Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 14 2015

Consensual review edit

File:Tawau_Sabah_LA-Hotel-01.jpg edit

 

  Question Can you please give me a hint, what exactly is distorted, PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ? The verticals are rectilinear as far as I see. --Cccefalon 15:42, 13 January 2015 (UTC)   Info I think, it is not distorted. But the focus is apparently on the coconut tree, leaving the middle part of the building "just in focus" but fading away for the more distant roof part. I tried pixel compression and it would be ok. However, I know that pixel compression is a disputable method. My proposal is, to withdraw the photo and after the QICbot eliminated it from the queue, I will upload a compressed version for encyclopedial use. --Cccefalon 16:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  •   Comment The image is perfect on the left side, but on the right the building seems inclined me, distortion is visible on the roof. Now may be the architect built it and, in this case, it is a mistake on my part.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 16:45, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:2014_Kamieniec_Ząbkowicki,_pl._Kościelny_7,_03.JPG edit

 

  • Nomination Kamieniec Ząbkowicki Abbey 2 --Jacek Halicki 12:24, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion   Support Good quality. --Hubertl 13:44, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
    Sorry Hubertl! The Abbey is in good quality, but the blue sky is completely washed out and needs repair. Also, the fuzzy bird interfere and should be removed, also a sensor spot. The coordinates would be nice! --Steindy 00:42, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support--Livioandronico2013 20:08, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Comment 1 dustspots (see note) --Christian Ferrer 08:29, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
      Done--Jacek Halicki 10:36, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support --Christian Ferrer 11:33, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 11:20, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose →   Promoted   --C messier 15:14, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (076).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination An ÖBB Railjet passes the Neunkirchen railwaystation. --Steindy 00:43, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline   Support Good quality, though difficult insolation conditions. --Johann Jaritz 03:41, 08 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose blown out sky and details --Christian Ferrer 17:21, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Dnalor 01 09:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I accept that the sky is not the main subject here, but there is no detail in large parts, same is true for parts of the roof. The image is also unsharp in large parts. Difficult to get right, admittedly. --DXR 22:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Christian Ferrer --Livioandronico2013 20:09, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --C messier 15:13, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Mimizan- azulejos (2).JPG edit

  • Nomination Mimizan .- Azulejos de la créperie "Chez Julan" Landes (département)--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 09:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline Insufficient quality. Unsharp, the file is to small (less than 2MB) for QI too. --Dnalor 01 10:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      Comment The 2 Megapixels rule is for file resolution not for file size (in KB or MB). This file has greater resolution than 2 MP. Please read Guidelines. --Joydeep 12:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC) *   Comment I see a problem with FOP in France, ADEVA CERÁMICAS was founded in 1981! For me, its an artistic work. --Hubertl 12:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
    Okay, thanks, I've changed it to discuss. --Dnalor 01 13:36, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      Oppose on quality grounds (why did you take a photo of a photo?), DRed on derivative work grounds. Mattbuck 17:02, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      Info It is a own picture reworked with Aviary Photo Editor--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 17:43, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --C messier 15:17, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Mimizan.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Mimizan dans les Landes (département) Aquitaine--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 09:27, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline The file is to small (less than 2MB) for QI. --Dnalor 01 11:11, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      Comment The 2 Megapixels rule is for file resolution not for file size (in KB or MB). This file has greater resolution than 2 MP. Please read Guidelines. --Joydeep 12:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Okay, thanks, I've changed it to discuss. --Dnalor 01 13:36, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      Oppose - Overexposed. Mattbuck 17:02, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      Comment How have you scaled your monitor, Mattbuck? --Steindy 18:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Its really overexposed, especially on the right upper corner, and too, it has a massive perspective distortion, due to the extreme wide angle used. It is fixable, but only with PS. Additional, the WB has to be corrected.--Hubertl 11:12, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
    •   Done(test) correction of exposure--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 14:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
      • The problem of overexposure is not that it's #FFFFFF, it's that you lose information. Remapping #FFFFFF to something darker does not magically cause this information to reappear. Mattbuck 23:20, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --C messier 15:12, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Mimizan les plages (5).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination: Plage Nord à Mimizan dans les Landes (département) Aquitaine--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 09:27, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Review
  •   Support Good quality. --Hubertl 09:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
    •   Comment Very nice impression, but the file is to small (less than 2MB) for QI. --Dnalor 01 11:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      •   Comment you are right, Dnalor 01, the original file has 5.04 MB, it is just too compressed. It needs a new, lower compressed version from the original file! --Hubertl 11:31, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
        •   Comment The 2 Megapixels rule is for file resolution not for file size (in KB or MB). This file has greater resolution than 2 MP. --Joydeep 12:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

  Oppose - Blur at edges, noise, notable perspective distortion. Mattbuck 17:02, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

  •   InfoThat is logic with a wide angle supplement.- I can fix anything
    • You can or you can´t? --Hubertl 11:16, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
      • I can not correct the perspective of this photo, here even more deformed--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 12:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC).
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --C messier 15:27, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Vatican_City_(VA),_Petersdom_--_2013_--_4198.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Saint Peter's Basilica, Vatican --XRay 06:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --Hubertl 09:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

  Oppose Needs a rotation, the line must be horizontal. Very bad and insufficient description and categorization.--Jebulon 14:11, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  Fixed Issues fixed. Thanks for your review.--XRay 06:45, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --C messier 15:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC)--C messier 16:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)