great artwork, you tolerate them. Or at least I do. Have most of you been to this sculpture garden? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:06, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There are ways to work around some of those things, at least to some degree, and it is my impression that more could have been done here. But FWIW, the green colour of the water is a big plus in my book, as it builds a nice colour palette together with the green-ish sculpture and the lawn and hedges in the background. --El Grafo (talk) 06:47, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please help me: how to make an FP with the photograph of a masterpiece of sculpture ? But you made me a compliment when saying "usual tourist shot". I removed by cloning out almost ten of "usual tourists" (sitting on the bench, walking on the stairs, walking in background etc...) on this picture, and you did not see this !--Jebulon (talk) 15:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2017 at 20:00:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Weak oppose It's pretty enough to look at but for an FP I would like a wider crop and preferably all the slots filled in the case. --cart-Talk08:53, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per cart; also it's a little dark at the top edge. A shame because it seems we have so few FPs of musical instruments. Daniel Case (talk) 04:55, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 17:30:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Silja Serenade in Stockholm.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Silja Serenade in Stockholm.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2017 at 21:59:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:PelisterPatekaPoKamenjar.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:PelisterPatekaPoKamenjar.jpg
Support It's just a conditional support. There green CAs at bottom right and geo location is missing. Please check your image. --XRaytalk04:57, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A lot of snow, rocks and sunlight and a dog that better should have turned round. No FP for me, sorry.--Ermell (talk) 08:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Also per Ermell. There's nothing really wrong with the picture, there's just not too much excitement either. Better light offering more contrast between the sky and the hill may help if you're going back there.--Peulle (talk) 10:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2017 at 06:37:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Beskid Sądecki in winter 2016 05.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Beskid Sądecki in winter 2016 05.jpg
Neutral Martin is right, but I would have liked less beaten path and more misty mountains. When I look at a photo like this, I want to feel like I'm the only one seeing this. Here it is like I'm standing on a busy highway, it goes against the rest of the calm serene landscape. --cart-Talk09:02, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I don't find this image convincing. While there are pleasant light and colours and beautiful haze in the valley, there are some elements breaking the harmony. First, the traces that indicate that an elephant herd has crossed by, then the trees on the left which seem somewhat unbalanced to me and finally the top of the fir tree that's emerging over the rest on the right. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:13, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 00:45:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:'David' by Michelangelo Fir JBU005 denoised.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:'David' by Michelangelo Fir JBU005 denoised.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 17:24:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support - This photo gives me the creeps, even though I'm a member of a predator species, too. Very good composition and excellent capture of the moment. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 04:22:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Agapanthus 'Windlebrook' 05.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Agapanthus 'Windlebrook' 05.jpg
Info Almost opening flower bud of an Agapanthus 'Windlebrook'. A fairly new English cultivar, beautiful dark blue in color. All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:22, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Question - Very pretty buds, but is the right side of the stem in fact magenta? I think there may be some CA on the stem, and mostly but not only its right side. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:15, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2017 at 14:26:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Heiligengrabe, Kloster Stift zum Heiligengrabe, Stiftskirche -- 2017 -- 7162-8.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Heiligengrabe, Kloster Stift zum Heiligengrabe, Stiftskirche -- 2017 -- 7162-8.jpg
The building is missing an important part, there are windows only at one side. That's why I'd chosen this side as bottom. -- XRaytalk04:30, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 23:03:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Hinge on blue dumpster.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hinge on blue dumpster.jpg
Support Minimalistic and nice colours. This is exactly the blue that works very well with rust. So scratch the door a bit or damage it otherwise and go back there in a few years ;-) --Basotxerri (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2017 at 00:04:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Turret Arch through North Window.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Turret Arch through North Window.jpg
Info I have no permission to publish their faces. Besides I do not know their identities, so unfortunately I can not ask for permission now. Therefore I have blurred their faces for legal reasons. -- Wolf im Wald11:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The faces of the two people on the left seem to have been purposely blurred. That kind of editing is a hard line for me.--Peulle (talk) 13:18, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Info I have no permission to publish their faces. Besides I do not know their identities, so unfortunately I can not ask for permission now. Therefore I have blurred their faces for legal reasons. -- Wolf im Wald11:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wolf im Wald, there are no "legal reasons" to blur their faces. The law in the US permits photos of identifiable people to be taken and published and we have many thousands of such images on Commons. Nor is their, imo, any moral reason to do so as your image does not harm anyone's reputation. Consider my own photo of a railway station which contains hundreds of identifiable people. I do not wish to support this image while the people are blurred: they are in the photo and should be displayed properly and their presence gives scale to the subject. There's even a series in The Guardian newspaper called "That's me in the picture" where subjects celebrate their appearance in some famous photo, and often they were not aware the photo was taken, never mind were asked permission. A national park has people in it. Let's be happy about that rather than blur it out. -- Colin (talk) 11:33, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know their nationality. In Germany, we have a different legal situation. Indeed German law allows you to publish images with recognizable people on it but only if there are at least 5 or 10 people on the image. If there are less than 5 people on the image it can quickly become a problem for the photographer. Maybe the people are Germans and I uploaded the image from Germany. I think in this case they could take me to court (in Germany). If I would be an US-citizen and the people on the image too, I would agree with your opinion. But this is a very popular location for tourists from all over the world and the legal situation of my country does not allow this, as far as I know. Do you understand my situation? Regards, -- Wolf im Wald11:51, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm of the same opinion of Colin; this was a public place and people must be aware that images are taken in such places. As long as the people are not the subject (just caught on camera by coincidence), the photographer cannot be blamed. Cropping them out would be acceptable, but censoring images crosses the line IMO.--Peulle (talk) 12:58, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wolf im Wald, why on Earth would they take you to court? No reasonable person could have an expectation of privacy in these wide-open spaces, and they are not depicted doing anything unusual or sexual. Are you afraid they'd want payment? Next time, maybe you should ask the people for permission. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:20, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
'LivioAndronico, did you ask Wolf im Wald permission to clone out the people? If not, then that's really disrespectful to alter his photo and especially to alter it while it is an FPC. To be honest, I'd prefer to see the people but without the blur, unless those people are friends of the photographer and have asked to be made unidentifiable. The US has no issues with photographing people in public places, and in fact there's a good chance they'll be happy to see their photos on Wiki in this case. It gives a sense of scale. Such a significant change requires pinging all previous voters, not just those who objected to the blurred faces (which I do also). I think you should consider reverting and asking first. -- Colin (talk) 21:50, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Of course Colin I warned him, anyway I do not think that's your problem. And why ask if you believe, wrongly, to be right? Besides, the photo is here and visible to everyone. --LivioAndronico(talk)22:04, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To me the people were an important part of the composition and I'm considering changing my vote to oppose now. But first I'd like to hear if Wolf im Wald agrees with the editing done by LivioAndronico2013. The blurred faces were no big deal and I find it quite respectful to blur them regardless what the legal situation in the U.S. or elsewhere is. --Code (talk) 05:55, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted the change per Commons:Overwriting existing files. This official guideline requires you to ask first, not just tell them afterwards you've made significant alterations to their photo while it was their nomination at FPC. If Wolf im Wald is happy with the edit he can restore it, though I caution that really he then needs to ping everyone who has voted here. Livio, you know full well that photographers here can generally do a better job making edits to their raw files than anyone else can with the JPG. This is Wolf im Wald's photo and you should respect that. -- Colin (talk) 07:33, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the version with the people because they are a good scale for the size of the arch and they improve the composition in my opinion. I blurred them moderately not to hurt the picture. I think they are not clearly recognizable but they are blurred so moderately that you only can realize that in full view if you look out for their faces. Therefore I think the current version is a good compromise between these aspects. -- Wolf im Wald11:37, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is better framing. As for the faces, having been involved in a similar dispute here over the appearance of identifiable people I photographed in a public place in the UK without their consent ... I defer to Wolf here. Had I been the one taking the picture, I wouldn't have blurred the faces out; indeed they are well smaller than a thumbprint (the standard we always used in journalism for when you have to identify someone, or crop them out). But ... there's no requirement under American law that you do this, which means equally that there's no requirement that you leave them unblurred. All we need to do is categorize it appropriately. Daniel Case (talk) 16:51, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support The version with faces! It is a great view and those people give it scale plus a little human touch. -- Colin (talk) 07:52, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support FP for me now. I do not know the legal situation in America. In Germany the people would be ok as an secondary accessory I think. --Milseburg (talk) 11:13, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 15:09:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info The TwinTowers (Fanny-Zobel-Strasse, Berlin-Treptow) as seen from the opposite side of the river Spree during a marvelous sunset. I've taken this picture shortly before this capture. Here you can find some other pictures of the same evening and (nearly) the same place: [1], [2], [3]. The vignetting was left intentionally to emphasize the centered composition. All by me. --Code (talk) 15:09, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A good image with plenty of wow factor, IMO, but I think it could be even better if cropped a little at the bottom (though not so much that it cuts the green reflection). Opinions?--Peulle (talk) 16:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 10:13:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Mailbox under altocumulus clouds.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mailbox under altocumulus clouds.jpg
Can't do anything about additional sharpness but it's not tilted, the mailbox is though and the road is curving, check with flagpoles and masts in the distance. --cart-Talk11:19, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Indeed, nothing really crispy here. The sky is nice but not outstanding to dedicate it 80% of the image. Sorry, not a FP to me Poco219:12, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Yeah, yeah, I get it. Buy a DSLR or get out of the landscape photography business. Same old, same old. --cart-Talk19:53, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 07:30:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
InfoDormition of the Virgin at the right wing of the predella of the Bäckeraltar (altar of the bakers), St. Stephen's parish church, Braunau am Inn, Upper Austria. Anonymous master, around 1490. All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:30, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2017 at 05:28:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support I already liked it a lot when I saw it on Flickr. However, a little bit more brigthness would be good, I think. --Code (talk) 07:16, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it but I wonder if about a 5% crop on the right and 15% on the left would improve it (IOW, crop in to where the shore vegetation starts to turn green). PumpkinSkytalk15:18, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Mild Oppose - I think I agree with Charles. In a picture in which everything else is blurred, the subject needs to be really clear. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:44, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 15:48:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Cephonodes kingii MHNT CUT 2010 0 138 Cambridge Park, New South Wales Australia female dorsal.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cephonodes kingii MHNT CUT 2010 0 138 Cambridge Park, New South Wales Australia female dorsal.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 16:01:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Monasterio Hercegovacka Gracanica, Trebinje, Bosnia y Herzegovina, 2014-04-14, DD 14-16 HDR.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Monasterio Hercegovacka Gracanica, Trebinje, Bosnia y Herzegovina, 2014-04-14, DD 14-16 HDR.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2017 at 06:07:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Heiligengrabe, Kloster Stift zum Heiligengrabe, Heiliggrabkapelle -- 2017 -- 9998.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Heiligengrabe, Kloster Stift zum Heiligengrabe, Heiliggrabkapelle -- 2017 -- 9998.jpg
Comment Yes. The focus is on the cross on the desk. The objects on the desk should be sharp, not the elements in the background. IMO it would be disturbing to have the background sharp. May be you try a second view? --XRaytalk07:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination A short decision. I understand your reviews and IMO it's better to withdraw the image. Thank you for all your reviews. --XRaytalk08:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 11:13:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:A Montanhista.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:A Montanhista.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2017 at 01:57:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:160316-031 Bridge near Tatopani.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:160316-031 Bridge near Tatopani.jpg
Oppose Whitebalance is seriously off. See alt; it's not perfect though, feels a bit green. If anyone wants to take a crack at it I'll support. -- KennyOMG (talk) 11:52, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I actually find the other version prettier, but I'm voting for this one on the basis that this is presumably closer to the original color. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:49, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017 at 04:52:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017 at 03:08:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support ...but then you'd cut out that nice little climber twirly thingy (whatever that is called in bothanicalese). --cart-Talk07:46, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
SupportOppose It a great subject and the photo you took is fine, but woa, this is not reality. There's far too much contrast, the leaves just wrong colour and I'm not seeing fine texture anywhere. I've seen plastic flowers that look more convincing than this :-). Trust me this is my reaction before I look at the EXIF to see what you did. We're a conservative bunch on Commons FP.} I'd support a much more conservative processing of this flower. BTW do you know the cultivar here? -- Colin (talk) 12:25, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Some suggestions for order of processing
The tone curve here is "Medium Contrast". For most of my images I use Linear and adjust the contrast using the other controls. Sometimes Medium Contrast is worth a try. I wouldn't use it as standard. Be aware though that if you do use it, the scene already starts off with contrast so the Clarity is just adding more.
Set the exposure so that the midtones look right. Adjust the global contrast if required (I rarely reduce it unless an HDR scene and am unlikely to increase it beyond +25, and often untouched). In this image you have't altered either, which might be fine if the original shot was exposed correctly.
Adjust the highlights and shadows somewhat if required to bring in highlight and shadow detail. Rarely need to go above +/- 50 here other than for an extreme high dynamic scene or an HDR image. In my experience, these are the main controls for removing the warnings of blown hightlights or shadow crushed to black. In this scene, there shouldn't have been any of either to begin with. Then adjust the white and black if required to stretch the histogram towards but not reaching clipping/crushing -- though not all subjects benefit from this and a low key or high key image will naturally sit towards one end of the histogram or the other. Here I see Highlights -79, Shadows +19, Whites -100, Blacks -12. I'd say that the highlights and whites settings are very extreme.
Some images benefit from some added Clarity, particularly if the local contrast is low due to atmospheric effects or the shortcomings of a telephoto lens. For a natural close image like this consider 0..25 perhaps. Sometimes it helps to come back to the image after a break and you reconsider it with fresh eyes. A Clarity setting of +69 is radioactive. For black&white photography, such extreme local contrast can have an artistic effect, but for colour and for natural scenes or for recording artwork, that's far too high.
The sharpening settings are complex and Lightroom does come with two useful presents for Landscape and Portraits, which are worth a try. Getting this right needs a book chapter but I think masking of +93 seems odd as that is practically turning sharpening off.
Your image is only ISO 200 so will barely need any NR. If you are careful to not oversharpen and don't have to lift shadows much, it might not need any at all. The level here is 40 which is the sort of desperate "turn it to waxy plastic" setting one might use on an ISO 3200 image. If you do feel it necessary, try 10 and rarely will you need to go above 25. You shouldn't have to touch the colour NR at all, unless dealing with super high ISO.
Avoid the colour controls alone for now. I see "Blue Saturation +12". On nearly all my colour photos, these are not necessary to adjust. Certainly with natural outdoor light there is little excuse to alter. Your camera should do a reasonable job with the white temperature/tint, and Lightroom has its own "auto" setting which sometimes is worth considering, but this is the main white balance is the main control you may need to tweak a little at times.
The camera profile here is "Camera Landscape". This is Adobe's attempt at emulating your Nikon's "Landscape" profile. You will find that choosing one of these profiles makes quite drastic changes to the colours and tone and certainly shouldn't be the last setting you alter. FWIW, I have mine on "Camera Standard" and don't change it. This is Adobe's emulation of my Sony's standard profile, and I find it a little more interesting than "Adobe Standard" which is their extremely neutral profile. I can't really think that "Landscape" is appropriate for flowers, but don't know what Nikon's profile does. I suggest you stick with either of the two standard profiles you like best and leave that alone. Avoid "Vivid" unless you join 500px.
Avoid applying circular gradient filters or vignettes unless trying to solve a problem or are going for a very arty photo. For most "documentary photography" like this flower, they aren't helpful or required.
Of course, everyone does it differently and there is always more than one way and matters of taste. I recommend Jeff Schewe's The Digital Negative book. -- Colin (talk) 12:25, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Colin, since you offered these processing tips I've tried to incorporate them. I have my camera take a RAW and JPG and the version I just uploaded looks very much like the JPG from the camera. I guess I should do that more often. I've watched or read many people's ideas on processing and they vary widely. Thanks for the tips. PumpkinSkytalk13:09, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
At the Botanical Garden I take a photo of the info plaques they have for the for the plants I take photos of. The plaque for this one had the Latin name, common name, and that it was host to two types of butterfly: Variegated Fritillary and Gulf Fritillary. So, I don't know the cultivar.PumpkinSkytalk13:14, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017 at 06:27:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:ADAC-Zentrale, Munich, March 2017-03.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:ADAC-Zentrale, Munich, March 2017-03.jpg
Info The main office complex of the ADAC in Munich was designed by Sauerbruch Hutton and opened in 2012. I've already successfully nominated another, not too different image a few months ago. So why another nom? Well, my first picture was a straightforward architecture shot with a rather conventional composition. This one, however, is a bit more complicated. The framing's a bit heavy and the reflections are much more distracting, making the image significantly more art(s)y if you will. I like it especially for its wild interplay of colors, lines, and shapes. All by me, --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:27, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2017 at 09:13:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Round ribbontail ray from Lakshadweep.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Round ribbontail ray from Lakshadweep.jpg
Support It's super easy to identify technical flaws - by ordinary standards. These don't apply here, imo. This is an underwater shot after all, showing a ray in its natural habitat in a most impressive way. In short: the wow is very mitigating ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The lack of sharpness is too much for me to actively support it, but I wanted to register that I love the composition. Big wow factor. --Peulle (talk) 22:07, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Martin. Underwater shots should probably have different quality standards compared to the usual shots. -- Pofka (talk) 10:41, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - When I realize I'm rooting for a file to be promoted, that's time to vote for it. Excellent camouflage by the ray, yet it is quite clear enough to see. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:37, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 10:48:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Golemo Ezero Pelister.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Golemo Ezero Pelister.jpg
Weak support I was choosing between weak support and weak oppose for like 10 minutes here. The decision was that image nomination which attracts your eyes for such time should get a chance to be saved by others. It looks quite pleasant, especially those blue mountains in the background, however something is clearly missing here to support it completely. -- Pofka (talk) 08:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Constructive oppose Like Poco, the overall lighting does it in for me. But unlike him, I think the composition might work given not only stronger light but perhaps a clear sky. And it needs to be sharper at distance. Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 05:27:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.08.23.-09-Vogelstangsee Mannheim--Hoeckerschwan.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.08.23.-09-Vogelstangsee Mannheim--Hoeckerschwan.jpg
It was very difficult to get the swan as it is now so I won't change it again. I just wanted to give it a chance because of very good feedbacks from people outside of wikimedia. --Hockei (talk) 19:34, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As well as the blurred thing in the corner, the lighting is quite harsh, which isn't very flattering. It isn't really jumping out at me wrt wow, and for such a common park/pond bird that is really very accessible to many people. -- Colin (talk) 21:24, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2017 at 19:34:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Montaña de la Fuente 02.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Montaña de la Fuente 02.jpg
Support More details would be great but I don't need them in this case. This is an awesome, wonderfully layered landscape and I don't pixelpeep here. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:35, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Martin and really good composition. The hazy blue mountain in the background is OK, and everything closer is detailed enough to show a barren landscape with patches of green plants. In this case, my feeling is that needing more details means ignoring the macroscopic level. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:02, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very interesting composition indeed, but the details quality really doubtfully fits the FP standards. -- Pofka (talk) 10:34, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017 at 14:40:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Neutral Good details of this nice bird and also good perspective. But I'm not convinced of the background of it and also of the somewhat too tight crop above. --Hockei (talk) 05:01, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For this sort of photo, it is crucial to position the bird where there is foliage behind the bird, otherwise correct exposure is impossible. With such a long tail, if I leave more space above, then the bird will be lost. Charles (talk) 17:20, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice balance of bird and environment. WB looks a little warm, but if it's OK with Charles I don't mind (and it is in the tropics). Daniel Case (talk) 02:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 12:54:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:V78A5310.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:V78A5310.jpg
Support I like the contrast between the mud puddles and disturbed earth in the foreground vs. the sublimity of the distant peaks. Daniel Case (talk) 17:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2017 at 16:58:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:A view from the northeast coast of Kåfjorden, 2012 March.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:A view from the northeast coast of Kåfjorden, 2012 March.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2017 at 17:00:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Bleached sandstone - Valley of Fire.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bleached sandstone - Valley of Fire.jpg
Support. Great colors, though the sharpening radius used may have been too high, perhaps to compensate for the slight softness throughout the image. -- King of♥♦♣ ♠ 03:25, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Moderate Support - Didn't really strike me as a thumbnail, but great at larger sizes, except for the sky, which is a bit blotchy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:32, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2017 at 21:00:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Casa histórica de Abbasi, Kashan, Irán, 2016-09-19, DD 75.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Casa histórica de Abbasi, Kashan, Irán, 2016-09-19, DD 75.jpg
Info View of one of the six courtyards of the Abbāsi House, a large traditional historical house located in Kashan, Iran. Built during the late 18th century, it is said to have been the property of a famous cleric. All by me, Poco221:00, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 13:32:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Ceiling of "Loggia d'onore" in Palazzao Te,Mantua.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ceiling of "Loggia d'onore" in Palazzao Te,Mantua.jpg
Info The Loggia owes its name to the decorations related to the Stories of David, frescoed in the lunettes and in the vaulted ceiling.
The large porch well sums up the life in the villa, opening onto the Courtyard of Honour with a central arch and towards the fish ponds and garden, once full of flowers and plants, with three arches supported by groups of four columns.
The frescoes and stuccoes above the door were made between 1532 and 1534 but the Loggia had probably already been set up in 1530 to receive the visit of the Emperor Charles V.
The scenes regarding David allude both to the military standards of perfection of Federico, and in events that involved the Duke’s mistress, Isabella Boschetti: like David, in love with Bathsheba, had sent her husband Uriah to die, Federico acted against Isabella’s husband too .
The lunettes dedicated to the biblical hero illustrate David and Goliath (North wall), David fighting against a lion (West wall, lunette on the right), David fighting a bear (lunette on the left), David plays the lyre (South wall). To the same theme also refer the fine stucco medallions around the lunettes on the short walls. The Stories of David return in the octagonal coffers of the vault : The Toilet of Bathsheba, The Bath of Bathsheba and The Drunkenness of Uriah.
The decoration is completed by Gonzaga’s coat of arms, frescoed on the lunette at the center of the West wall and by the modelled stucco Victories at the sides of the arches.All by LivioAndronico(talk)13:32, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Good position and quality, but the very bright center and dark sides gives me some doubts... -- Pofka (talk) 10:27, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 17:32:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Lysekil Panorama.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lysekil Panorama.jpg
Comment - The zoom viewer isn't working for me ("service unavailable"). I hope the problem gets fixed so that I can appropriately judge this photo, which looks very good to me as a thumbnail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:58, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Zoom viewer still wasn't working, but this time, I was able to zoom the photo normally without having my browser turn black. Relaxing panorama with a very pleasant rhythm. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:46, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support A good photo from one of the best view points in town. Feels a bit strange to see someone else here capturing "my" little town. --cart-Talk19:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Exceptional quality but the lighting does not look very pleasant for me here. The bottom of the picture is quite bright, however the rest of it (especially the church and the right corner of sky) are quite dark. Maybe slight increase of brightness would help, not sure. -- Pofka (talk) 10:18, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ermell, it's not just this file that can't be viewed in the zoom viewer, it's the viewer tool itself that is broken at the moment and it is affecting all files AFAICS. Check any other file and you'll get the same message. Don't dismiss a photo because of some fault totally unrelated to the file. --cart-Talk20:46, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to view and enlarge it the normal way, without using the zoom viewer. The first time I tried, it turned every page on my browser black and I had to reboot Firefox, but another time, it worked. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:45, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Please can you include an embedded ICC profile. This image lacks any EXIF data other than the author's name/copyright. -- Colin (talk) 11:40, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And you've been shown how to do it many times, yet you choose not to bother with this basic requirement of a well-formed JPG. -- Colin (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
InfoDaniel Case: I have fixed now the errors. Especially one house face was broken before my fixing. So thank you for your hint to make this image better. I have also done some other minor improvements. And I have also added the EXIF now. But one's again, and my very last explanation to this really silly topic, Colin: I never erase any information of the EXIF. The programs do this. And in the linked discussion I have explained, that I have expended hours and hours to look how to add the colour space information to the EXIF but I failed. And non of your hints worked. Maybe sad, but true. The color space in original is sRGB, this I have proved by a screenshot of the original, unprocessed picture. I have to do better works than to continue this (in my eyes) worthless investigation how to add "sRGB" info into the EXIF. If this one missing information is really the ONLY reason to oppose my picture than do this. But please do not hope for any comprehension or sympathy any more. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:59, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wladyslaw there are plenty photographers here who would be happy to help with your workflow problems if you ask nicely, but for over six years I see you stubbornly refuse offers of help and struggle with this trivially simple aspect of image-generation. Pretty much everyone else here manages to create stitched panoramas and to process their raw files and has no problem with losing the colourspace information. So it is an option you have ticked or unticked or a step you forget to perform that everyone else manages OK. This should have been a "Ah, so that's how you do it, thanks for the info" moment about six years ago, and yet here we still are, and your images do not display correctly on many monitors. I'm sorry that I've been unable to help but I don't have the same camera/software as you though there are plenty others here who do. An embedded ICC colourspace is the only way to ensure your image colours are meaningfully specified. I will check the EXIF later. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with KoH that the polarisation effect is strong, and the combination with a wide-angle view is not always advised because it only then affects one part of the sky. Whether it is "too intense" or "excellent" is a matter of taste. -- Colin (talk) 09:00, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wladyslaw, I recall from earlier discussions you have an expensive monitor and profiling tools. I don't know quite what "calibration" you have done, but this page describes the typical process. One doesn't typically change the monitor settings much other than brightness levels and perhaps the overall R/G/B gains in order to set the white point to 65K. The rest of the "calibration" is actually "profiling" the monitor to determine its own colour profile. This is then saved to disc and the OS updated to use it for that monitor. The colour managed software then converts from the colour profile of an image (sRGB, AdobeRGB, ProPhotoRGB, etc) to the profile of your particular monitor, and this ensures you see accurate colours. But, and here's the big but, colour managed programs such as browsers, GIMP, Photoshop, Lightroom, can only actually do this if the source image contains an ICC colour profile (Photoshop, Lightroom and Safari can infer the ICC colour profile based on a few DCF EXIF tags but other software including all Windows browsers, need the embedded ICC colour profile). So your JPG, that has no EXIF tags (other than name/copyright) and has no embedded profile, is not being colour managed on your computer. Any adjustments you have made to make it look "right" for you are thus peculiar to whatever characteristics are present in the monitor sitting on your desk, but not "right" for anyone else on the planet. If your monitor is a little too yellow, say, then you end up making the image a bit too blue to compensate. So it is rather cheeky for you to suggest KoH needs to calibrate his monitor when in fact you have offered us a JPG that does not conform to any recognised colour profile at all. KoH can calibrate his monitor all he likes, and he still won't see the same sky you do, and nor will anyone else. The process relies on you ensuring the JPG is set to a known standard profile, and the JPG contains enough meta information that software can determine that profile. The irony is that your high quality monitor and profiler ensures you see everyone else's photos accurately, but your faulty workflow ensures nobody else sees your photos accurately. -- Colin (talk) 09:00, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2017 at 21:54:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:OhridskoEzeroKarpaSvNikola.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:OhridskoEzeroKarpaSvNikola.jpg
Support A bit more space at right would've been better (especially so as not to crop so close to that tree), but still pretty nice all in all. DaphneLantier00:10, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2017 at 13:04:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Около Дурман-горы.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Около Дурман-горы.jpg
Support - I'd love to see a bit more of those pretty clouds, but that's no reason for me not to support such a striking picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:57, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2017 at 17:28:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose - Sorry, Mile, I love most of the photos you nominate here, but in this case, I think it's a very useful VI and a good QI but lacks a great or compelling composition for FP. The reflections in the glass facade are the most interesting thing in it to my eyes, but they're not the subject and don't constitute a whole form in this context, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:52, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination As a railway fan i obviously saw some more in it. But have another option, will try with that. --Mile (talk) 17:37, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 19:57:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Aurora amazônica no Lago do Cuniã.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Aurora amazônica no Lago do Cuniã.jpg
Oppose As it is, the technical flaws clearly stand in the way of this as an FP. If you can fix them all, I'll switch my vote to support.--Peulle (talk) 22:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It's a great photo that I want to support, but I'd like to see the dust or water spots taken care of. I don't really care about any of the other technical issues mentioned above, in the context of this fantastic image. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2017 at 13:13:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Balanced Rock sunset.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Balanced Rock sunset.jpg
Support Wow. I'm very impressed. Light, subject, quality, composition, detail - this is certainly one of the best pictures I've ever seen here on FPC. Which lens did you use? --Code (talk) 13:20, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Info Behind the bushes there is the main road of the Arches National Park. So it could be cars, traffic signs or people. Grüße ins Rheinland ;-) -- Wolf im Wald14:14, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. This is man invading nature with metal signs and whatnot. Removing it wouldn't ruin the "authenticity" of the image. DaphneLantier05:33, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Awesome, in the original sense of the word. And I wouldn't suggest cloning out the signs, though if you'd like to crop out a bit of the bottom of the picture frame, I'd be OK with that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:01, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 14:17:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Dome of Saint Peter's Basilica (Interior).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dome of Saint Peter's Basilica (Interior).jpg
Info Giacomo della Porta and Domenico Fontana brought the dome to completion in 1590, the last year of the reign of Sixtus V. His successor, Gregory XIV, saw Fontana complete the lantern and had an inscription to the honour of Sixtus V placed around its inner opening. The next pope, Clement VIII, had the cross raised into place, an event which took all day, and was accompanied by the ringing of the bells of all the city's churches. In the arms of the cross are set two lead caskets, one containing a fragment of the True Cross and a relic of St. Andrew and the other containing medallions of the Holy Lamb.In the mid 18th century, cracks appeared in the dome, so four iron chains were installed between the two shells to bind it, like the rings that keep a barrel from bursting. As many as ten chains have been installed at various times, the earliest possibly planned by Michelangelo himself as a precaution, as Brunelleschi did at Florence Cathedral. All by LivioAndronico(talk)14:17, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For the lack of symmetry (corners, dome). Albeit one might argue that the upper part of the dome sort of render tangent with its lower part, and that might be intentional. - Benh (talk) 17:27, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose saw, tried, it would be so bad if you leave it as it is, i hope you choose some cloudy day and make it better, since is great scene. Problems are not just corners, see statue in bottom, much diffraction is passing thru. --Mile (talk) 11:10, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blown windows and the parts of the baldachin at the bottom are distracting. A pity as the dome itself definitely deserves FP. --Code (talk) 15:55, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 19:05:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Fjordparken trebro.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fjordparken trebro.jpg
Oppose A great scene but the composition is unbalanced. The bridge is off-center, but not so off-center that it makes a meaningful statement. -- King of♥♦♣ ♠ 19:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I can correct that quite easily by cropping parts of the right edge, if that's the only problem you see. Or is it a lack of other factors as well?--Peulle (talk) 19:12, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WeakSupport. There's a little too much in shadow, but long shadows are unavoidable when you want good light. -- King of♥♦♣ ♠ 22:41, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, and thanks for your feedback. Light is definitely on my list of things to work on in future projects. :) --Peulle (talk) 23:43, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bearing in mind King's comment about the shadow, which I still find distracting, there's just way too much going on in the background for me. Daniel Case (talk) 01:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 13:24:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Miyazaki Japanese Moon Bridge 8 LR.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Miyazaki Japanese Moon Bridge 8 LR.jpg
Oppose I'm sorry, but I find the composition somewhat lacking. It's a quality image but too much of the subject is obscured by vegetation to reach FP status for me.--Peulle (talk) 16:09, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
CommentPeulle, Well, I can't cut down the trees; this is a public park. The reason I love the composition is the tunneling\vanishing point effect the trees, creek, and light give this. PumpkinSkytalk17:33, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I too like this little bridge sitting so cozy among the bamboo, its red color an almost exact complementary color to the foliage. I think it might be a tad oversaturated though (could need say minus 8 to 10 desaturation in LR) since the colors almost "shine into each other". Maybe a matter of taste. --cart-Talk19:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle also looks very over-processed -- plastic appearance (too much NR?) and a rather hyper-real contrast/tone. Suggest taming the urge to whack every LR slider :-) -- Colin (talk) 11:35, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment@Colin: I don't come near whacking every LR slider, but do think I tend to slide the ones I use too far and I consciously try to avoid that. I do value your feedback. PumpkinSkytalk12:19, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the warmer colors, especially on the rocks, in this version. It's a natural setting with lots of earth tones that doesn't need to be too cold. Although maybe dialing back on the red and orange saturation wouldn't hurt. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful -- most people do not revisit nominations they have voted on. FPC isn't really intended to be a place to collaborate on processing a raw file. -- Colin (talk) 07:50, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Info People seem to love or strongly dislike the tunneling effect. If an objection is to the bamboo in front of the bridge, there's nothing I can do about that. Using W.carter's and Colin's feedback, I'm offering this alternative version, which is different processing of the same RAW file: I used pretty much the same sliders but didn't move them as far (wink to Colin). Pings for those who already voted: @Colin: @W.carter: @Peulle: @Basotxerri: @Ermell: @Yann: @Johann Jaritz: PumpkinSkytalk12:19, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support This version. Color balance better and composition tighter. This tighter crop works much better, composition now contrasts the colors of streambed, bridge and foliage without being overwhelmed by the bamboo, which now is a graceful framing element. Montanabw (talk) 15:48, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support If you twist my arm, I would go for this one. I try not to do too much pixel peeping, but like Basotxerri says, this looks more natural. --cart-Talk19:28, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm afraid I'm still not finding this remarkable enough for FP. It does look more natural. It would be great to have someone on the bridge, though they'd need to be photogenic in some way, rather than some random tourist pointing their camera back at you :-). -- Colin (talk) 07:50, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I find it remarkable, especially its person-less tranquility and daring colour contrast. Not for the colour-blind, of course ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:26, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I much prefer the balance on this version to the other. It's a delightful scene and I do like the tunnelling effect. Chacune à son goût, I guess. --RexxS (talk) 13:22, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2017 at 23:06:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Sorry, but you're losing sharpness both on top centre and bottom left/right. Limitations of the lens, I think. For a shot like this one I feel the areas should be sharp for FP.--Peulle (talk) 11:33, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was thinking about it a while because I wasn't sure about it, especially the lighting. However the more I've looked at it, the more convincing it was. Nice. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:26, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Some sharpness issues as mentioned before but the image has something what forces you to watch into it for a while. -- Pofka (talk) 12:01, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nice idea, but it doesn't captivate me so much that I'm OK with considering this one of the creme de la creme of the site without greater sharpness, so Oppose per Peulle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:34, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 12:53:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Great Blue Heron Yellowstone.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Great Blue Heron Yellowstone.jpg
Comment The light is very good, and I like the fact that the resolution is hight. But tell me: have you considered doing a bit of noise reduction?--Peulle (talk) 14:14, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Peulle: I did a very slight noise reduction in the RAW-processing. I tried not to lose any details of the heron, so a bit of noise is OK for me. -- Wolf im Wald01:45, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral There are three things, which are disturbing me in full resolution: 1.) the noise, 2.) overexposed areas in the grass but also even in the heron itself, and 3.) the left part of the picture is completely unsharp whereras the right part (in about the same distance) is not. --Llez (talk) 11:27, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Famberhorst and Llez. Also, perhaps I'm biased because I see these birds almost every day (this time of year) in the shallows of the river while I'm walking across the bridges near my house, but this really doesn't seem like an extraordinary picture of them. Yes, I know they're in their natural habitat, but I'd like to see a little more of them and not so much of the environment. As it is, it's a QI possibly (certainly in composition) but not an FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 02:27, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 21:36:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Brachypelma vagans p1.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Brachypelma vagans p1.jpg
Comment The background is a white cardboard it has been manipulated using gimp to be more white but no cloning has been used --Cvmontuy (talk) 23:38, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I accept the response. Very sharp spider. I've taken the liberty of adding the common name to the English line of the file description, Mexican red rump tarantula. I hope that's okay. PumpkinSkytalk10:16, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the background is OK. Can't see anything else wrong so if that's the only weakness, that's not enough to stop me from supporting. :)--Peulle (talk) 20:25, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2017 at 22:02:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Large red damselfly (Pyrrhosoma nymphula) male Swinley.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Large red damselfly (Pyrrhosoma nymphula) male Swinley.jpg
Oppose This is a common dragonfly so that I can expect a special composition but this isn't. Also the sharpness around the upper area between the eyes and chest as well face is not convincing. --Hockei (talk) 05:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017 at 03:53:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.09.02.-11-Kaefertaler Wald-Mannheim--Gartenkreuzspinne-Weibchen.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.09.02.-11-Kaefertaler Wald-Mannheim--Gartenkreuzspinne-Weibchen.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 04:28:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose It's a very nice scene that might have worked if the photo had been properly processed from raw. The shadows are too dark and massive and there is a lot of CA all over the pic, some even visible at thumb. --cart-Talk09:25, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 04:19:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Comment Nice and certainly one of "my" subjects but I think a little bit tighter crop would lift the composition a bit. See note. For now it will only get a weak support from me. --cart-Talk09:33, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support although I think cart's idea for a tighter crop should be considered. I thought at first it was a human elbow with some bracelets. Daniel Case (talk) 05:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2017 at 18:17:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 06:49:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Heiligengrabe, Kloster Stift zum Heiligengrabe, Abtei, Treppenturm -- 2017 -- 9941-7.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Heiligengrabe, Kloster Stift zum Heiligengrabe, Abtei, Treppenturm -- 2017 -- 9941-7.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017 at 20:06:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kloster Paulinzella, Thüringen, 170316, ako (2).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kloster Paulinzella, Thüringen, 170316, ako (2).jpg
Info A different kind of church interior this time: Ruin of the abbey church of Paulinzella abbey in Thuringia, Germany. View from west to east. The church was built from 1106 on, today there are only ruins left. It's one of the most important romanesque buildings in Germany. All by me. --Code (talk) 20:06, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd rather not and I don't see any reason why it should be desirable to have both arches "end in the corner". You won't ever get "rid of some tree" unless you make a 2:3 portrait crop here which would not fit for the subject. --Code (talk) 11:21, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support This perspective shot definitely has "wow" for me. The shadows create nice patterns, the statue down the end of the shot is well captured too. I wouldn't mind seeing this on the front page.--Peulle (talk) 14:07, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017 at 16:45:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Hmmmm...mmmm-no. For me this is two good photos combined into one, although I get that you want to illustrate the low/nonexistent water level. A pic of just the tree stump in an infinite sea of baked earth would be epic, and a view of the bridge and the ridge beyond would be great. Combined in one pic they compete with each other for the viewer's attention. Just cover the upper or lower half of the pic and I think you'll get what I mean. --cart-Talk08:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This would have been a good subject for focus stacking. If both the tree stump and the bridge were sharp... --Llez (talk) 11:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment OK, I understand your opinions, maybe it's not as good as I thought. However, the focus is intentionally on the stump, it's more or less the effect I wanted to achieve. Anyway, it was worth a try. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:12, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes, I noticed that it was a deliberate effect. Not quite successful in this case but good effort. I would really like to see some regular shots of this location, though, that bridge looks like a good subject.--Peulle (talk) 18:17, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I differ with cart about the effect of the two combined, since I think it gives a nice scale and makes perfectly clear that this stump should be underwater, but I agree with Llez that if so both the stump and the bridge need to be in focus. Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 15:48:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Igreja de Nossa Senhora da Consolação e Santos Passos, Guimarães, Portugal.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Igreja de Nossa Senhora da Consolação e Santos Passos, Guimarães, Portugal.jpg
Oppose Unfortunate crop at top, lack of detail, tilt in cw direction, perspective issues (sides leaning in). You should go first to QIC (will not work in this case) and try there your luck before going for FP Poco219:09, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2017 at 14:30:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:AngelSeguridadSocialp1.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:AngelSeguridadSocialp1.jpg
Oppose Sorry, but imho the background is way to distracting for a FP. It would have been a good idea to use a bigger aperture to blur everything except the monument and/or to choose a different angle to get the persons and signs off-frame. // Martin K. (talk) 13:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 20:59:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Genista benehoavensis LC409.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Genista benehoavensis LC409.jpg
Info Genista benehoavensis, an endemic broom on La Palma, together with flowering Tower of Jewels (Echium wildpretii). Created, uploaded and nominated by Jörg Hempel
I withdraw my nomination Thank you for the helpful comments. Blue really seems to be a bit overdone. Thanks even for the "no wow" comments. I don't agree but I accept this. The pic didn't convince you, that's fair enough. But this utterly ridiculous nonsense "yucks, you downsampled it, oppose!" just let my blood pressure jump up. Either it meets the minimum size requirement of 2 MPx or it doesn't. Everything else is not a discussion about quality anymore, just about meta data. The final comment led me to the decision to just stop it here. Daniel's comment wasn't the only b***sh*** sarcasm I heard in my years here, but it will be the last. It's probably better for my mood. So long, and thanks for all the fish. --LC-de (talk) 21:56, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2017 at 07:32:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Златоврв 3.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Златоврв 3.JPG
Oppose Uninteresting composition. Just a big rock and some small with a crucifix on the top, far away mountain below on the right side and much sky above that. No wow. (no quality check) --Hockei (talk) 18:10, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2017 at 15:56:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2017 at 10:27:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Пролетни качунки.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Пролетни качунки.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2017 at 16:08:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:AngelSeguridadSocialP2.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:AngelSeguridadSocialP2.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2017 at 06:27:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.08.25.-07-Landgraben Huettenfeld-Lampertheim--Herbst-Mosaikjungfer-Maennchen.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.08.25.-07-Landgraben Huettenfeld-Lampertheim--Herbst-Mosaikjungfer-Maennchen.jpg
Never! I always portray the life as natural as it is. E.g. this specimen also was in natural position. It was sitting and flattering it's wings. Animals often do thinks that we wouldn't expect. --Hockei (talk) 05:50, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about that again. It can be that I took this photo more downward from the embankment in direction to the creek. Maybe this perspective let it looks like as if the migrant hawker was stretching the abdomen upward but it wasn't. --Hockei (talk) 09:40, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2017 at 08:02:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Party-poop oppose A well-done QI for sure but just doesn't stand out from any other well-taken picture of a building like this for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:58, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2017 at 13:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Poertschach Johannaweg 5 Villa Woerth Sued-Ansicht 25062017 9858.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Poertschach Johannaweg 5 Villa Woerth Sued-Ansicht 25062017 9858.jpg
Neutral Plus points for good light and sharpness, but for FP I don't really like this angle; it gives the building a strange perspective, somehow.--Peulle (talk) 14:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2017 at 11:14:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:O Garrafão.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:O Garrafão.jpg
Big problem...there's a watermark in the lower left that says this is a copyrighted photo. So why is it on Commons with a free license? PumpkinSkytalk12:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per the Guidelines: "No advertisements, signatures, or other watermarks in image. Copyright/authorship information of all images should be located on the image's description page and should not interfere with content of the image.".--Peulle (talk) 12:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PumpkinSky, a copyright watermark does not mean it is a copyright violation. Especially since the name in the watermark matches the uploader, as well as the EXIF author data: "Karla Paiva". I don't think you mean to suggest this is a stolen photograph/copyright violation because it is clearly not. Karla Paiva has also not given up their copyrights, they have simply licensed their work under CC-BY-SA-4.0, which maintains their ownership of it but is sufficiently free for use on Commons. seb26 (talk) 13:20, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@PumpkinSky and Seb26: According to the Facebook profile, she really is the author and probably she didn't pay attention to the license of his images. It seems the watermark is just a credit sample. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict) Yes, it was clear from the three info pieces, watermark/uploader name/EXIF name, that they are the author of the work. I don't think it's necessary to link to that facebook profile. User:KarlaFPaiva is a regular contributor already on Commons. @KarlaFPaiva: would you be able to upload a new version of this photo that excludes the watermark? So that it can be considered for featured status. Cheers, seb26 (talk) 14:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it now appears that way to me, so I've removed the "strong" from my oppose, but the watermark is not allowed, per the FPC rules. PumpkinSkytalk14:12, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@ArionEstar: Creative Commons licenses forbid the removal of such watermarks unless you have the permission of the author. You should revert your change, it's a copyright violation. --Code (talk) 20:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just a note (PumpkinSky and others) to say that unless an image is in the public domain (due to age, being taking by US government employee, or put there with a CC0 declaration for examples) all the images on Commons are "copyright". Indeed, you cannot offer a "free licence" unless you are the copyright owner. -- Colin (talk) 19:20, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose FPC and WLE will not consider an image with watermarks. So this is not eligible unless the author themselves provide a version without watermark. Jee03:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Even without the watermark, this doesn't quite make the cut for me. It's soft in too many places, which the processor seems to have attempted to correct with sharpening. The colors ... well, they remind me a lot of some ofthe pictures I took at Teotihuacan after Wikimania 2015, where I think I tried to make the same adjustments as were made here but I'm not really happy with how they turned out. Daniel Case (talk) 03:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2017 at 09:07:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Winter in Debar's Lake.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Winter in Debar's Lake.JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 11:28:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Anturium Andrego.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Anturium Andrego.jpg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: as per above comments. Yann (talk) 12:00, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2017 at 17:02:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Demba Savage 2017 HJK.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Demba Savage 2017 HJK.jpg
Oppose Focus is not outstanding, but better here. The top crop though is a no-go to me. This feedback you'd probably also get in QIC. Poco217:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2017 at 17:07:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Oolah Valley (16089307144).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Oolah Valley (16089307144).jpg
Neutral The darkness is acceptable (especially as the light green goes through the shadow), but I miss sharpness --Llez (talk) 10:44, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This shot in a remote location is unlikely to be retaken any time soon, so I think that and the wow and composition trump the degree of unsharpness at full size, a least for now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support i focus on the positive aspects. it is a natural location and yet it looks a little bit like an abstract painting, I like that.--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:21, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2017 at 17:09:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Xhevdet Gela 2017 HIFK.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Xhevdet Gela 2017 HIFK.jpg
Oppose The footballer is not in focus. Please, try first to pass your FPC candidates through QIC to get initial feedback on them. Poco217:17, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Poco. Also, there's nothing really remarkable with this photo - it's not like he's in fast motion, doing a bicycle kick or anything, so where's the wow factor?--Peulle (talk) 01:14, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2017 at 15:20:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Zaubertuba Triebener und Neubauer 17RM0634.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Zaubertuba Triebener und Neubauer 17RM0634.jpg
Support Very nice. This is what you get when you have people who are not afraid to interact with the camera. I take it that the Template:Consent would be appripriate to place on the file page? --cart-Talk08:33, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, images with tight crops can be well-composed, but it depends whether anything important has been cropped out. As you say, it can be seen as a matter of taste; in this instance I think having the hand is important since the man is playing a tuba and the hand is instrumental (bad pun, sorry) in that.--Peulle (talk) 17:00, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2017 at 21:01:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Embalse de Kechut, Armenia, 2016-10-01, DD 60-63 PAN.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Embalse de Kechut, Armenia, 2016-10-01, DD 60-63 PAN.jpg
Info Panoramic view of Kechut reservoir, near the town of Jermuk, Armenia. The reservoir was built in 1981, has a total volume of 23 million cubic meters and for its construction a medieval cemetery and cross stones had to be flooded. Poco221:01, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2017 at 12:05:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Common blues (Polyommatus icarus) mating, male (l) and female (r).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Common blues (Polyommatus icarus) mating, male (l) and female (r).jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2017 at 10:59:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Drammensbrua undenfra 02.17.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Drammensbrua undenfra 02.17.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2017 at 05:06:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Mont Blanc, 2017.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mont Blanc, 2017.jpg
Oppose I oppose since "shoping" went to far. Seems like Walt Disney Pictures logo, color problem, or low temp and vignetting could be solved to some minor extent. --Mile (talk) 16:09, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2017 at 20:32:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2017 at 17:23:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Пат во Лазарополе.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Пат во Лазарополе.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2017 at 16:31:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.08.27.-03-Mannheim Vogelstang--Star.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.08.27.-03-Mannheim Vogelstang--Star.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2017 at 21:04:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info The Mønsted limestone mine in Denmark is the largest such mine in the world. A network of paths criss-cross through the man-made caves. The tone-mapped HDR image was created from five exposures. All by me. -- Colin (talk) 21:04, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2017 at 06:25:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.08.21.-03-Mannheim Vogelstang--Blaumeise-Jungvogel.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.08.21.-03-Mannheim Vogelstang--Blaumeise-Jungvogel.jpg
Comment and Info Certainly it is in the shadow. In fact within a tree under its canopy what is very natural. I don't understand why a bird must be always in the sun and why every other pictures are bad in many eyes. This is the same with mountains for example and other thinks. Often I like shadow or back-light pictures (much) more than always the same styled sunny pictures. --Hockei (talk) 14:44, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad lighting and distracting background. A great photo is more than just getting the subject in focus. -- Colin (talk) 17:45, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2017 at 15:35:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kräne im Hafen der argentinischen Hauptstadt Buenos Aires.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kräne im Hafen der argentinischen Hauptstadt Buenos Aires.jpg
Oppose Overprocessed, tilted, improvable crop and composition containing disturbing elements, lack of perspective correction,...far from FP. You should try to understand the quality we expect here nominating pictures to COM:QICPoco216:07, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2017 at 14:20:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Shelter 3 sign at Great Neck Park LR.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Shelter 3 sign at Great Neck Park LR.jpg
Oppose Sorry, no. For this to work you need some amazing light, it also needs to be totally centered which this is not. I would also have recommended some "analogue editing" = plucking off that tape on the right side of the sign and perhaps dusting off a bit of the cobweb. Making your scene look nice before you shoot it is not wrong for an artistic photo, only if you are doing documentary shots. --cart-Talk09:27, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 03:38:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Maria Saal Kapuzinerstoeckl Dom und Dechantei W-Ansicht 03072017 0083.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Maria Saal Kapuzinerstoeckl Dom und Dechantei W-Ansicht 03072017 0083.jpg
Support Normally I'd qualify this since you'd want to see it in full sunlight ... but here it works just fine to have it in occluded sunlight. Daniel Case (talk) 18:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2017 at 10:39:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Unfortunately, there appears to be a red-colour oversaturation, most of the trees are unsharp and the composition does not seem to be striking enough. These gardens might offer possibility to take something that would be featurable, but this is definitely not it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:35, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2017 at 08:07:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Galichica pogled 2013.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Galichica pogled 2013.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2017 at 21:24:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info By all accounts, this elusive tortoise, which lives in the rain forests of Western Africa, is a prized delicacy, which is why it is protected in Ghana. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 21:24, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 08:28:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Sankt Botvids kyrka February 2015 10.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sankt Botvids kyrka February 2015 10.jpg
Oppose Failing to see why it should be featured. Looks too ordinary for me. QI? Sure. FP? Why...? Sorry. -- Pofka (talk) 08:13, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Pofka. I think this would need both a crop in on both sides so the verticals are stronger, and to be photographed from another angle, one that makes it clear that thing on top is a cross. Daniel Case (talk) 15:14, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 18:45:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Nice moment, sharpness is ok, but not outstanding, the background is pretty distracting. Sorry, not convincing to me. Poco219:07, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the bird. Although you could crop both sides a bit. Left the small branch completely and right the big one a bit. --Hockei (talk) 06:38, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 14:03:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 13:23:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info All by me. This typical storehouse from Berdal in southern Vinje, Norway, was built ca. 1750-60. It has the classic raised design to prevent rats from entering and getting to the food stores. Inside would be cured or dried meats, fish and other foods stored for the winter. The building is now on display at the open-air section of the Norwegian Museum of Cultural History. For other views of it, please see 1, 2 or 3. -- Peulle (talk) 13:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 21:00:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Museo de la Catedral de Quito, Quito, Ecuador, 2015-07-22, DD 91-93 HDR.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Museo de la Catedral de Quito, Quito, Ecuador, 2015-07-22, DD 91-93 HDR.JPG
InfoChapter house located in today's museum of the Metropolitan Cathedral of Quito, Historic Center of Quito, capital of Ecuador. The construction of the catholic temple began in 1562 and it was consecrated 10 years later, but this hall was inaugurated in the 17th century by order of bishop Alonso de la Peña y Montenegro. The chapter house contains paintings of all bishops and achbishops of the Archdiocese of Quito since 1545. All by me, Poco221:00, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Shining ceiling lights here reminds me those annoying blown rays which you get when you are photographing with a cheap smartphone camera. I am really surprised it was produced by Canon EOS 5Ds R, which is one of the finest photographing machines currently available... Maybe problem of the lense? Anyway, it looks unpleasant in those places. Just my thoughts. -- Pofka (talk) 07:59, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I haven' understood what your point is Pofka and cannot see anything that make me feel this picture was taken with a cheap smartphone camera. Can you be please elaborate your comment? Do you want me to reduce the highlights (I could it is a HDR image)? But first I'd like to understand the problem. Poco208:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: Added annotations. Those lamps looks problematic and unnatural to me. They are too shiny and too white. Maybe just for me... Probably we should wait for more comments about this before taking actions. Other parts are definitely great and doesn't remind something that was taken with a smartphone camera. -- Pofka (talk) 08:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, the image is compositionally strong to the point and the issue with the lights doesn't challenge that. seb26 (talk) 13:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, the lamps are almost blinding to look at directly. But the picture gets everything else right that I'd like it to get right. Daniel Case (talk) 02:28, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't have an issue with bright lights being bright. And pure white direct light, like the brightest bulb or clear window, should be bright white on a JPG too imo. I dislike it when photographers reduce the highlights such that such bright features are merely paper white. So please don't dim the highlights. If they are too bright then that's the fault of scene/subject, not the photographer. There is a little purple blob of lens flare above some of the near lamps. What is unfortunate is that some of the lamps appear to have compact fluorescent sticks in them, which poke out above the lamp glass shades, and don't match the colour of the tungsten bulbs in the other lamps. One lamp is missing its shade and several are dead. The room does not appear to have (any longer) a source of natural light. So what can one do? It is what it is. -- Colin (talk) 11:34, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Having seen the issues people have noted about the lights, I still think this is good enough due to the composition, sharpness and depth. --Peulle (talk) 14:48, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2017 at 04:54:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2015.07.07.-24-Mulde Eilenburg--Schwarze Heidelibelle-Weibchen.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2015.07.07.-24-Mulde Eilenburg--Schwarze Heidelibelle-Weibchen.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2017 at 01:35:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support Yes! I'm glad we got the original (larger) file for this after some debate on QIC since it is such a great photo. Renato Augusto Martins has uploaded so many great photos and I hope we will se more of them here. Love this for example. --cart-Talk08:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Question Was the photo taken wildlife or were the frogs in a terrarium or anything else? What a background is this and why is it that (equable) dark? --Hockei (talk) 17:39, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Evening, f/22 and background objects far away can leads to a black bg. EXIF says no flash used; but there may be other artificial light sources. Jee11:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very good photo, but I have to wonder along the lines of Hockei. The background doesn't look like it's in the wild, more like a terrarium with a black wall or something. That's not a natural position for either frog so it looks like a posed shot to me. I wish the uploader would explain more about this photo.PumpkinSkytalk23:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hockei, Charlesjsharp, and PumpkinSky: Like Jee said, it's totally possible to do that in the wild. This one was taken outside at the place where the plant was growing using only natural light without any kind of modification – just sunlight on the subject and shadows in the background. It's even easier with flash lighting at the bottom of a dark rainforest (and if you look at the catchlight in the eye it's obvious that some kind of artificial lighting was used here). --El Grafo (talk) 12:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As long my questions are not honest convincing answered from the photographer that this is wildlife. For me it looks like a circus act in a terrarium. --Hockei (talk) 16:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
*Oppose Just until we hear from the photographer. Better to be safe than support an image which might be suspect. There is a photographer of the name Renato Augusto Martins on Flickr. His images are all watermarked and this one is not there. May not be significant, but seems odd. Charles (talk) 13:14, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Info Olá a todos, muito obrigado pelas mensagens e dúvidas.Tentarei esclarecer todos os pontos questionados. Sim, o animal é selvagem e de vida livre. A técnica utilizada para este tipo de imagem com fundo preto é muito simples, no entanto muito trabalhosa. Como já citado anteriormente pelo colega, no EXIF da foto é possível observar o f/22 oque seria bem alto! com o primeiro plano bem iluminado e o segundo plano na sombra ou escuro, conseguimos deixar o fundo bem preto. Aliado a isso, podemos observar na imagem que praticamente não existe sombra nos anfíbios, essa é a parte mais difícil da fotografia! Não aparece informações no EXIF sobre a fonte de luz, pois utilizo um flash externo, acoplado em um rádio flash. Apenas isso já bastaria para um fundo preto, mas para não ter sombra na imagem eu utilizei 3 rebatedores de luz, tornando a luz suave e agradável! A posição dos anfíbios são completamente naturais em seu habitat. Sobre tudo a Clado Phyllomedusidae, apresenta espécies que andam devagar e saltam pouco, na foto em questão, um macho disputa o galho com outro macho, ao passar por cima dele, um anfíbio se abaixa como forma de defesa em quanto o outro atravessa, tudo isso durou cerca de 4 segundos, tornando a imagem ainda mais desafiadora! Espero ter ajudado, estou sempre disponível para mais esclarecimentos. Renato Augusto Martins (talk) 16:21, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't speak Portuguese and goggle translation is horrible. But I think the explanation is convincing as far I can understand. Thanks. --Hockei (talk) 18:06, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hockei: and others who are interested. Re Google translations: If your native language is anything other than English but you understand English quite well, always make the translations from the language you don't understand to English, that way the translation will always be better since eng translations are always best maintained. If I make a Google translation from say Portuguese to Swedish, it will come out gibberish, but the same text from Portuguese to English is usually very good. --cart-Talk18:47, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2017 at 01:50:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Sonoma chipmunk at Samuel P. Taylor State Park.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sonoma chipmunk at Samuel P. Taylor State Park.jpg
Oppose Nice animal and good composition. But I must oppose it because of the noise and posterization / jpg-artefacts. --Hockei (talk) 06:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If the chipmunk's fur definitely wasn't all that color in that part of its body, I would be neutral. You're sure of that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't spoken of colour. My colour ability is not quite good. Please don't make your opinion dependent on me. I just have answered your question what I mean. --Hockei (talk) 19:27, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support And 7.... Here are too many "GENIUS" of photography that are not perfect but they require it to others ...... this place is really weird! --LivioAndronico(talk)08:57, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support 13.8 MP is well above the minimum for wildlife shots, so a few pixel-level quality issues are not a big deal. -- King of♥♦♣ ♠ 15:57, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 20:27:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Pink blue and white silage bales.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pink blue and white silage bales.jpg
Info “… and this year our fashion-forward farmers can choose from a collection of candy pink or ice blue silage wrapping. The colors are carefully selected to match the green of your oat field and make your farm look even better.”
Seriously, the pink silage wrapping is sold to support breast cancer awareness and the blue for prostate cancer awareness. Part of the proceeds from the sale of these colored wrappings goes to the respective cancer research. The pink silage bales also look very nice in a green field and hopefully, I will come across one with my camera ready when the light is good. All by me, -- cart-Talk20:27, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LOVE it! I instantly knew this was a Cart photo--didn't have to look at who took it. Glad to see they're helping both genders. Often you only hear about breast cancer awareness. The bird is a great touch too. Question what are the white/beige bales for? and what kind of bird is that? PumpkinSkytalk20:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The white/beige bales are just the normal color of silage bales around here, see this from the same farm last year. The bales are not as white this year as the farms are moving towards more recycled material, which is also good. The bird is a magpie (Pica pica), they are common around here. I chose this pic since I think it adds to the photo. --cart-Talk21:16, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Martin Falbisoner: Hmmm... Unfortunately, that side is a bit cluttered this year. There is another angle I could try for a more close-up shot, I'll just have to see how near my camera can get to that. That side is all ditches, fences, brambles and oat field. Walking about in a growing oat field is a sure way to get on the wrong side of a farmer. In this nom I liked the contrast between the straight lines of the dour house and the happy round bales. Plus the bird. Also, too much sunlight is usually a bane when shooting silage bales since they are so shiny. --cart-Talk08:08, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like a candy farm! Yum! I suspect eventually we'll start seeing these on American farms, and when we do (there are plenty of farms near me that grow alfalfa in alternation with corn), I'll do my best to get a picture like this. Daniel Case (talk) 18:02, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
According to what I have heard, the idea originated in New Zeeland and has found it's way here via some other European countries. Besides being for a good cause, they do make the landscape look a bit happier and more fun. --cart-Talk18:40, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry cart, the composition doesn't convince me. I cannot say what I would have done differently as the subject itself is original, but the cropped trailer and the almost hidden 2 windows are disturbing to me Poco216:32, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination I'll see if I can make something like what Martin suggested instead when the light is right. Thanks for all your input! :) --cart-Talk07:50, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 08:23:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Korean fir - branches with cones 2.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Korean fir - branches with cones 2.jpg
Oppose Composition seems too random for me. Could have been better focusing on one group of cones, sort of like the one cart linked to. Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We already have an FP picturing a closer look of the cones, I thought it would be nice to show how a number of them grew on the branches, so I went wider with the cones flowing diagonal across the frame. --cart-Talk20:23, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2017 at 09:23:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2017 at 14:40:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Finding Serenity.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Finding Serenity.jpg
Comment - Looks oversaturated to me, and I think a more descriptive and less poetic name would be more in keeping with Commons style. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I really like this picture. It has very good composition. Only the quality (noise, sharpness) isn't quite sufficient for me. I cannot decide. --Hockei (talk) 06:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful Oppose, as this is a really beautiful image. But there are too many quality issues already mention. Furthermore, CAs are present at the left. --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:38, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2017 at 18:30:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Lake-sherburne-964855.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lake-sherburne-964855.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2017 at 18:19:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Interior of the roman-catholic Rosenkranzbasilika ("Rosary Basilica") in Berlin-Steglitz. The basilica was built in 1899/1900 according to plans by Christoph Hehl. It was painted mainly by Friedrich Stummel. Fortunately the parish allowed me to take some photographs of their wonderful church. They were so nice not only to let me in but also to put the lights on. Otherwise the church would have been much too dark to take the pictures I wanted. It would probably have taken me the whole day to get all the pictures exposed correctly (I've already spent more than three hours there for roundabout 10 pictures!). However, I still had to use a rather high ISO (between 800 and 1.600) to take the single exposures for my panoramics. Please have also a look at the 360° view of the church. I'm considering nominating it, too. This will probably be my last church interior of Berlin since I'm moving to Leipzig tomorrow to start my new job (and to take photographs of all the nice buildings and places there, of course!). All by me. --Code (talk) 18:19, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment My !vote notwithstanding, I am sad to hear you are leaving Berlin, although Berlin's loss is Leipzig's gain. Perhaps one of us can move there to carry on. Daniel Case (talk) 15:09, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I'll have to move to Berlin next year... we'll see. (In any case I'd prefer going back home to Munich but that's not very likely at the moment) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I dont agree here. People are kiling photo with weird stitching (aka, put as much as you can get, and just correct distortion). What happaned to fisheye...i know is prohitibed here, by some users. Check the lights, they are spoiled now. See sharp border around it. --Mile (talk) 14:06, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment These "distortion" votes are driving me crazy. No one of you has ever been inside this church and you don't seem to care much about optics. It's a wide-angle view and such views do always stretch the corners a little bit. That's as normal as the fact that longer focal lengths compress a view or that portraits usually have a shallow DoF. Are we supposed to only use focal lengths of 35mm or 50mm in the future? How can you show the interior of such a church as a whole without using shorter focal lengths? Guys, I'm so tired of having this discussion again and again. Yesterday I moved to a new city (I don't have a stable internet connection so far and it will take a while until I got one) and I think I will take this opportunity for a longer wikibreak. Commons is getting more and more frustrating. Besides the obvious revenge-voting we have here it's very sad to read such comments like the one(s) above about pictures like this one. I think some colleagues here don't really understand how much work it is to create such a picture. Not only did I spent hours of phone-calls, e-mails and meetings until I got the permission to even take this photograph. Then I took a whole day free from work to go there and take the pictures. After that I spend nearly a whole night with postprocessing and uploading. It's hurting me to see some guys in bad mood just come around here and put their {{o}} after having had a look at his picture for some seconds. That's just a lack of respect for each others work. Please at least try to understand how this picture was is created and why it looks that way. I know I'm not perfect myself but personally I normally don't vote on pictures when I feel that I'm not competent enough to judge it (e.g. wildlife photography/sports/cars and so on). I think that if someone has a problem with understanding architecture or interiors he/she should restrain from voting or just give a comment without voting. Opposing because "the lamps are distorted" is simply bullshit. Sorry for the rant, but I just felt I had to say this, especiallay after I had almost the same discussion at Dewiki where one of my (as I personally feel) best pictures was reviewed in a way that was not only disrespectful, but even insulting. I can't stand this any more at the moment. Sorry. As I already said above I think I need a break. Maybe I'll be back in some weeks. Thanks however for all your votes and reviews, especially (but not only) for those supporting my nomination. Take care! --Code (talk) 15:12, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment But end it !!!!!!!!Here the most vindictive is YOU! Only you're taking time to take pictures? I HAVE LOSE a HOLY DAY FOR 2 MINUTES TO DO A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE DOME IN SAN PIETRO (which is not a church dispersed in germany!). You say a tide of bullshit and allow you to pass as a victim! What courage did you have? What man are you? Feign this your intention to make the saint! Whether you're here or not I'm indifferent but do not let yourself go for a victim! You are just a vengeful and savage person! And this is TOO DISTORTED --LivioAndronico(talk)20:21, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
you read everything .... say that we are bullshit and that we are avenged for you is a compliment Martin K. ? Greetings. --LivioAndronico(talk)
Code articulated his frustration about some of the votes without attacking anybody personally. He just wrote about his perception and his consequences. However insulting somebody, like you did, is something completely different. Something I don't like to read here... // Martin K. (talk) 13:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Enjoy your Wiki-break, and may the new home be a blessing for you. I haven't voted on this photo precisely because I'm not feeling competent to pass judgment on this question of distortion; however, I have the utmost respect for your work and look forward to your return. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:47, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Distortion is managed well. The extent of distortion is not outside that previously passed in the excellent series of cathedral images by User:Diliff a couple years ago. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree that there is some distortion in both corners, but still minor topic in comparison to the quality overall and excellence of the place Poco220:31, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support There's a little bit of CA on the candles in the bottom left. Perhaps I should strong oppose until that is fixed :-). Seems that's what people do these days. I agree that stitching does permit one to create rectilinear projections that can be too extreme for comfort, especially vertically as the vertical midpoint is often at waist height rather than the centre of the frame. I've opposed several of Diliff's when I felt this was too much. However that is not always the case. One of my own FPs File:St Matthew's Church - Paisley - Interior - 5.jpg is cropped vertically as the round lamp-holders in the corners appeared quite distorted -- so I cropped them out. That was an unstitched single-frame photo with (the equivalent of) a 24mm lens with Lightroom's lens corrections applied. So even a modest wide angle image can produce noticeable distortion on certain shapes. Circular objects, like lamps and columns and people, are particularly eye-catching, whereas rectangular objects can get away with being skewed. One doesn't see this with normal vision since you can only concentrate on the central portion of your vision and so move your entire field of view every time you look around. With a static image like this, that isn't possible. The 360 panorama Code links to is more representative of human vision if you focus only on the centre of your monitor. -- Colin (talk) 12:00, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2017 at 16:02:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Tarier patre ichkeul.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tarier patre ichkeul.jpg
Support I love that the bokeh works like a spotlight on the bird but please add an FP category above to the nominationFixed. --cart-Talk16:50, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. Is it impossible to identify the species of the bird? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 15 July 2017 (UTC)The species of the bird is on the short description, it's a European stonechat (Saxicola rubicola)El Golli Mohamed14:29, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good sharpness, nice bokeh and outstanding pedestal :) A pity not to see the whoe of it a the bottom. Anyhow, FP to me. Poco216:21, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2017 at 04:20:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Wandeling over het Hulshorsterzand-Hulshorsterheide 14.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wandeling over het Hulshorsterzand-Hulshorsterheide 14.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 08:49:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Navreme pred nevreme - Ohridsko Ezero 5.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Navreme pred nevreme - Ohridsko Ezero 5.jpg
Weak oppose Quite pleasant scene, however the plants are blurred and the dramatic clouds are full of grain. -- Pofka (talk) 11:13, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 10:10:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Trinidad and Tobago hummingbirds composite.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Trinidad and Tobago hummingbirds composite.jpg
Info I prepared this composite for English Wikipedia and it is FP there. There is the issue of whether one should use vernacular names or scientific, but I chose the common names that everyone uses. Naturally, there are more than four hummingbirds on Trinidad and Tobago, but these show the variety of colours well. All four images are QI. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 10:10, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think the complaint at the Wikipedia FP holds: that we don't strictly need such a construct because one can layout using wiki templates. Embedded English-language captions is of limited use on an international project like Commons, so reduces its value at Commons FP. We have set nominations. Which leaves one to consider whether this arrangement of four makes an appealing work of art as a poster, say. I think the names reduces its artistic value, and captions are usually below the subject. I can only find three of these birds photos on Commons and only two QI. One of the birds has been flipped -- you could have arranged them facing each other. The two lower birds have blown whites. The backgrounds and poses aren't quite similar enough to work imo, and you note that this is not a complete list of "Trinidad and Tobago hummingbirds" -- such a complete set would make for a very much more valuable poster and required for a set nomination. For disclosure: I have one such poster at FP: File:Paisley Abbey New Gargoyles.jpg and a triptych FP: File:Epilobium hirsutum - Seed head - Triptych.jpg. -- Colin (talk) 11:53, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so he has to create a bigger set? Should be doable. Btw. @Charlesjsharp: I think these images individually look very much like VI candidates, they're just the kind of images books use to illustrate bird species.--Peulle (talk) 23:12, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2017 at 07:25:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Поглед од врвот Пелистер.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Поглед од врвот Пелистер.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2017 at 12:25:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Comment I think that's a focal point (maybe proper term is slightly different) not a dust spot. Yes, please remove it. I saw this exact thing in Lightroom trainging video I watched a few weeks ago.PumpkinSkytalk19:54, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2017 at 16:47:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Odenplan station July 2017 11.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Odenplan station July 2017 11.jpg
Support Nice to see the new station. Cool (and gutsy) angle. Very slight CA in top corners, ceiling and text, though. --cart-Talk18:50, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Excellent passageway pic made special by the curvy ceiling decorations, and the neon lamps and their reflections help, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:55, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Question I can tell the curvy ceiling was built that way on purpose; I guess for artistic effect. But what is the deal with the arcs of light crossing from side to side in the background? PumpkinSkytalk19:51, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. I get it now. Reminds me of when I moved into an apartment in Utrecht, Netherlands. A Swedish couple had lived there before us. They'd painted the living room walls red, black, and white.PumpkinSkytalk21:37, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not find this interesting enough, and I like neither the composition nor the motion blur of the people --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:27, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Why would you feature blurry people? Charles (talk)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2017 at 02:23:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Scarlet skimmer at Keitakuen in Osaka, June, 2016 III.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Scarlet skimmer at Keitakuen in Osaka, June, 2016 III.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2017 at 09:34:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Sorry, but for this to work, the features of the house across the street needs to be exactly centered (or way off) in the arch. It's bugging me that it is just slightly off center. Do you have another version of this scene? --cart-Talk15:51, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the scene and the color scheme, but as others stated the composition is off. Also, f/5 is too wide of an aperture for the scene, resulting in worse than decent focusing. Sorry. WClarke02:36, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2017 at 20:14:45
Info Previous photo from 2014 used exposure-fusion and the limited dynamic range led to blown areas. New photo from 2017 is a full HDR generated from five exposures and tone-mapped in Lightroom. It is also sharper. The scene is a path in Mønsted limestone mine in Denmark, the largest limestone mine in the world. (Original nomination)
Delist and replace As the creator of the current FP. Colins version is clearly better. I proposed the delist and replace to them in an email. -- Slaunger (talk) 05:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 11:33:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Neutral Certainly has some WOW, but it's a bit weak in terms of sharpness. I don't really understand the camera settings (F20 @ 1/80, ISO 200). Sure, the wall looks slightly curved, but I don't think it was necessary to stop down to F20 to get sufficient depth of field at 10mm? I'd certainly support it over at VIC, though. --El Grafo (talk) 13:01, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 18:37:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Chiesa di Sant’Andrea in Montefiascone.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chiesa di Sant’Andrea in Montefiascone.jpg
Info Sant'Andrea in Campo is a Romanesque style, Roman Catholic church in Montefiascone, province of Viterbo, Italy. he church is mentioned in documents from the year 853 as a church in Campo or in a rural location. The church while narrow and later within the town walls, had three naves. The portal and internal columns are Romanesque. All by LivioAndronico(talk)18:37, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not symmetrical, distortion on the left lamp ;), blown highlights, barrel distortion, over NRed. Below the church standard generally speaking. - Benh (talk) 07:35, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support though not exactly symmetrical (the photograph has its center between the 2nd and the 3rd row of tiles in the central aisle); that apart the photographs keep good resolution of details even with zoom it at its fullest. -- SERGIO(aka the Blackcat)11:14, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. Folks, do you really think this merits being featured along with the church interiors of people like Diliff? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:59, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You actually came here to post a sour-grapes reply after getting featured? You can never be satisfied with anything less than 100% support. What does that show about you? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:15, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2017 at 07:39:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Mezquita de Agha Bozorg, Kashan, Irán, 2016-09-19, DD 85.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mezquita de Agha Bozorg, Kashan, Irán, 2016-09-19, DD 85.jpg
Info Bottom view of one of the iwans of the Agha Bozorg mosque, a historical mosque in Kashan, Iran. The mosque, located in the center of the city, was built in the late 18th century by master-mimar Ustad Haj Sa'ban-ali. The mosque consists of two large iwans, one in front of the mihrab and the other by the entrance and the courtyard in the middle. All by me, Poco207:39, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure you got it all? I'm still seeing some green. Maybe the cache is not refreshed; I'll wait and check again this evening.--Peulle (talk) 13:25, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Peulle, the FPC page reminds voters not to judge the photographer. We are here to review the image, which at 44 MP with sub-pixel CA in the original image, is really imo quite a petty reason to oppose. If this image was a Flickr upload, where minor issues generally don't get fixed, would you have opposed? I would hope not. Please leave such pixel peeping "improvements" as a polite request rather than a oppose. Your oppose clearly interrupted the flow of support votes, so is not without harm, and it encourages other voters to pixel peep themselves. -- Colin (talk) 17:54, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I can only suggest you read some books on what makes a great photograph. You might then notice that (absence of) CA does not figure in the criteria. Please consider that your oppose votes on such will actually deter good photographers from participating here, and that is not good for Commons. -- Colin (talk) 12:52, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. Under the "color" section of the QI/FP guidelines, CA is listed as one of the issues/common problems and I have seen images rejected from both QIC and FP for this reason. In FP, this should of course be weighed against the criterion "Given sufficient "wow factor" and mitigating circumstances, a featured picture is permitted to fall short on technical quality." On the voting issue, I have looked at the FP voting section and see that while there is a "request" template I admittedly could have used, you are contradicting yourself: you give the example that problems with flickr images would not be fixed, so how do you expect a "request" to have any effect in such circumstances? As for whether my vote would deter others from voting to support, I feel I cannot oblige you; I must have faith in other users' ability to judge for themselves. I vote the way I see fit, others will hopefully do the same. --Peulle (talk) 14:07, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
While chromatic aberration is indeed a flaw, we are not robots nor is the any requirement that an image is technically perfect, whatever that might mean. The "wow factor" get-out for low technical quality is intended for images far lower in technical quality than this. The kind of flaw you point out here is irrelevant. It's a kind of nit picky "improvement only visible if pixel peeping very closely on a 100dpi monitor at 100%". Stick a High DPI monitor on your desk for all our sakes and you might appreciate how utterly irrelevant a faint blue tinge on the edge of a black line on a 42mp image really is. I don't "contradict myself": I was rather assuming you were a reasonable person, and were only pointing out the CA because you knew Poco would fix it. My Flickr question was supposed to be rhetorical. Your response, that you feel the need to oppose a great image because of sub-pixel CA, is quite remarkable. I have seen, over the years, good photographers leave this project over votes like yours. So there's nothing theoretical about that. Don't base your judgement of makes a great image is based only on Commons Image Guidelines: buy some books. Digging your heals in and saying "I vote the way I see fit" is no attitude to have. I'm not asking you to follow my opinion on what is great, there are plenty great resources on photography, and absolutely none of them focus on CA. Please leave CA issues for when you next choose what prime lens to buy, and not for when selecting great images. At 44MP, this sort of nit picking just makes Commons look foolish, and really is a huge turn off for proper photographers. -- Colin (talk) 15:08, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like your reasoning: it sounds like you're trying to pressure a fellow Commoner to vote the way you want, which is something I cannot accept. On the one hand, you're saying you don't want me to follow your opinion, but your whole line of reasoning definitely does: you want me to think the way you do - and I don't. As the Guidelines point out, different users may have a difference of opinion, which is the purpose of the voting system. I also disagree with your evaluation: these were not tiny CA barely visible by means of "pixel peeping", but clearly definable streaks of colour visible at 100% view. As for sources you want me to study, I use only one: the Commons FP/QI Guidelines. CA is listed as a possible problem and that's the end of it as far as I'm concerned. Whether photography books say otherwise is simply not relevant to me. If you're suggesting that any Commoner who has not actively studied photography should not participate in this project, well, I disagree with you on that as well.--Peulle (talk) 16:19, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"visible at 100% view" == "pixel peeping". That's the definition. And it isn't a compliment. Peulle, the guidelines were written when many images uploaded to Commons were barely 2MP, and many from that age, if you view on a HD screen, will not even fill the monitor. So, worrying about people viewing at 5x magnification wasn't in the minds of that guideline. This image is 1.4 metres tall if viewed at 100dpi. And you are juding something only visible from close up. Do you think, if Poco got this on the cover of National Geographic, that you could see the CA even with a magnifying glass? There is more CA (and colour moire) in your last FP than in this one, and it is only 6MP (from a 24MP camera) vs this 44MP. So, downsizing and CA. Are you willing to delist your own 6MP FP, or accept you are being ridiculously and harmfully picky on a 44MP image? If that's a downsized image you got to FP, then you are being hypocritical to pick faults on Poco's generously full-size upload. -- Colin (talk) 16:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, now, among us, and if I've to be honest I do consider the CA comment (specially the second one) pixel-picking for such a big image. I've already participated in similar discussions of whether it is fair and healthy for the project to use oppose votes as pressure measure to get a fix for small flaws, and I still believe that this is not a good practice, specially when you all now that I'll fix all quality issues anybody addresses here. Poco217:28, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There's no CA that I can see in my bridge photo - it was removed in PS. Nor is it downsampled, it's cropped to get rid of the disturbing trees. Oh and @Poco: I didn't mean to pressure you; if the photo had gained enough votes even with my oppose that would have been fine by me - this is a democracy. :) --Peulle (talk) 18:49, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is CA and colour moire to similar degree to Poco's earlier uploads. But to be completely fair here, you need to blow yours up to 250% so it is 41MP also. Then pixel-level flaws just jump out at you and there is no need to squint at the screen, whereas at 44MP Pocos's image is great. You believe in judging the images equally don't you? I magnify both images to same size on my desktop. Or do you think your 6MP image should not be examined as closely as a 44MP image? Perhaps you should judge Poco's image at 40% so it is similar size to yours? In other words, you are unfairly criticizing an image because (a) it was taken by a higher resolution camera and (b) generously uploaded at full size. If instead, we judge all images at FP equally, you need to find a balance between merely looking at it full screen and looking at it 100%. If you view everything at 100% then (a) you are only looking at a tiny part of the picture and (b) you are more likely to oppose technically superior images like this one simply because they are offered in higher resolution. And that's just daft, and quite harmful to this project. -- Colin (talk) 07:01, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point about high resolution possibly weighing up for flaws, but if you're saying we should not judge images at 100% anymore that's news to me. Oh and since you're a pro perhaps you can tell me what is the difference between CA and the remains of CA; I did remove it from my photo using software, so what wer're seeing is traces of the CA that used to be there. ...--Peulle (talk) 12:28, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think most people have worked this out, but clearly not everyone (especially at QI). Photographers often point out minor details that are only visible at 100% as suggestions for fixing because many of us are perfectionists and improve techniques, but that doesn't translate to those issues being something to oppose over. If you notice the FPC page only requires photos are of a "high technical quality" and goes on to list various aspects (focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field) to consider -- nowhere does it say that images must be judged at 100%. The "complete guidelines" are just that, guidelines, and mostly aimed at beginners in photography and are generally a bit out-of-date. Really I think the page should be archived and replaced with something shorter, and with separate teaching pages for beginners who don't know about JPG compression or CA. The CA/moire in your photo is getting out-of-scope for this FPC so ping me if you are interested. -- Colin (talk) 14:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 10:09:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Namibie Himba 0712a.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Namibie Himba 0712a.jpg
weak oppose The composition looks unbalanced to me. I think it would benefit from additional Lead room on the right, or at least a tighter crop on the other sides. Otherwise very nice! --El Grafo (talk) 13:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We have very few images of this kind. So it is a pity that this picture has shortcomings (it looks tilt, left crop is not OK, etc.). Yann (talk) 08:05, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Indeed it has issues but we really lack this kind of pictures and I think it could fit minimum requirements as the composition is really nice and quality is tolerable. -- Pofka (talk) 11:48, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 11:53:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose At first I thought this was an old classic photo, maybe from the 50s ... but it's not. That loses the wow factor for me. QI, sure. FP? Not for me, sorry. --Peulle (talk) 12:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support With everything going on in this photo, B&W is definitely the right choice in this light. The artistic 'old school' feel to this is very nice. --cart-Talk16:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WeakOppose. The bright left side of the tower at the bottom left ruins it for me. It's generally not a good idea to put eye-catching things at the edge of a composition, and the heightened contrast due to the B&W conversion makes it worse. -- King of♥♦♣ ♠ 04:13, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, this is just too busy for me: Busy cityscape, busy sky and high contrast. The signal-to-noise ratio is too low for me so to speak, I'm missing a clear subject. In this case, I think I'd prefer the color version, as the colors help me to separate the different elements of the scene. I'm certainly not opposed to B&W images at FPC in general – I'd love to see more of them being nominated here so by all means please keep them coming. --El Grafo (talk) 05:37, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Without B&W effect it would have absolutely no chance. It looks pleasant with that effect but still the scene is not exceptional. -- Pofka (talk) 11:43, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 08:33:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Woman fishing for shore crabs 5.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Woman fishing for shore crabs 5.jpg
Info A woman fishing for shore crabs (Carcinus maenas) in Brofjorden at Holländaröd, Lysekil Municipality, Sweden. Her technique is simple but effective. She has bait in small net bags on strings in the shallow water under a makeshift jetty. The bait attracts crabs and as soon as they climb onto the bag, she hauls all of it up and into her landing net. The crabs are collected in a bucket, later to be cooked and eaten. The complete series can be seen in the file's page. She is not bundled up to cover her identity in the photos, it was cold and windy on the fjord and this is how she looked. All by me, -- cart-Talk08:33, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
*Oppose I'm sorry cart, the image's really interesting (I've never seen anyone fishing like that) and somehow also quite funny - but the main subject is just not very sharp... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:24, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, capturing a moment with a moving target, handheld, strong wind and light conditions changing all the time due to clouds, this is about as good as I can make it. Anyway, some additional Lightroom sharpness added. --cart-Talk16:29, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2017 at 10:05:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Жизнь и Смерть у оз. Ожогино.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Жизнь и Смерть у оз. Ожогино.jpg
Neutral Can we get rid of that giant bug on the lens (at least, that's where I hope it is) between the upper tree branches? And do we really need to have such a dramatic title? "Life and death by Lake Ozhogino" ... OK, I get it, and it sort of fits the mood, but I think it's too much for this forum. Daniel Case (talk) 19:04, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel, and I also don't like the crops. The motif is great, however, so I'd love to see a somewhat wider view of it without an insect on the lens. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2017 at 18:25:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.07.09.-07-Bossee Felde--Gemeine Becherjungfer-Maennchen.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.07.09.-07-Bossee Felde--Gemeine Becherjungfer-Maennchen.jpg
Info The raw photo is currently not present for me. Independent from that I like the crop as it is. The stem waving in the wind shows the fragility of everything. I don't know at the moment what exists right and left. Either disturbing thinks or uninteresting emptiness. --Hockei (talk) 06:50, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2017 at 13:13:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose I think the choice of base/background grey is a poor one. Generally pure white is most useful for a wide variety of purposes, though many photo images also enjoy a pure black background for such items too. The result is an image that just looks under exposed. It isn't very clean either -- if you examine our best photo/game FPs then you'll see they are meticulously clean. -- Colin (talk) 07:07, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
weak oppose I actually like the grey background, as it interplays nicely with the several different types of grey of the camera. It's good enough on a technical level – including lighting, which turns out to be a problem in similar nominations quite often. The problem is: I am not Wow-ed. To my mind, there is a certain level of perfection required to bring a very good product photograph like this to "wow, this is awesome" level. For example, cleaning your subject thoroughly can be quite tedious, but it's definitely worth the effort (compare e.g. the works by User:Evan-Amos). The strap should be either made a feature of the image or hidden behind the camera. The crop is too tight for me, especially at the top and bottom. There are some blown highlights on the top. These are of course details that could be unavoidable in most other kinds of photographs. But in a controlled studio environment the photographer has the chance to spend some extra-time on perfection, and that's what I personally expect from a Commons FP (but not necessarily Wikipedia FP) in this category. --El Grafo (talk) 08:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2017 at 01:08:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Caminho das pedras.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Caminho das pedras.JPG
Weak oppose The view is nice but not outstanding comparing it many other FPs that make a difference thank to great ligthing or spectacular view. I don't see any of both here. The picture is also tilted in cw direction Poco216:16, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 04:34:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Balloërveld, natuurgebied in Drenthe 02.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Balloërveld, natuurgebied in Drenthe 02.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 10:04:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Пешна (4862122015).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Пешна (4862122015).jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2017 at 18:09:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Викиекспедиција Бојмија 181.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Викиекспедиција Бојмија 181.jpg
Oppose I'll reserve comment for now on whether that blue is too saturated, but portrait orientation was a bad choice, giving us all this street and dead space at the bottom. Daniel Case (talk) 06:47, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2017 at 18:27:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Викиекспедиција Бојмија 165.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Викиекспедиција Бојмија 165.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2017 at 23:44:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Socozinho.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Socozinho.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 05:57:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.10.05.-05-Lauten-Weschnitz--Blaugruene Mosaikjungfer-Maennchen.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.10.05.-05-Lauten-Weschnitz--Blaugruene Mosaikjungfer-Maennchen.jpg
Maybe you're right. I was sceptical before I've nominated it. But not because of the background but of the dry leaves. --Hockei (talk) 05:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Panoramic view of Kata-Tjuta in the early morning.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Panoramic view of Kata-Tjuta in the early morning.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 23:31:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
I'm not saying if it looks attractive or not, just explaining what it is. Some may find it cool and others may think it ruins the photo, that is up to the individual viewer. --cart-Talk16:55, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@ArionEstar: I haven't been here as long as some other users, but it is generally common practice not to modify and upload a new version of someone's photograph without their consent, as a photograph, despite it being freely licensed, is someone's own artistic work, even if you're just cropping it. Obviously you didn't mean to do anything wrong, and it is easily reversible, but I thought I should point that out. I would just revert it now and then message the creator on their talk page about possible changes if they were requested. WClarke03:10, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
At first I thought it was Charles that accidentally lost half his signature as done before, but it looks like Mr. "22 July 2017" is Colin. --cart-Talk09:01, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 06:11:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Interior view of the Shah Mosque, renamed to Imam Mosque, after the 1979 Iranian Revolution, located in the northern section of the Grand Bazaar in Tehran, Iran. It was built to the order of Fath-Ali Shah Qajar of Persia during the Qajar period, as one of several such symbols of legitimacy for the new dynasty. At the time of completion, the mosque was considered to be the most significant architectural monument in Tehran. All by me, Poco206:11, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 15:26:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:De la floraison à la fructification (2).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:De la floraison à la fructification (2).jpg
Oppose The image is unique in a way, as it seems to focus on imperfection rather than the typical crop-photo-esque exactness often strived for by many photographers. Despite this, the photograph technical flaws that can't be overlooked. The depth of field is too shallow, resulting in too much area being out of focus, and the area that is in focus still could be sharper. Along with that, the colors and exposure aren't quite right: there are several places with notable clipping, and IMO the blue sky is a bit dominating over the subject (though that is hard to control). Overall it was a good concept, but with subpar execution. Sorry. WClarke02:29, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 18:12:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Январское побережье.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Январское побережье.jpg
Support This image definitely has huge wow factor for me - it also looks to have been taken under challenging conditions.--Peulle (talk) 23:08, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lovely. For this kind of camera a better resolution would be nice. And it looks like JPEG artifacts or unsharpness (at the right). --XRaytalk15:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It saddens me not to support this, but at least author could have used a better downsampling algorithm (which I think are the JPEG artefacts mentioned above)... Looks like a simple "mean value" one... - Benh (talk) 21:33, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2017 at 08:59:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Disputa de galho entre duas fêmeas de Saí-azul - Dacnis cayana.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Disputa de galho entre duas fêmeas de Saí-azul - Dacnis cayana.jpg
Oppose Sorry, but I cannot find the focus point. You can correct me, but as far as I can see it isn't on the birds. --Hockei (talk) 16:20, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. And we've got supports on less sharp OOF still ceilings, so I'm personally fine when there's slight issues on action shots. - Benh (talk) 11:29, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2017 at 12:31:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose A QI but not FP. The flower is past its best: the bottom layer expired and shrivelled, the middle layer curled and getting wrinkled and the top in bud. See this as one example that shows the flower petals in full strength. The background isolation is not IMO good enough for FP. The lighting is bright sunlight, which means the white flowers lose detail in their highlights. Better captured on an overcast day and possibly a portrait orientation captures this flower head better. -- Colin (talk) 19:51, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2017 at 20:29:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Common kingfisher at Tennōji Park in Osaka, March 2016 II.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Common kingfisher at Tennōji Park in Osaka, March 2016 II.jpg
Oppose Don't understand the voting here compared to this current nomination which has comparable sharpness and size of birds in pixels. Yet the other photo is a great picture and this one is not. The tree trunk is distracting and diagonal intersects the birds head. We already have a better FP: File:Kingfisher eating a tadpole.jpg with no distracting background at all. -- Colin (talk) 17:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Question This is the part of FP I'm still unsure of; when images are similar. Should this be a "delist/replace" discussion? We have had several images of the same species of bird promoted before - just how similar do they have to be before they overlap?--Peulle (talk) 16:38, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That's been an ongoing debate. People will never agree. In this case, I think they are dissimilar enough for both to be listed. PumpkinSkytalk21:42, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I guess we'll have to settle it democratically, then. Thanks to Colin for pointing it out and then people can decide for themselves.--Peulle (talk) 22:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not this absolutely isn't a delist/replace issue. People can take pictures of Kingfishers all they like. But FP is about "the finest on Commons" and the other pic is an order of magnitude better, particularly wrt background / composition. -- Colin (talk) 21:55, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2017 at 22:30:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
InfoEduard Wiiralt (1898–1954) is the most remarkable Estonian graphic artist and his etching Hell is one of his iconic works. Rights of that work are owned by Estonian Ministry of Culture who allowed the work under CC BY-SA 4.0. Kruusamägi (talk) 22:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 15:07:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose sorry, but the "white" of the building is too bright (burned out) and unsharp for me, otherwise very nice. Can you try please to rework this image from the raw? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:56, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Lovely, and I think that cropping out the building on the right wouldn't improve the picture, because of what you'd have to cut off to do that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:41, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 21:00:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Turbo sarmaticus 01.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Turbo sarmaticus 01.JPG
Support The depth and sharpness are excellent, the lighting is good and it illustrates the subject matter well.-- Peulle (talk) 21:00, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2017 at 04:18:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Dredged wood that has lain for years underwater.
The wood on this image has been under water for years. It has been removed from the lake during dredging operations.
created All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:18, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A more selective crop (see note) might work better here and B&W is not doing this documentation photo any favors. With color, the waterlogged logs might have contrasted well with the green(?) grass and plants and giving the viewer a clue as to what this is. In B&W it looks to much like ordinary burnt firewood. --cart-Talk09:38, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's better, but the plants were not as interesting as I hoped for. I think that for such an image to work, you need some extraordinary feature in the wood, dramatic light or something beside the log that is beautiful, creating a contrast. Sort of like this log. --cart-Talk20:17, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2017 at 08:51:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Urmas Lattikas 2011.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Urmas Lattikas 2011.jpg
Neutral This is a portrait focusing on the face, everything else is just background and unimportant. The short DoF is intentional, I don't think a professional photographer like Arno Mikkor would just accidentally chose that aperture. The white on white objects are a more interesting way to frame the subject (also giving us a hint of what he does) instead of just having a white background, so it doesn't bother me that they are very bright. Looking at the histogram, very little of the photo is actually blown, white well-kept pianos are very white. If only the face had been better lit, I would have supported this. --cart-Talk08:16, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can't agree the comments made by the PumpkinSky the slightest. Piano isn't over-exposed and this is a image of a composer and a pianist (and not an image of a piano - that is just a background). Image has to show us the face of that man and so it does. Kruusamägi (talk) 11:21, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Even if we all agree to your point, the right side of the face is over exposed; which is the main subject. The two sides of his face being so differently exposed is highly distracting to me. PumpkinSkytalk11:25, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion the face is also ok. I never nominated this image myself as I don't personally consider it to be that outstanding, but anyway... it was the comment that got me writing. Face could be more evenly lit indeed, but that isn't overexposed. Kruusamägi (talk) 12:03, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2017 at 11:27:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Корякский, Авачинский, Козельский.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Корякский, Авачинский, Козельский.jpg
regretful oppose What's happened here? The subject's great and well captured, EXIF looks fine, yet the image's technical quality leaves much to be desired... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:40, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2017 at 10:49:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Neutral I'm on the fence on this one. On the plus side, the motif is lovely and the composition seems well done - this certainly looks like a good VI. It has a certain wow factor. On the other hand, the resolution is not very high; I'd like some more info about the camera since it seems these drones can carry quite good equpiment, why such low resolution? Also, the image does need categorization, that should be fixed.--Peulle (talk) 15:42, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2017 at 08:02:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Бескрајност.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Бескрајност.jpg
Oppose Small (4.3MP for a landscape) and seems too much saturation. Possibly also a bit too much space on the left hand side. -- Colin (talk) 11:31, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2017 at 09:22:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Matka Canyon 2014.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Matka Canyon 2014.JPG
Oppose I afraid this isn't doing anything for me, and the quality isn't first class either. Mist in a valley, observed while walking in the mountains, is really quite common, and this just looks like a random snap to me. -- Colin (talk) 19:40, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2017 at 12:18:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Piéride du réséda ( Pontia daplidice) au Lac sud de Tunis.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Piéride du réséda ( Pontia daplidice) au Lac sud de Tunis.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2017 at 05:39:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support This shot reminds me of why navies use camouflaging colours on their ships; it's difficult to tell where one zebra stops and another begins. :) --Peulle (talk) 14:32, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2017 at 16:52:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Lucanus cervus male 2017 G1.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lucanus cervus male 2017 G1.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2017 at 20:32:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Umeda Sky Building, Osaka, November 2016 -01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Umeda Sky Building, Osaka, November 2016 -01.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2017 at 03:22:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Webysther 20170619072151 - Pedra do baú e a direita Vale do Paiol Grande.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Webysther 20170619072151 - Pedra do baú e a direita Vale do Paiol Grande.jpg
Support Big wow factor - the kind of beautiful image that makes you want to dive into it and experience it all live. The fog, the hills, the sky ... :) --Peulle (talk) 16:14, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2017 at 19:57:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
@Yann: Are you sure this FPX is ok? The nom did not fail, it was FPD-ed since the nominator had too many noms going on. Anyway this is a new cropped and fixed version of that first photo. --cart-Talk09:36, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't think the crop changes the quality of the picture. You can remove FPX and replace with with oppose if you support it. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:39, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I will not support it, just want to get the procedure right. I'll let someone else decide. Thanks for clarifying. --cart-Talk09:58, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, What is the logic of considering a cut image the same image? The cut was precisely to ensure approval after several notes on its framing. The information text have a link to suggestion --Webysther (talk) 17:50, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2017 at 07:25:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Панорама на Лесковица.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Панорама на Лесковица.jpg
Oppose - I might vote for a photo of this scene, but not one like this with dull light and gray skies. The resulting lack of contrast makes this very good, very sharp picture lack wow, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:57, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2017 at 09:51:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Двор на Конечки манастир.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Двор на Конечки манастир.jpg
Oppose - Is this really the best spot for a photo of the church? I think that either from the other side or the viewer's left could do the church more justice, but I haven't been there. However, right now, what's being emphasized in the photo, to my eyes and mind, are uninteresting things like a compact fluorescent light bulb, a ladder and part of a tree, whereas I'd rather see the church being emphasized. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:04, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2017 at 12:33:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/Image:Weißhandgibbon (Hylobates lar).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Weißhandgibbon (Hylobates lar).jpg
Oppose - You did that, but in my opinion, the shadowy, unsharp branch that's closer to the viewer distracts too much from the gibbon for me to consider the composition outstanding. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:31, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination The photo was intended as animal in its surrounding. If this is not wanted I withdraw the image. And cropping the photo will reduce the resolution. Alexander Leisser (talk) 12:48, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2017 at 14:21:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Münster, Speicherstadt, Handstellvorrichtung einer Weiche -- 2017 -- 1797.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Münster, Speicherstadt, Handstellvorrichtung einer Weiche -- 2017 -- 1797.jpg
Oppose Sorry, I have to agree with Charles. Light on the background instead of the subject, busy background, unattractive sky and some burned out branches. There's got to be a better way of photographing this old train-thing. --cart-Talk17:54, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination A short time of nomination, but I agree with the reviews. Sometimes a third opinion is necessary. Thank you. --XRaytalk18:30, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2017 at 17:02:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Bieler Höhe - Silvrettastausee - Wasserleitung 05.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bieler Höhe - Silvrettastausee - Wasserleitung 05.jpg
Comment Indeed it was my intention to present one of the other pictures, too. But not the same day :-) BTW, of course your right because of the pipe size but I like this one because of the colours. Let's see, maybe it's not good enough. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:58, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- I like both of them and there's no reason we can't FP both of them. The pipes are similar but their setting and perspective are plenty different. PumpkinSkytalk19:11, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I'm not opposed to having two FPs of the same subject, this just doesn't have enough wow factor for me. If the angle had been more dramatic (sort of like this) things might have been different. --cart-Talk19:50, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Cart. Not enough wow here. (The other photo is great, though shame there isn't just a bit more of the mountains and perhaps some sky -- it is an amazing scene and might benefit from a stitched photo if you can't fit it all on the one shot.) -- Colin (talk) 07:50, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2017 at 08:28:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Belle Tout lighthouse March 2017.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Belle Tout lighthouse March 2017.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 14:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Diamonds Thudufushi Beach and Water Villas, May 2017 -09.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Diamonds Thudufushi Beach and Water Villas, May 2017 -09.jpg
Info A last summer greeting from Thudufushi, a vacation resort in the Ari Atoll, Maldives. This time a deliberately touristy motif with pretty much everything the tired westerner desires - a white beach, the azure sea, a shady palm, and a cocktail bar (the large stilt house)... :-) All by me, --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:43, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak, regretful oppose Seems to have involved a lot of thought and effort, but ... still looks like the average website background image. Daniel Case (talk) 20:18, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2017 at 07:16:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Maria Saal Collegiatsstift Karner und Pfarrkirche Mariae Himmelfahrt SO-Ansicht 30062017 0005.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Maria Saal Collegiatsstift Karner und Pfarrkirche Mariae Himmelfahrt SO-Ansicht 30062017 0005.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2017 at 11:10:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Comment seems to lack definition (400mm lens?) and would be a small image if cropped (as I think it should be) to show the damsel better. Charles (talk) 19:27, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2017 at 08:44:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Ncisles Val Mont dal Ega Gherdeina.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ncisles Val Mont dal Ega Gherdeina.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 00:37:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Araçari-poca.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Araçari-poca.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 21:13:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Harebells by a road.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Harebells by a road.jpg
Info A "star" harebell with its "chorus line". Last attempt with a more innovative way of photographing plants, after this I'll go back to the old "safe" style. All by me, --cart-Talk21:13, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2017 at 22:24:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Mouette rieuse en vol au lac sud de Tunis.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mouette rieuse en vol au lac sud de Tunis.jpg
Oppose It's not very sharp for a very common bird. The sky is dull. There are better images in the category gallery. Charles (talk) 22:19, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 05:28:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.07.12.-11-Flemhuder See Quarnbek--Blaugruene Mosaikjungfer-Weibchen.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.07.12.-11-Flemhuder See Quarnbek--Blaugruene Mosaikjungfer-Weibchen.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 09:48:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Morning in Langtang.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Morning in Langtang.jpg
Comment Stunning image - but then I am a sucker for repeated mountain ridges! For me the pixel number is not an issue, but I would love to fly to the spot on Google Maps - geo location would definitely add to the value of the image. --Alandmanson (talk) 07:54, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose At only 3.7MP, 40% linear resolution compared to 24MP camera, this is too small imo for a landscape FP in 2017. Please upload a full size image for FP. -- Colin (talk) 11:58, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2017 at 07:30:52 (UTC)
Info The old archipelago ferry Skarpö during a very cold winter day on the island Utö in the outer part of Stockholm archipelago. Skarpö is a ice-going ferry and still used in the winter. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 07:30, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice, especially the one of the ferry leaving. Good set showing all four sides of the ferry pleasantly in two shots. I love that the photos are taken in the winter, we don't get many boat pics from that time of year, showing that life in the archipelago goes on as usual even if it's below freezing. --cart-Talk08:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2017 at 04:19:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Tijdelijke pijpleidingbrug over de Tramwei in Broek bij Joure 08.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tijdelijke pijpleidingbrug over de Tramwei in Broek bij Joure 08.jpg
Info Temporary pipe bridge on the Tramwei in Broek at Joure for transportation of diluted with water to the dredging mud depot. Nice tight line play of rusty pipelines contra-fresh spring green. created All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but no. I find the trees disturbing the motif, the lower part of the scene is in shadow (very little, but still) and it is too centered. To get this, I would have crouched low to get just sky behind the pipes and placed the diagonal pipe in the bottom corner or something like that. --cart-Talk16:24, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We already had some interesting shots of ugly, rusty pipes, however these trees in the background ruins the composition here and makes it quite usual shot for me as well. -- Pofka (talk) 20:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2017 at 18:49:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2017-07-23 11-15-49 reconst-histo-belfort.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017-07-23 11-15-49 reconst-histo-belfort.jpg
Oppose The guy with the sunglasses at the back ruins the effect. Not to mention the woman half cut at left. Sorry. Yann (talk) 19:05, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I'd probably support this if the left crop was better. The muzzle flames and smoke are well captured, and that's difficult since it all happens very quickly.--Peulle (talk) 13:23, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2017 at 18:46:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2017-07-22 15-20-51 reconst-histo-belfort.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017-07-22 15-20-51 reconst-histo-belfort.jpg
Oppose I could bear the people in the background, but not the man with his smartphone and the flying arm at left. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:08, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2017 at 09:21:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Blue Hour Piazza Duomo 5 - Syracuse - Unesco World Heritage.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Blue Hour Piazza Duomo 5 - Syracuse - Unesco World Heritage.jpg
Comment And since this nominator may not be used to the crude shorthand used in the votes above, "Verticals" means that the main problem with the photo is that is needs some perspective adjustment. A good way of getting a photo ready for FPC is to first nominate it for Quality image since that is were such issues can be commented on, advice given and photos fixed. --cart-Talk14:17, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2017 at 12:17:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2016.09.09.-09-Anglersee Bruehl--Grosse Heidelibelle-Weibchen.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016.09.09.-09-Anglersee Bruehl--Grosse Heidelibelle-Weibchen.jpg
CommentI know the colouring is different (neither are the typical bright yellow of young/middle-aged adults) but this existing FP is of a very high quality. The nomination is better than the other FPs but comparable to some of the QIs which have more typical colouring. Charles (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The other one is partially better and partially not. It is a male this a female. I didn't know that the guideline says that the typical colouring of a species is a criteria for FP. BTW, the colouring of this female isn't nontypical. --Hockei (talk) 19:06, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2017 at 00:27:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Aleksander Uurits. Portrait of a Lady. TKM 0088M.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Aleksander Uurits. Portrait of a Lady. TKM 0088M.jpg
Support should be nominated for QI, although I wasn't sure it had sufficient wow factor for me to vote for FP. In the end, though, it has high resolution and very good quality even along the edges, which brings it over the finishing line.--Peulle (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 22:07:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2017 at 13:00:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Never shoot a cow or a horse while eating... The image is nice and the white horse gives a good contrast but a grazing horse is quite boring. If it was looking at you or would do something interesting, I think this could be a great shot. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:12, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I wish it was sharper in the background but after all the subject is the horse, and I find grazing animals to very often be quite peaceful. Daniel Case (talk) 17:24, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Daniel, I was wondering whether I had violated a non-written (or maybe written, but unknown to me) law about not photographing animals while grazing. What is your source, Basotxerri? Poco217:34, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: I think he may just be stating a personal preference. I can understand—I get the feeling that, like me, he lives in an area where it's very easy to go out and get shots of ruminating animals in pastures, so he may see this a lot—but I think it's really just a matter of taste. Daniel Case (talk) 17:51, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: Sorry if I stated it if it was some of the FPC guidelines. The reason is a bit like Daniel comments. Out here are a lot of free-roaming horses and the challenge is to get near and calling their attention anyway. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:32, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2017 at 19:34:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:The Devil bargains with God over Job's faith in Duomo (San Gimignano).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Devil bargains with God over Job's faith in Duomo (San Gimignano).jpg
Info The Collegiate Church of Santa Maria Assunta, San Gimignano is a Roman Catholic collegiate church and minor basilica located in San Gimignano, Tuscany, central Italy, situated in the Piazza del Duomo at the town's heart. The church is famous for its fresco cycles which include works by Domenico Ghirlandaio, Benozzo Gozzoli, Taddeo di Bartolo, Lippo Memmi and Bartolo di Fredi. The basilica is located within the UNESCO World Heritage Site of the "Historic Centre of San Gimignano", with its frescos being described by UNESCO as "works of outstanding beauty". All by LivioAndronico(talk)19:34, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Good picture of an important work. The lower left corner looks unsharp, but as Livio explained in a previous nomination of a photo of a fresco in the Collegiata, that's from damage to the work. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:52, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support The fact that God and the Devil are eating, drinking and have a band playing while they do such serious negotiations gives a good insight into how politics were done at the time this was painted. --cart-Talk09:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for correcting me, I didn't know the whole story. With old paintings it is always hard to know how much of it is from the original texts and how much is colored by the customes at the time it was painted. --cart-Talk10:12, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No problem whatsoever! It's always fun trying to decipher old paintings, a broad view of the period is essential and I'm by no means an expert. Most of the time you need several experts from different disciplines to make something of it. --cart-Talk11:35, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2017 at 15:05:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/Image:Junge Kohlmeise (Parus major) kurz nach dem Verlassen des Nistkastens.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Junge Kohlmeise (Parus major) kurz nach dem Verlassen des Nistkastens.jpg
Support - The top and bottom crops could be more generous, but I like the bird and the composition, otherwise, and it's especially nice to see its talons curled around the branch. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:26, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2017 at 10:35:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2017 at 19:33:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support I saw this bird on Christian's Flickr stream. I like this because it is more than just a "species identification" photo. It has a perfectly mirror-smooth pond and I enjoy the criss-cross of the legs and diagonals including the beak. -- Colin (talk) 19:33, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Colin. In my view, this "reflectional" composition is everything; without it, this would indeed be "just another image" of a bird.--Peulle (talk) 20:28, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2017 at 13:40:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:منظره چرام.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:منظره چرام.jpg
Oppose Image's small size doesn't help as it's very unsharp at distance, plus the white balance seems a little on the cool side. Daniel Case (talk) 02:38, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Info Panoramic view during sunset of Dasht-e Loot, in English "Emptiness desert", located in the provinces of Kerman and Sistan-Baluchistan, Iran. This place is pretty special for being the spot on the Earth where the highest temperature was ever measured (70 °C or 159 °F) and since July 2016 a UNESCO World Heritage Site. All by me, Poco2 14:20, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Support -- Poco2 14:20, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but I'm just not wowed. For me it's an average composition in average light. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:09, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Comment Your comments about the lighting conditions comply one hundred percent with my thoughts about the situation of the image. Hopefully it will occur one day that I will be there shooting at sunup or sundown. I started my prayers to God asking Him for compliancy. ;) -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 10:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
--LivioAndronico (talk) 13:17, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
Here's to a hundred more!! --cart-Talk 11:25, 1 July 2017 (UTC).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Done Please, the size increased -- Swift11
chromatic aberrations by the top of the trees, then there's the compression issues/grain in the grass near the camera as well as in the fog on the near left.--Peulle (talk) 10:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Fixed Fixed some technical flaws... Peulle thank you! -- Swift11 13:39, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
Neutral It has a certain wow factor, but the grain is disturbing. I know it was 1970, but the technology back then wasn't good enough to get a decent shot inside the White House? It just looks like the guy grabbed any old camera and took a snapshot rather than preparing with a proper camera and a flash. I'm not opposing because of said wow factor, but I just can't bring myself to support it either.--Peulle (talk) 12:02, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
). Good for you for making this one work so well. And how helpful that one of them has its IMO painted on its stern! Daniel Case (talk) 20:03, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
.jpg)
I withdraw my nomination --Basotxerri (talk) 16:07, 28 June 2017 (UTC).jpg)
Question- And why are images of a random and also quite common animals as nominated here then something "special"? Thence, I cannot see the criteria to be honest.--Joobo (talk) 08:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_female_underside.JPG)
.jpg)
_with_hand.jpg)
I don't see any significant difference. I've chosen this one because it stands out better from the background. --Hockei (talk) 17:54, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
_de_La_Roche-sur-Yon.jpg)
Request Thanks Wolf im Wald, cart for noting that. Could you advise if I can upload a new version of the same file (the file is already a QI and I wonder if this affects overwrite policy). I have a slightly rotated and cropped version without the white showing that I can upload as new version.-- Shankar Raman (talk) 12:55, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Daphne Lantier 05:38, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Daphne Lantier 18:01, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_male_Swinley.jpg)
That means that the origin of the dragonfly is decisive for FP? --Hockei (talk) 07:15, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
.jpg)
I always portray the life as natural as it is. E.g. this specimen also was in natural position. It was sitting and flattering it's wings. Animals often do thinks that we wouldn't expect. --Hockei (talk) 05:50, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_mating,_male_(l)_and_female_(r).jpg)
_-_Dome.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_male.jpg)
_-_Reymonta_street,_gate.jpg)
Delist and replace -- Colin (talk) 20:14, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_Peblinge-See,_S%C3%B8pavillonen_--_2017_--_1453.jpg)
_03.jpg)
--Famberhorst (talk) 16:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)_02.jpg){kind=small}
_au_Lac_sud_de_Tunis.jpg)
.jpg)
I will vote .jpg){kind=small}
.jpg)
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_female_underside.JPG,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_de_La_Roche-sur-Yon.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
![84 File:Ceiling of "Loggia d'onore" in Palazzao Te,Mantua.jpg, not featured](#File:Ceiling_of_"Loggia_d'onore"_in_Palazzao_Te,Mantua.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_male_Swinley.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_mating,_male_(l)_and_female_(r).jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_-_Dome.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_male.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_-_Reymonta_street,_gate.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
,_Peblinge-See,_Søpavillonen_--_2017_--_1453.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_03.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_au_Lac_sud_de_Tunis.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_kurz_nach_dem_Verlassen_des_Nistkastens.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
,_Nationalmuseum_--_2017_--_1473-9.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_female.jpg){kind=link}
_female_underside.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_female_underside.JPG){kind=link}
_female_underside.JPG,_featured){kind=link}
_male.jpg){kind=link}
_female_underside.JPG,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_de_La_Roche-sur-Yon.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_de_La_Roche-sur-Yon.jpg){kind=link}
_de_La_Roche-sur-Yon.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_de_La_Roche-sur-Yon.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sonnenuntergang_an_der_Spree,_Berlin,_1705252136,_ako.jpg){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sonnenuntergang_an_der_Spree,_Berlin,_1705252151,_ako.jpg){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sonnenuntergang_an_der_Spree,_Berlin,_1705252134,_ako.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
![13:32, 1 July 2017 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/July_2017#c-Livioandronico2013-2017-07-01T13:32:00.000Z-File:Ceiling_of_"Loggia_d'onore"_in_Palazzao_Te,Mantua.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
![06:13, 11 July 2017 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/July_2017#c-Daphne_Lantier-2017-07-11T06:13:00.000Z-File:Ceiling_of_"Loggia_d'onore"_in_Palazzao_Te,Mantua.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_male_Swinley.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_male_Swinley.jpg){kind=link}
_male_Swinley.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_male_Swinley.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_mating,_male_(l)_and_female_(r).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_mating,_male_(l)_and_female_(r).jpg){kind=link}
_mating,_male_(l)_and_female_(r).jpg,_feat){kind=link}
_mating,_male_(l)_and_female_(r).jpg,_feat){kind=link}
_-_Dome.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_Dome.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Dome.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_-_Dome.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
_male.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_male.jpg){kind=link}
_male.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_male.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
,_1706281217,_ako.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Reymonta_street,_gate.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_Reymonta_street,_gate.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Reymonta_street,_gate.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_-_Reymonta_street,_gate.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
,_Peblinge-See,_S%C3%B8pavillonen_--_2017_--_1453.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
,_Peblinge-See,_S%C3%B8pavillonen_--_2017_--_1453.jpg){kind=link}
,_Peblinge-See,_Søpavillonen_--_2017_--_1453.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
,_Peblinge-See,_Søpavillonen_--_2017_--_1453.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_03.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_03.jpg){kind=link}
_03.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_03.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_au_Lac_sud_de_Tunis.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_au_Lac_sud_de_Tunis.jpg){kind=link}
_au_Lac_sud_de_Tunis.jpg,_not_featu){kind=link}
_au_Lac_sud_de_Tunis.jpg,_not_featu){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_female.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_male_yellow_abdomen_and_brown_pterostigma.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
_GC.JPG){kind=link}
_female_in_flight_2.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg,_){kind=link}
.jpg,_){kind=link}
_kurz_nach_dem_Verlassen_des_Nistkastens.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_kurz_nach_dem_Verlassen_des_Nistkastens.jpg){kind=link}
_kurz_nach_dem_Verlassen_des_Nistkastens.jpg)
_kurz_nach_dem_Verlassen_des_Nistkastens.jpg,){kind=link}
_kurz_nach_dem_Verlassen_des_Nistkastens.jpg,){kind=link}
,_Nationalmuseum_--_2017_--_1473-9.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
,_Nationalmuseum_--_2017_--_1473-9.jpg){kind=link}
,_Nationalmuseum_--_2017_--_1473-9.jpg)
,_Nationalmuseum_--_2017_--_1473-9.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
,_Nationalmuseum_--_2017_--_1473-9.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
._in_het_Nationaal_park_Stelvio_(Itali%C3%AB)._Houten_kruis_boven_op_rots_naast_de_bergweg_01.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
