Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 25 2017

Consensual review edit

File:Völs_am_Schlern_Kalter_Keller_Höfeweg_Tafel.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Cellar with natural ventilation on the Höfeweg (farmhouse trail) in Völs am Schlern, South Tyrol. --Moroder 12:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Comment The curse of woodland shots... There are overexposed areas, I doubt that they can be fixed reasonably but please try. --Basotxerri 09:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I've already done my best. These areas are inevitable but imho not relevant for the quality of the image --Moroder 17:01, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry but IMO it's important. However, feel free to move this to CR. --Basotxerri 06:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
I disagree --Moroder 15:11, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, while I understand the problems in such a photo, there are at least 2 significantly burned areas. PumpkinSky 21:13, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 08:08, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Völs_am_Schlern_Kalter_Keller_Höfeweg.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Cellar with natural ventilation on the farmhouse trail in Völs am Schlern, South Tyrol. --Moroder 06:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Comment Please try to fix the overexposed highlight in this one, too, but it's possible that it can't be fixed. --Basotxerri 09:14, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I've already done my best. These areas are inevitable but imho not relevant for the quality of the image --Moroder 17:01, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   OpposeSorry but IMO it's important. However, feel free to move this to CR. --Basotxerri 06:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment You might like to crop the photo so that it shows the cellar and sufficient woodland to illustrate the context of the ruin and then submit it as "Valued image" where the photo quality requirements are lower, but the originality and assocaited comments are higher that for a QI. -- Martinvl 10:55, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
      Comment Thanks for you comment but I'd like to show the natural environment of the cellar which is important and I'll post some other more detailed pictures of the structure --Moroder 06:47, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Good for me. I think it is the impression which I had when walking at a sunny day in this wood. -- Spurzem 08:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Good for me too. Taking a lot of outdoor photos myself, I understand the difficulty in such a photo.PumpkinSky 21:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I understand what you mean but in these cirunstances you've got to use HDR because the dynamic range of your camera simply can't get it. If we shoot a photo at 1/5 s and it's get motion-blurred, we don't argue that it was dark either and there was no other way to take it, do we? Sorry, only my opinion. --Basotxerri 15:24, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment You are right but I don#t like HDR for the colour distortions and to tell you the truth I'm not very familiar with HDR. My point in this foto is that the overexposed parts are irrelevant, this can be accepted and not be accepted. Thanks for the discussion. Gut Licht! --Moroder 16:52, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Peulle 08:09, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Fetzima 2.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Levomilnacipran Capsules --Sixflashphoto 01:15, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 05:21, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree, the light is bad, not enough detail, the grains are blurred together,   chromatic aberration on the letters. At least some focus stacking could be done for such a studio photo. --W.carter 16:01, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too shallow DoF I think.--Peulle 13:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I think the main problem here is that it's very dark over-all, given that this is supposed to be a white background. Easy to fix in post, though. --El Grafo 15:09, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Image is not sharp, making it brighter won't help. --Shansov.net 03:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 08:11, 24 August 2017 (UTC)