Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 12 2019

Consensual review edit

File:Monument_Savonarola_in_the_background_of_Este_Castle._Ferrara,_Italy.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Monument Savonarola in the background of Este Castle. Ferrara, Italy --Ввласенко 12:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Oppose Sorry, too soft --MB-one 13:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice composition. GQ. --Basotxerri 13:08, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I see no lack. -- Spurzem 15:39, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - It's a very good composition, but I wish the top of the statue of Savanarola were sharper. Is it possible to sharpen it without damaging anything? -- Ikan Kekek 01:46, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - It's a bit better. It's still close to the line between Qi and not QI in that area, but the overall impression of the photo is very good. -- Ikan Kekek 00:32, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Image is not sharp enough --Shansov.net 18:30, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Ikan. --Aristeas 09:20, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Basotxerri 19:35, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Saslonch_Sella_Pic_Seceda_Odles_inviern.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Resciesa in Urtijëi, South Tyrol. --Moroder 11:18, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Amazing --Podzemnik 13:01, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree. The background in the middle is lacking sharpness in comparison to the left and right part. There is a little stitching error, see note. Besides this issues very good. But not a QI yet. --Milseburg 13:17, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment It is not a stitching error it's a cloud (I can see it also on the single take). I could easily sharpen the huge image resizing, but someone has to tell me yet if resizing is allowed or not ;-) --Moroder 16:38, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I´m not sure, if this would be a good solution. The problem is, that you slightly changed the focus during the shots. So the background is of different sharpness. Maybe the sharpness jump will remain visible if you try to hide it by scaling down. The cloud is in the transition area. Maybe it´s really the only little one in front of the mountains. --Milseburg 17:13, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I see this as a bit of a problem with the shutter speed. There is movement blur on the twig she is holding, and this could explain the slight lack of sharpness on some of the mountains too. I myself am hardly ever getting sharp images below 1/125.--Peulle 01:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
    •   Comment This reasoning doesn't make sense at all. The twig moves because of the wind or her moving hand. --Moroder 10:25, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  • It makes perfect sense: a higher shutter speed would have eliminated the motion blur.--Peulle 11:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Tiny problems on a 113 MP panorama. -- King of Hearts 04:20, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Left and right part is really amazing. But the middle is blurred, especially on the mountains in background. --Johannes Robalotoff 11:16, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportBeautiful panorama and good quality for me. Tournasol7 12:29, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Milseburg. --Fischer.H 18:33, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good for me. At the back it is blurred, but only in a small part. But because of the size of the picture, it does not look like it when viewed. --Milan Bališin 20:45, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality, it's a shame one of the frames isn't as sharp (making the image uneven) but it's sharp enough imo. --Trougnouf 18:48, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose →   Promoted   --Basotxerri 19:36, 11 January 2019 (UTC)