Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 20 2016

Consensual review edit

File:Kosice 20.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Chapel of Saint Michael with Sculpture of Saint Michael in the centre of Koscice, in eastern Slovakia --Scotch Mist 09:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Oppose - Basically good, and a beautiful chapel, but the photo probably should be sharper for QI, as the cross and some of the upper reaches of the chapel are not sharp. Would you like to try sharpening more? -- Ikan Kekek 09:54, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Done: Thank you for your feedback - have attempted to sharpen but not sure I have made sufficient progress, especially as the cross appears to have caught the sun! --Scotch Mist 12:15, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Comment I don't notice any sharpening on the chapel, and in fact, at the lower reaches, you've actually decreased the sharpness. The clear improvement is that you denoised the sky. I'm not ready to promote this photo, but it's close to the line, so feel free to take it to Consensual Review if you like, or wait a few days and see if anyone else is confident in ruling pro or con on the photo. -- Ikan Kekek 13:41, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 20:22, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Napoleone_Bonaparte's_Tomb.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Napoleone Bonaparte's Tomb --Livioandronico2013 21:58, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:58, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Please see annotations.--Jebulon 16:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The distortions are negligible for me, but not the overexposure on some reliefs. Sorry --A.Savin 13:53, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Yeah, the lights near those reliefs are so blown out that they blow out everything around them. I know those aren't the subject, but they're disturbing at full size, so I think A.Savin is right. -- Ikan Kekek 15:17, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 20:20, 19 December 2016 (UTC)