Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 29 2015

Consensual review edit

File:RhB E-Lok IMG 2512ac.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Electric locomotive typ Ge 6/6 II of the meter gauge Rhaetian Railways entering the station of Bergün Switzerland --CHK46 08:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline   Support Good quality. --Billy69150 08:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
      Comment Really QI? Is it not a bit overexposed at the right? -- Spurzem 20:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
      Oppose Yes, it is. --Berthold Werner 07:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose -- Spurzem 18:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Hubertl 06:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Kvarteret_Toppsockret_May_2015_01.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Facade of residential building in Hökarängen. --ArildV 20:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)*   Comment has Sweden been visited by Mr. Hundertwasser in his early days? Please look at the lines on the upper side. Looks like an result of an earthquake. --Hubertl 05:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Perharps before Mr. Hundertwasser stopped using a ruler. The horizontal lines are not straight because the building is curved, please compare with this images and the category--ArildV 06:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose In this case, this image has been taken just about on meter more from the left, to demonstrate this construction detail. In this case, the picture doesn´t show this special construction. I´m happy to get some more opinions. Basicly, the technic is ok, but the composition is bad and incorrect. --Hubertl 07:07, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Comment I strongly disagree, the point was to show the design of balconies and windows (not to demostrate the sharp of the building). One out of ten images focusing on different aspects of the building. I therefore dont think this symmetrical composition is bad or wrong. --ArildV 07:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support Somewhat dull lighting, but in all other aspects absolutely QI. I really do not understand the decline vote above. -- Smial 09:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support The quality is good and photo demonstrate exact what is described. --Nino Verde 15:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Hubertl 06:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Kehlsteinhaus Umgebung.JPG edit

 

  • Nomination "Eagle´s nest" and Alps --Nordenfan 12:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality. See notes ;-) --Hubertl 16:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree. Verry informative and well labeled. But a unfortunate composition. To much sky and no golden cut. You´ve already given the QI award yourself. This is not o.k. --Milseburg 17:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC) *   Comment und inwieweit habe ich mir den Award selbst gegeben? Bin ich Nordenfan, Milseburg? Ich glaube, du liegst damit jetzt aber gewaltig schief. Ich reagiere immer etwas unwirsch auf solche Anschuldigungen. Nachhaltig.--Hubertl 17:55, 18 May 2015 *   Comment Sorry, Milseburg, ich hab jetzt erst gesehen, was du gemeint hast. Das ist wirklich sehr eigenwillig, was sich da der Nordenfan gedacht hat.--Hubertl 18:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC) Auch sorry, ich hätte deutlicher machen sollen, wen ich anspreche. Selbstredend war Nordenfan gemeint. Das Lob für die Beschriftung geht aber eindeutig an dich, Hubertl. Ich bemerkte eben erst, dass die von dir ist. --Milseburg 19:48, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition, too much empty sky.--Jebulon 21:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Hubertl 06:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Dome_of_Musei_capitolini.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Dome of Musei capitolini --Livioandronico2013 13:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Comment Can you get the crop symmetrical? It's a bit tighter to the left. --C messier 16:17, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Oppose Overexposed in center --Daniel Case 02:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    •   Comment IMHO, the center, although brighter from the rest of the image, due to light I suppose, is not overexposed, (no FFFF, shows structure). Please discuss. --C messier 07:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support no futher comment.--Tobias "ToMar" Maier 14:53, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support --Σπάρτακος 10:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Hubertl 06:15, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:CoA_Pius_IX_in_Porta_Portese.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination CoA Pius IX in Porta Portese --Livioandronico2013 08:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --Hubertl 08:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for now. Categorization (done). IMO the perspective does not need such a tilt (to be discussed)) and I would like a geocode, please (not a mandatory, I know).--Jebulon 10:27, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Comment No, no ... I thought, I not retreat. The perspective is perfect (I hate distortion) is not frontal. Come on guys, what you think? --Livioandronico2013 21:00, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • you can keep the lateral perspective, which is nice and more interesting than a frontal view (relief), but correcting the horizontal line, which is excessively tilted IMO.--Jebulon 11:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
If is lateral don't need horizontal but lateral adjustment.--Livioandronico2013 14:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand.--Jebulon 20:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support IMHO for this picture, the perspective is ok, because it is not a frontal shoot. QI is not about interesting composition, we are working with tecnical rules --The Photographer 16:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, I don't agree with Photographer. Composition is a very important component of quality. This disturbs me a lot. Since it is almost frontal a correction of horizontal lines is due and even very easy as I guess.--Moroder 21:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support Good for me --Σπάρτακος 10:47, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Livioandronico2013 21:06, 28 May 2015 (UTC)