Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 06 2023

Consensual review edit

File:Bony_de_la_Pica_(3).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Bony de la Pica (2405 m) in Sant Julia de Loria/Andorra parish, Andorra. --Tournasol7 05:12, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
      Oppose Sadly a bit too dark. --SHB2000 05:20, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
    Sorry, but I disagree. This is the dust, so low-key is natural here. --Tournasol7 05:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
      Oppose Underexposed. A polarisation filter could have helped too --Grunpfnul 10:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support ok for this time of the day.--Ermell 10:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support by Ermell --Robert Flogaus-Faust 14:32, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support It's blue hour, so it is expected that it will be overall dark. --C messier 19:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:45, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Pfälzerhütte_(valo139).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination The Pfälzerhütte in Liechtenstein seen from the west --Valo139 00:21, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    Nice POV but the lack of resolution :/ --Grunpfnul 09:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
    If it's too bad, please decline it. Sadly I don't have a higher resolution version. --Valo139 10:03, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
      Oppose lack of resolution --Grunpfnul 10:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
      Support I disagree. I don't agree with the decline-reason. The resolution is okay here in my eyes. Maybe a larger image of the hut is meant. But the composition shown is also okay in my opinion. Maybe it lacks a bit sharpness, but overall good enough for QI, I think. --Milseburg 13:04, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment There's a little posterization in the sky, though. You might consider smoothing out the change to darker tones in the upper part. -- Ikan Kekek 19:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per Milseburg.--Ermell 10:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Weak   Support. A little soft, a little overprocessed, but neither is really annoying when printing up to A4 size. We have to accept that phones nowadays deliver acceptable quality in good light conditions and sufficient for QI. -- Smial 13:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

File:A_caterpillar_of_Jamides_bochus_(Stoll,_1782)_-_Dark_Cerulean_WLB.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination: A caterpillar of Jamides bochus (Stoll, 1782) - Dark Cerulean. By User:Anitava Roy --Bodhisattwa 18:08, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Review
      Support OK quality for QI, but poor composition for a studio shot. Easy to use more natural background --Charlesjsharp 23:09, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
      Oppose although the background may be natural, it looks unusual and unnatural to me. --SHB2000 23:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 12:58, 5 January 2023 (UTC)