User talk:Cccefalon/Archives/2014

Fragen über Fragen zum Rotkanal

Hallo Cccefalon! Du hattest auf QIC nachgefragt wegen meines Kommentares zu der Übersättigung des Rot-Kanals bei diesem Bild. Ich hatte diesbzgl. mal eine inhaltlich interessante Diskussion mit Julian Herzog, s. User_talk:Julian_Herzog/Archive_2013#Clipped_Reds. Im DSLR-Forum (Verweis auf der Diskussionsseite) hatte ich zu dem Thema auch mal eine Diskussion eröffnet. Ich schalge mich nun schon seit längerer Zeit mit dem Thema rum und gewinne immer mehr den Eindruck, dass, zumindest die Sensoren von Nikon, extrem anfällig für dieses Clipping sind. Fraglich ist und bleibt: Wenn Channel-Clipping so schnell auftritt, ist es gar so schlimm wie z.B. von Julian (und anderen) angenommen. Was genau bedeutet das Clipping ganz praktisch für das Bild? Im Falle des roten Shirts auf deinem Foto: Würde man z.B. noch mehr Struktur von dem Shirt sehen, oder ist es einfach so rot, dass der Rotkanal übersättigen MUSS. Fragen über Fragen. Vielleicht kannst du etwas Erhellendes dazu beitragen. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:50, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

hallo tuxyso; ich bin gerade mit der Kamera in Sabah unterwegs und habe nur ein smartphone zur Verfügung. Wenn ich zurück bin, werde ich versuchen, eine passende Antwort zu finden. Lieben Gruß, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 12:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Masjid-Padang-Lalang-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:59, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Malacca Malaysia Jonker-Walk-Arch-and-Tamil-Methodist-Church-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:17, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Malacca Malaysia Malacca-Straits-Mosque-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 08:20, 22 January 2014 (UTC)  Support QI for me --Godewind 10:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Malacca Malaysia Malacca-Straits-Mosque-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Tiny tilt CCW, if removed it's QI --P e z i 08:25, 22 January 2014 (UTC)  Done Thank you for reviewing, I uploaded a rectilinear version. --Cccefalon 17:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC)  Support OK now. --P e z i 23:38, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Fisherboat-at-Pantai-Pasir-Hitam-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 00:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)  Support QI for me --Godewind 10:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Leong-San-Tong-Khoo-Kongsi-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good picture and impressive temple ! And far much better because isolated ! I wanted to open the file, this time... Don't neglect the psychology of the reviewer...--Jebulon 16:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Wat-Chaiya-Mangkalaram-Temple-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment I think with more light, image would be better --Halavar 17:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)  Done Well, this side of building is in the shadow. Nonetheless, I altered tone curve and uploaded a new version. --Cccefalon 17:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC) Great, looks much better. --Halavar 18:27, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Wat-Chaiya-Mangkalaram-Temple-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 16:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Chinese-Cemetery-at-Bukit-Cina-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 11:27, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Chinese-Cemetery-at-Bukit-Cina-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 16:27, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Malacca Malaysia Malacca-Straits-Mosque-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Frank Schulenburg 05:48, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Malacca Malaysia Malacca-Straits-Mosque-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support good --A.Savin 14:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Geographer-Cafe-at-Jonker-Walk-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --EveryPicture 19:34, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Penang-Chinese-Anti-War-Memorial-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Queen-Victoria-Diamond-Jubilee-Clocktower-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Melaka-Warrior-Monument-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Ravenala-madagascariensis-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Queen-Victoria-Diamond-Jubilee-Clocktower-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 15:34, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Dhammikarama-Burmese-Buddhist-Temple-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Melaka-Warrior-Monument-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Dhammikarama-Burmese-Buddhist-Temple-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 06:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Masjid-Kapitan-Keling-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Weak pro Good quality. A little bit dark, but still QI for me. --XRay 15:46, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Sabah CityMosque-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:23, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Kek-Lok-Si-Temple-29.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharpness just ok, but composition is great. --Poco a poco 17:06, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Kek-Lok-Si-Temple-14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Weak pro A little bit unsharp, but IMO still QI. --XRay 09:32, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Kek-Lok-Si-Temple-22.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 14:03, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Kek-Lok-Si-Temple-15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:59, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Kek-Lok-Si-Temple-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 09:26, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Kek-Lok-Si-Temple-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:04, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Penang-Chinese-Anti-War-Memorial-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment There are CAs at the top of the obelisk. Please have a look.--XRay 07:48, 25 January 2014 (UTC)  You are right, I removed it an uploaded a new version. --Cccefalon 09:35, 25 January 2014 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Dhammikarama-Burmese-Buddhist-Temple-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Strange haloes on the leaves everywhere, overbrightened? --A.Savin 18:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)  Done You are right, it derived from too much shifting the blue luminance. I uploaded a new version. --Cccefalon 07:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)  Support ok --A.Savin 16:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Bangunan Parlimen Malaysia-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sabah State Railway Train-Attendant-giving-clearance-signal-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 23:34, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saliwangan Sabah Diesel-lokomotive-6105-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 23:34, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah North-Borneo-Scout-Movement-Monument-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment The monument is OK, but the white clouds are a bit too bright imo (easy to fix) --JLPC 18:54, 26 January 2014 (UTC)  Done; thanks for the hint. --Cccefalon 19:56, 26 January 2014 (UTC) Better now. --JLPC 22:38, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nabalu Sabah Brugmansia-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 15:27, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Malaysia Tun-Mustapha-Tower-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:59, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Malaysia Puu-Jih-Shih-Temple-22.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nabalu Sabah Viewpoint-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:04, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Sabah UTC-Tower-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:33, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Malaysia Tun-Mustapha-Tower-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 09:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Sabah CityMosque-12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment May be it's tilted CW.--XRay 09:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)  I crosschecked the verticals of the left and right minarets, but IMO it's not tilted. There is one vertical of the middle tower that might be misleading; perhaps there was an issue during erecting the tower. No idea, what to do here. --Cccefalon 09:26, 26 January 2014 (UTC)  Support Your're right, it's OK. --XRay 09:43, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Nissan-Diesel-Truck-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sure, was just a bit too much space, now it's good. --DXR 09:40, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Kek-Lok-Si-Temple-27.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Alberto-g-rovi 05:30, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Wat-Chaiya-Mangkalaram-Temple-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Leong-San-Tong-Khoo-Kongsi-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 10:45, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Bangunan Parlimen Malaysia-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice, though from the image I expected this to be a Poco photo! --Mattbuck 10:45, 26 January 2014 (UTC) Thank you for promotion - but what is a Poco photo? :-) --Cccefalon 11:31, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pangi Sabah Diesel-lokomotive-5101-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:29, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rayoh Sabah Diesel-lokomotive-5101-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 21:11, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kokol-Sabah StJosephChapel KgKokol-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI --Rjcastillo 14:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nabalu Sabah Brugmansia-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI --Rjcastillo 14:33, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Sabah Sabah-State-Museum-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 11:09, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SabahStateRailways Death-Slow-Sign-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Sabah CityMosque-10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 15:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sabah State Railway Passenger-waiting-for-train-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:09, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Bandar-Leila-and-Bandar-Ramai-Ramai-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Top crop is improvable but ok overall --Poco a poco 19:09, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Diesel-lokomotive-5101-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 13:07, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Sabah CityMosque-06-a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK for me. --Bgag 15:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Bandar-Leila-and-Bandar-Ramai-Ramai-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 13:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Diesel-lokomotive-5101-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:52, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Menara-MPS-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:09, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Malaysia Puu-Jih-Shih-Temple-24.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:21, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Malaysia Puu-Jih-Shih-Temple-21.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:11, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Kek-Lok-Si-Temple-31.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Left and right row of tiiles is not perfect sharp (perhaps partially sharpening?). But still QI IMO. --P e z i 19:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Flooding?

Hi! I see you have declined all of my nominations for Quality images and accused me of flooding (Commons:QIC#January 28, 2014). I have used a tool that is made for the soul purpose of nominating many images ("QInominator"), and I cannot see any rules against nominating many photos. I have uploaded over 800 photos from the Eurovision Song Contest 2013, and I have been encouraged to nominate them as Quality Images. Am I supposed to only nominate one a day for 800 days? By the way, I was only planning on nominating the best of the 800 photos. I have read the guidelines, but cannot see what I am doing wrong. -abbedabb^disk 23:57, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

You uploaded 31 photos in one batch. This is exceptional too much. Under Section Number of nominations of COM:QIC you read "Carefully select your best images to nominate. Adding more than a couple of images at once can be considered flooding, which is at least frowned upon or may even lead to immediate decline.". This issue has been discussed several times on the talk page of QI; you can search in the archived entries. Especially when people nominate a lot of photos and do not take part actively in the assessment procedure, it will cause troubles. It has nothing to do, if you use a tool or not.

My advise: Nominate again, but only some photos per day; let's say five a day. Feel free to discuss your matter on the talk page of QI and get more opinions there. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 05:15, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, thank you. I'll try to do that. -abbedabb^disk 10:56, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah St-Michael-And-All-Angels-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 21:55, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Perpustakaan-KL-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 22:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Menara-MPS-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Dhammikarama-Burmese-Buddhist-Temple-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:34, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Dhammikarama-Burmese-Buddhist-Temple-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Could you remove the thingy at the top ? (see note)Pleclown 12:14, 29 January 2014 (UTC)  Of course! Thank you for the hint, the bird slipped through my attention. --Cccefalon 12:46, 29 January 2014 (UTC) OK now. Pleclown 19:52, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Malacca Malaysia Malacca-Straits-Mosque-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:20, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Proclamation-of-Independence-Memorial-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 00:07, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Perpustakaan-KL-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Christian Ferrer 19:06, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia- Cheong-Fatt-Tze-Mansion-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:13, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Street-sign-at-Lebuh-Armenian-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 15:18, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Old-House-in-Jalan-Masjid-Kapitan-Keling-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI --Rjcastillo 15:08, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia- Cheong-Fatt-Tze-Mansion-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 16:29, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Chinese-Cemetery-at-Bukit-Cina-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI --Rjcastillo 15:12, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah St-Michael-And-All-Angels-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --A.Savin 13:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Malacca Malaysia Police-Station-at-Jonker-Walk-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, but please, add the PR template --Poco a poco 19:24, 31 January 2014 (UTC) Thanks for the hint; it's added. --Cccefalon 20:11, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Boon-Leong-International-Gym-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 13:55, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia- Cheong-Fatt-Tze-Mansion-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Chinese-Cemetery-at-Bukit-Cina-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok for QI --Pyb 10:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Boon-Leong-International-Gym-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Oppose blown sky --A.Savin 15:34, 31 January 2014 (UTC)  altered histoHi A.Savin, can you please re-assess the photo? I altered the histo. For issues which are easy to resolve, it's good practice to give at least a second try to the nominator. --Cccefalon 15:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC) OK now. --A.Savin 17:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC) Thank you, I appreciate the nice touch. --Cccefalon 18:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Ministry-of-Home-Affairs-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice, a pity that the water didn't flow --Poco a poco 19:24, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Ministry-of-Home-Affairs-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 15:28, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Lonely-Rikshaw-at-a-rainy-day-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I would have preferred a slightly larger DOF (parts of the rickshaw and the operator are out of focus) but ok for QI imo.--ArildV 21:48, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Malaysia Puu-Jih-Shih-Temple-23.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 12:08, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sabah State Railway Railbus-20-at-the-Station-Tenom-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:08, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Seri-Gemilang-Bridge-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Sputniktilt 13:40, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Seri-Gemilang-Bridge-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 11:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Tuanku-Mizan-Zainal-Abidin-Mosque-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:08, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Tuanku-Mizan-Zainal-Abidin-Mosque-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Seri-Gemilang-Bridge-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saliwangan Sabah Diesel-lokomotive-6105-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. :-) --XRay 10:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Chinese-Cemetery-at-Bukit-Cina-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:45, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Street-art-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good now, thanks --DXR 17:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Lafarge-Malayan-Cement-in-Ayer-Hangat-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 20:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Penang Malaysia Bicycle-in-Lebuh-Penang-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Bgag 15:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Majlis-Bandaraya-Melaka-Bersejarah-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 20:00, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Majlis-Bandaraya-Melaka-Bersejarah-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 20:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Kubu-Fire-Station-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Kompleks-Sukan-Sandakan-23.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:17, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Kompleks-Sukan-Sandakan-10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Kompleks-Sukan-Sandakan-22.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:17, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Kompleks-Sukan-Sandakan-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Of course the leaning sign post is not your fault ! It works better here with the flag poles, IMO.--Jebulon 17:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tunku Sabah Bandar-Sahabat-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok --Poco a poco 22:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Kompleks-Sukan-Sandakan-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality IMO--Lmbuga 12:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tunku Sabah Bandar-Sahabat-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good, QI for me--Lmbuga 11:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kudat Sabah Tanjung Simpang Mengayau-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tunku Sabah Bandar-Sahabat-14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --DXR 12:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kimanis Sabah Workers-Camp-of Sawit-KK-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:41, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tambunan Sabah Battlefield-Battle-of-Tambunan-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Óðinn 20:14, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tunku Sabah Bandar-Sahabat-16a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments blurred at the right --A.Savin 16:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)  Done Thank you for the hint. I applied another crop. --Cccefalon 18:37, 6 February 2014 (UTC) OK for QI (still, image could have been sharper) --A.Savin 21:46, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sandakan-Turf-Club-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 17:07, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Kompleks-Sukan-Sandakan-16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 17:07, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Lafarge-Malayan-Cement-in-Ayer-Hangat-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough, imo.--MrPanyGoff 13:37, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Paddy-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 23:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Paddy-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:16, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Paddy-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Foreground could be sharper, but overall QI --DXR 20:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Dataran-Helang-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 15:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Dataran-Helang-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. :-) --XRay 16:04, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Uwe. I just wanted to thank you for posting so many images of a (slightly) different world! It is always nice to see them on QI and it really helps to gain a better view of Southeast Asia. Also your work as a reviewer on QI is excellent and very helpful! --DXR (talk) 11:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Daniel, I appreciate your kind words! Taking photos (an posting on QI) is almost a contribution to my article work in german wikipedia. My special interest is culture and history of Sabah and Malaysia. If my photos can give an insight to that country, my mission is successful :) Greetings from Cologne, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 20:42, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

They certainly do. Not hard at all to imagine how one could be interested in these countries! :) --DXR (talk) 18:09, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

QI review

Hi Cccefalon, thank you for your review on the image I put up for QI promotion. Quick question: what does CA stand for? Regards, Citobun (talk) 13:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Citobun, the CA is the often used abbreviation for "chromatic aberration". In your photo it occurs as a purple/magenta fringe. There are facilities in Photoshop to handle that. About perspective: It is recommended that verticals are depicted rectilinear. Cheers from Germany and belated Happy Chinese New Year, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 13:55, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I processed it with ShiftN to try to improve the perspective, but I'm not sure how to repair the other problems. Anyway, thank you for the advice and gong hei fat choy to you too! Citobun (talk) 16:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

QI review

Hi, You declined my QI. I've no problem with that but I did not edit these Files as you comment unnatural sky or artefacts (See Metadata). Regards :) --NahidSultan (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

My decline is regardless of editing the file or not. It's just applying our usual criterions for quality images. If you think, that my assessment is not properly done, you can send a photo to consensual review and ask for other opinions of course. Considering your photo, it might have been better to edit it: Applying perspectice correction, denoising and altering white balance is a bread-and-butter-process for every photographer. QI assessment might help you to take steps towards better results. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:51, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

"Your assessment is not properly done" I did not mean that :( Anyway, thanks for your answer :) --NahidSultan (talk) 18:58, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Jetty-at-Pantai-Pasir-Hitam-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 20:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Dataran-Helang-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Iifar 18:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Harvesting-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  ok --Iifar 18:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Fishermens-dwelling-at-Pantai-Pasir-Hitam-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 15:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Fisherboat-at-Pantai-Pasir-Hitam-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iifar 11:27, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Pantai-Kok-Lighthouse-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Much better. --Iifar 11:25, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Harvesting-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Sputniktilt 14:33, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Harvesting-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and interesting --DXR 09:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Paddy-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Seri-Wawasan-Bridge-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Pretty tight on the left, but ok --Poco a poco 08:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tunku Sabah Bandar-Sahabat-16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 20:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

QIC

Danke dafür ))

Ich wollte dies gerade komplett entfernen, hatte aber mit dir einen Bearbeitungskonflikt. Ich denke, solche "Kandidaturen" bedürfen keiner zusätzlichen Diskussion. Wer zum erstenmal nominiert, sollte sich einlesen und darf sich nicht im Nachhinein auf Dummheit berufen. --A.Savin 11:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Genau. ich habe an seinen neuesten Eintrag noch einen Verweis auf die hier weiter oben befindliche Diskussion mit einem anderen Benutzer verwiesen. Damit sollte alles gesagt sein. Wenn er gleichzeitig 23++ qualifizierte Reviews anderer Photos abgeliefert hätte, wäre es ok gewesen. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 11:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany Haus-Steeg-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pyb 20:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KgTambulian Sabah SK-Tambulian-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support : better now. --JLPC 21:55, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tambulian Sabah Ensemble-of-heritage-houses-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 15:45, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tambulian Sabah Atap-roofed-toilet-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 15:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kimanis Sabah Plantation-of-Sawit-KK-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Works for me. --DXR 19:09, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Petronas-Administration-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kimanis Sabah Workers-Camp-of Sawit-KK-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kimanis Sabah Plantation-of-Sawit-KK-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Petronas-Tower-Detail-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pyb 14:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Pantai-Kok-Lighthouse-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 06:05, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaBelud Sabah Samanea-saman-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 15:43, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tunku Sabah Bandar-Sahabat-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment The perfect grey of the sky seems a bit strange to me. --P e z i 20:42, 8 February 2014 (UTC)  CommentI also preferred blue sky but I had to take it as it is ... --Cccefalon 08:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)  Support OK. Good quality. --P e z i 16:02, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KgTambulian Sabah SK-Tambulian-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:44, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

File:KgTambulian Sabah SK-Tambulian-01.jpg

File:KgTambulian Sabah SK-Tambulian-01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Jebulon (talk) 09:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! UluDusun Sabah Gereja-Katolik-St-Pauls-Ulu-Dusun-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --Iifar 19:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kinarut Sabah StAugustineChurch-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 15:41, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kokol-Sabah StJosephChapel KgKokol-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 16:49, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

File:KgTambulian Sabah SK-Tambulian-01.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KgTambulian Sabah SK-Tambulian-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 23:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC) DR initiated, per COM:COA, sorry.--Jebulon 09:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tunku Sabah Bandar-Sahabat-Fire-Brigade Bedford Fire-Appliance-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! UluDusun Sabah Gereja-Katolik-St-Pauls-Ulu-Dusun-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support good. --A.Savin 12:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Scouts-Nature-Park-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --XRay 16:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

QI review: File:Bahnhof Waehringer Guertel Halle1.jpg

Servus Uwe,
zunächst möchte ich mich entschuldigen, dass ich mich in ein fremdes reviewing eingemischt habe; ist normalerweise nicht meine Art. Außer eben, wenn das Angemerkte für mich absolut nicht einsichtig ist, und genau das ist im vorliegenden Fall gegeben. Ich habe nämlich bevor ich meinen Kommentar geschrieben habe, wirklich genau geschaut. Und da ist keine perspektivische Verzerrung (eine kleine barrel distortion allerdings schon, aber auch die minimal). Die rechte Wand dieses alten Industriegebäudes ist zigmal ausgebessert und da gibt es nichts gerades mehr. In der Mitte des rechten Tores läuft die Linie deiner Anmerkungsbox genau parallel zu den senkrechten Linien des Tores.

Zu deiner Anmerkung bezüglich nicht melden des Einreichenden: Da hast du recht. Mein Hauptinteresse bei den QI reviews gilt aber der Erweiterung des Schatzes an guten Bildern in den commons und weniger der Verbesserung der Manieren von "Mitspielern". LG --P e z i (talk) 16:00, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Pezi, vielleicht bin ich manchmal zu pingeling; ich hätte allerdings weniger auf Perspective als auf Distortion hinweisen sollen. Nun gut. Ich sehe das Bild auch durchaus als QI-fähig, aber ich möchte gerne, dass die Leute auf Kritik eingehen und nicht einfach Bilder zum Assessment reinkippen und sich dann trollen. Ich nehme mir ja auch viel Zeit für jedes Bild, dass ich bewerte. Ich will aber nicht Korinthen kacken und mache aus Discussion wieder Promotion, damit bricht mir kein Zacken aus der Krone. Danke Dir für die Rückmeldung, Gruß, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 16:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich musste zu Beginn auch lernen, dass man seine Bilder nicht nur zur Begutachtung abgibt, sondern auch reviews macht und kommuniziert. Und ich möchte mich an dieser Stelle auch bei dir noch bedanken für die freundliche Aufnahme in den Kreis. LG --P e z i (talk) 16:32, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Corrections

Hi, I am trying to do fixes in my photo, thanks for your reviews and work!! Ezarateesteban 13:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:00, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah PLUMS-University-Malaysia-Sabah-Outstation-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:19, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 17:01, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ranau-Sabah-MamutCopperMine-BatuDuaCamp-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:07, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Harvesting-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 21:28, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Jetty-at-Pantai-Pasir-Hitam-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Interesante perspectiva para mi. --Ivan2010 08:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KgBangkauBangkau Sabah Kampung-Air-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 22:07, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cinta-Mata Sabah SK-Cinta-Mara-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not sure this is crisp enough. Mattbuck 23:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC) I think it is. --Kreuzschnabel 16:39, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tawau Sabah Tanah-Perkuburan-Wilis-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very chaotic, but a good image. Good quality. --DXR 23:12, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tawau Sabah MasjidRayaTawau-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 18:12, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 18:29, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sapong Sabah Basal-Christian Church-Sapong-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 15:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rundum Sabah Rundum-Baru-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rundum Sabah Rundum-Baru-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 21:59, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rundum Sabah Sekolah-Kebangsaan-Rundum-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:05, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rundum Sabah Sekolah-Kebangsaan-Rundum-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:01, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rundum Sabah Rundum-Baru-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:08, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rundum Sabah Rundum-Baru-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:47, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Papar CatholicChurch St-Joseph.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --DXR 17:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia Kwang-Fook-Kong-Temple-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments You have convinced me, poor construction, good photography ;-) --DXR 18:28, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu Sabah Sabah-State-Mosque-19.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 15:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia Kwang-Fook-Kong-Temple-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I'd have cropped a bit of road but QI. --JLPC 18:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia War-Cemetery-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Some areas a little bit bright, but still ok --Poco a poco 13:35, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia War-Cemetery-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support--Ivan2010 13:01, 16 February 2014(UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia Surrender-Point-Memorial-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 11:22, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia Chimney-Museum-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fassade is a bit soft, but more than OK for QI. --Tuxyso 14:19, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KotaKinabalu CityHall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --DXR 09:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tawau Sabah Tanah-Perkuburan-Wilis-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:56, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany Fontainesche-Wasserturbine-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 10:25, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Petronas-Tower-Detail-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 16:42, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Langkawi Malaysia Rice-Harvesting-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI, but I would remove the two UFOs (left and right of the vehicle's roof --P e z i 16:39, 16 February 2014 (UTC)  Done Thank you for the hint; I even found three of the bastards. --Cccefalon 18:29, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia War-Cemetery-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:42, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath-Denkmal-47 Steeg-5 Haus-Steeg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:47, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KgBangkauBangkau Sabah Kampung-Air-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 23:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality image. --DAJF 02:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kimanis Sabah Plantation-of-Sawit-KK-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks fine to me. Good quality image. --DAJF 04:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 23:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 19:28, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tuxyso 14:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality image. --DAJF 13:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tawau Sabah Tanah-Perkuburan-Wilis-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 15:45, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks like Spiderman to me. --Mattbuck 18:40, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Überbelichtung / Illustration

Hallo Cccefalon! Ich habe unter https://www.dropbox.com/s/hv6bxne6t0fu911/ueberbelichtung.jpg mal eine Illustration erstellt. Keine Sorge, ich bin kein Pixelzähler. Lightroom zeigt mir bereits eine massive Überbelichtung an (s. durchgehend rote Bereiche). Das sind mehr als ein paar tausend Pixel. Das größere Problem ist eher, dass der Himmel ab etwa der roten Linie völlig homogene RGB-Werte zeigt, also z.B. (99%, 99%, 99%). Das deutet auf eine nachträgliche Korrektur der Lichter hin. Zumindest sollten minimale Differenzen in den RGB-Werten erkennbar sein. Daher schließe ich darauf, dass das Bild überbelichtet ist. Wenn du nicht einverstanden bist, kannst du es freilich ins CR schicken. Mir tut es schon weh (wie ich auch dort geschrieben habe), das Bild abzulehnen, da es eben eine sehr hohe Qualität hat. Formal nach QI-Kriterien ist es meiner Meinung nach aber kein QI - ich habe die Regeln nicht erfunden. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Also ich benutze auch LR und im RAW-Bild ist das Histogramm ausreichend weit von den Reinweiß-Werten entfernt. Auch das unbearbeitete DNG ist völlig in Ordnung, es ist sehr gleichmäßig belichtet. Dass der Himmel an dem Tag gleichmäßig grau war ist aber nun mal eben so, das habe ich mir nicht ausgesucht - blauer Himmer wäre mir auch lieber gewesen. Der Highlight-Indikator von LR zeigt auch nichts an. Kann sein, dass bei der jpg-Renderung ein bisschen was weggerendert wird, aber nicht in dem Maße. Ich habe das jpg mit dem Histogram viewer plugin nach dem Hochladen ebenfalls nochmals untersucht und es deutet nichts darauf hin, dass zuviele #FFFFFF drin ist. Egal, ich habe das Bild zurückgezogen und werde eine dunklere Version hochladen. Ich bin allerdings der Meinung, dass ein völlig gleichmäßiges Grau genausowenig eine Benachteiligung für ein QI sein darf, wie ein gleichmäßiges Blau. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 20:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Cccefalon! Ich möchte hier kein Foto "benachteiligen", erst recht nicht deine Fotos, die ich mir immer sehr gerne anschauen - deswegen habe ich vermutlich auch direkt 3 begutachtet. Ich habe die Erfahrung gemacht, dass bei der Konvertierung in sRGB einiges an Infos verloren geht. Lightroom nutzt intern den riesigen ProPhoto RGB - Farbraum. So kann es durchaus passieren, dass ein Foto nicht ausgebrannt aussieht, es aber nach Konvertierung in sRGB-JPG wird, insbesondere bei Rottönen ist das häufig ein Problem, s. Channel Clipping in Lightroom. Probiere doch mal das besagte Bild von dir in der Softproof-Ansicht anzuzeigen (einfach Taste S drücken). Wie sieht es dann mit dem Ausbrennen der Lichter aus? Du hättest doch nicht zurückziehen müssen, immerhin kann auf QIC ja jeder mal danebenliegen und du warst offenbar ja nicht einverstanden mit meiner Einschätzung. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:10, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich mag den CR-Prozess nicht. Da landet zur Zeit zu viel und es ungewiss, ob überhaupt jemand kommentiert und ob qualifizierte Reviewer drüberschauen. Mir ist in diesem Fall eine Re-Nominierung nach Überarbeitung lieber. Die neue Version ist mit anderem Histogramm etwas dunkler. In der ersten Version hatte ich den Softproof weggelassen, da das Histogramm eigentlich eindeutig war. In der neuen Version habe ich das aber geprüft und der Softproof ist i.O. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 09:07, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Geht doch :) Wie du nun leicht nachprüfen kannst, unterscheiden sich die RGB-Werte im Himmel, z.B. (94.9, 95, 95.6), was mir zeigt, dass noch Zeichnung im Himmel vorhanden ist. Kannst du mir, nur mal interessehalber, das RAW zuschicken? Ich finde, dass das Gebäude nun etwas zu stark abgedunkelt ist. Ich würde gerne schauen, was ich noch rausholen kann. Ein solches Foto schreit ggf. nach den NIK-Filtern bzw. nach Vivezza, womit man wunderbar selektiv bearbeiten kann. Promoted habe ich es dennoch schon auf QI. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich war von Anfang an der Meinung, dass Änderungen am Histogramm zu den Übungen gehören, die leicht zu machen sind. Deshalb war ich durchaus verstimmt, dass das Photo sofort declined wurde. Ich setze den Status nur dann auf "Decline", wenn ich der Meinung bin, das es sich um nicht weiter lösbare Probleme handelt oder wenn die schiere Menge an Beanstandungen nach einer Ablehung ruft. Das RAW ist zum Schicken zu gross; ich werde es heute auf den Server hochladen und Dich dann informieren, wo Du es finden kannst. Danke für die Promotion. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 09:57, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich setzte nie leichtfertig auf Decline. Ich war bei dem Foto der Meinung, dass sich nichts mehr reparieren lässt, da der gesamte Himmel ausgebrannt aussah. Du hast mich eines besseren belehrt :) Außerdem: Verstimmt sein musst du deswegen nicht. Wenn ich "fälschlicherweise" ein Decline setze und du eine neue Version hochlädtst und auf Discuss änderst und der Fehler eindeutig behoben ist, ändere ich dann einfach auf Promotion. Das hat sich bei den Reviews z.T. so eingebürgert, obwohl nicht 100% von den Regeln gedeckt. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:05, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dortmund Germany Zeche-Zollern-14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia War-Cemetery-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 19:40, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Labuan Malaysia Circumcision-Service-Shop-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 22:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tawau Sabah Tawau-Airport-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 22:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Seri-Wawasan-Bridge-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment I think, there is nothing to sharpen. You won't get a bridge in one kilometer distance pinsharp. --Cccefalon 09:09, 20 February 2014 (UTC)  Support Rather grey and uninspiring, but it's good quality as defined by the QI guidelines. --DAJF 07:20, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

• ⧼Wikibase-terms/2014⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! KgBrunei Sabah Sungai-Kimanis-at-Kampung-Brunei-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 21:51, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia PICC and Seri-Gemilang-Bridge-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:12, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kimanis Sabah SOGT-Worker-Camp-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:37, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SabahStateRailway JungleStationInPadasValley.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --TommyG 19:56, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Gereja-Basel-Sibuga-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 16:08, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sepilok Sabah SJKC-Ming-Chung-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. I'd just cropped 10px from top to get rid of the black horizontal line in the upper left corner. --P e z i 16:19, 9 March 2014 (UTC)  Done Thank you for the hint; I removed the flaw. --Cccefalon 17:29, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sepilok Sabah SJKC-Ming-Chung-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 16:21, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sepilok Sabah SJKC-Ming-Chung-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 16:52, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sepilok-Orangutan-Rehabilitation-Centre-02a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:47, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sepilok-Orangutan-Rehabilitation-Centre-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 12:11, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Federal-Government-Administrative-Centre-BlockD9-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:41, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Member-of-Malaysia-Peoples-Volunteer-Corps-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:41, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia PICC-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 06:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Kuala-Lumpur-Police-Contingent-Headquarters-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 18:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia PICC-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:17, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Perdana-Putra-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharpness just okay, but given big size no problem imo --DXR 10:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Guardian Angel QI

Hi. In your review of the Guardian Angel QI, you noted that the water traces are fringed with prominent magenta. Those traces are not water, but are lit fiber optic cables and did not have an aqua hue typically seen in water. Would you reconsider your review?

Best,

--Igoldste (talk) 14:07, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

In my understanding, even when it is not water but a fiber optic cable, there shouldn't be a magenta fringe. I think that the light installation is not emitting magenta coloured light but that is an aberration effect within the lense system. Such CA is easy to fix. Do you have an appropriate software to handle that problem? Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 14:18, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I've been using GIMP to edit the photos. I've tried to manually select the areas, but the results are less than desirable. Can you recommend an appropriate plug-in for GIMP, or a stand-alone program that will take care of this? Thanks --Igoldste (talk) 16:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I am not familiar with GIMP. I'm using Adobe Lightroom. However, I will try to remove the CA and then will let you know, if this is a substantial enhancement of your photo. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 22:49, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I tried several corrections in LR but it turns out, that every color correction will affect other parts in an unsatisfying way. The reason is, that the colors of the watering cans are too close to the color of the fringe. So finally I decided, that your postprocess is probably the best solution. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:38, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! --Igoldste (talk) 14:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah LapanganTerbang-2a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 11:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Tuanku-Mizan-Zainal-Abidin-Mosque-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pyb 13:43, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Tuanku-Mizan-Zainal-Abidin-Mosque-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pyb 13:43, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Tuanku-Mizan-Zainal-Abidin-Mosque-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Headquarters-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 22:21, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cologne Germany Electric-Car-Charging-Point-at-TUV-Rheinland-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 20:43, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Headquarters-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 20:19, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Headquarters-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 20:05, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Masjid-Jamek-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:23, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Naval-Base-KD-Sri-Sandakan-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 22:38, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Junction-Jalan-Singapora-Jalan-Sekolah-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 18:00, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Vegetable-Market-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:05, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sam-Sing-Kung-Temple-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality IMO --Halavar 16:07, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sam-Sing-Kung-Temple-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 16:18, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sam-Sing-Kung-Temple-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 16:18, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Headquarters-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support I don't understand your problems with the correct categorization, technically however OK for QI --A.Savin 13:17, 15 March 2014 (UTC) Thank you for promotion. "TÜV Hochhaus" is only applying to the building in the background. The foreground building is a different one of the TÜV compound. --Cccefalon 13:44, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Vegetable-Market-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tuxyso 10:29, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Vegetable-Market-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting and good quality. --Tuxyso 10:29, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Vegetable-Market-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tuxyso 10:29, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sandakan-Memorial-Park-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:45, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Headquarters-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --A.Savin 12:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Outdoor-Swimming-Pool-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality--Lmbuga 21:42, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SabahHeritageSteamTrain-StesenPapar-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 17:28, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chengdu Sichuan China Panda-breeding-and-research-center-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:17, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gozo, Malta Basilica-Ta-Pinu-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 14:49, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cospicua Malta Cranes-at-No2-docks-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 12:22, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chengdu Sichuan China Panda-breeding-and-research-center-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --A.Savin 12:45, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Xeskija Gozo Rotunda-Church-of-Xewkija-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Church leaning slightly to the right --Halavar 12:32, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  Done Thanks, please have another look. --Cccefalon 14:09, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  Support Better, but I think it's still not perfect straight, but it's OK and image can be QI --Halavar 15:06, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mdina Malta View-from-Citadella-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tuxyso 10:45, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Intersection-Jalan-Leila-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria imo. I think that you should mention the country in the description.--MrPanyGoff 12:11, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cologne Germany City-wall-at-Habsburgerring-2-during-excavation-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support ok --A.Savin 12:37, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Vegetable-Market-10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not 100% convincing crop/angle, but ok --Poco a poco 08:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Pasar-Ekonomi-in-Jalan-Elopura-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Putra-Mosque-08a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. Really interesting --Lewis Hulbert 19:47, 13 March 2014 (UTC) I'm sure that it can be QI, but only the 20% or 30% of the picture is sharp, and its a criteria of Cccefalon to decline if it's a 20% blurry--Lmbuga 01:44, 16 March 2014 (UTC) As already mentioned in your long posting at your reviewed photo Claustro_da_Catedral_de_La_Seu_d'Urgell._Cataluña_2014-2.jpg in the March 11 section, the focus of my proposal was a 20% dark wall at the left side. --Cccefalon 10:18, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Seri-Gemilang-Bridge-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Please have a look to the top of the image. There are dust spots.--XRay 07:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)  Done, I removed two. Thanks for the hint. --Cccefalon 09:18, 15 March 2014 (UTC)  Support Thanks. Fine.--XRay 07:30, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia PICC and Seri-Gemilang-Bridge-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:43, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Kuala-Lumpur-Police-Contingent-Headquarters-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Right side is not perfect, but close enough --Poco a poco 18:21, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry. I don't have problems with you. A photo is just a photo. People and users are more. A photo no matter. Sorry, perhaps we have not understood. It is normal, do not give it more importance (IMO). I tend to like a lot your photos. Encouragement (es: Ánimo). Sorry--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 21:47, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Holà Miguel! Thank you for your message and yes, you are right, we should value the good relations of the regulars here in QIC. As other experienced photographeres here, your photos show a high level of professionalism and I don't feel comfortable if I have to raise photographic issues. I never decline a photo which still has a chance to get rid of a flaw. Instead, I try to suggest, how to get rid of the flaw. I know, that I am not inerrant. I don't mind, if someone is entering into a discussion with me or sending the photo to CR. I apologize, if my review caused worries. Let's try to avoid imbroglio in future. Cheers, Uwe (--CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 11:16, 17 March 2014 (UTC))

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SabahHeritageSteamTrain-StesenPapar-09a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 23:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Masjid-Jamek-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:23, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Buildings-at-Jalan-Singapora-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Arctic Kangaroo 16:47, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Headquarters-06a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 18:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kunming Yunnan Square-in-front-of the-railway-station-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 07:30, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Pangi-Hydroelectic-Plant-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 04:04, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nabalu Sabah Brugmansia-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice, however I'm not sold on the square here. Leaves a bit too much space at the top? --DXR 21:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Kundasang-Town-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Kundasang-Town-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:11, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sepilok-Orangutan-Rehabilitation-Centre-01a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, a bit bokehy, but I think that's alright in the context --DXR 19:44, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kunming Yunnan Intersection-in-front-of the-railway-station-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 16:43, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beaufort Sabah SJK-C-Kung-Ming-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:56, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beaufort Sabah SJK-C-Kung-Ming-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:42, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Pangi-Hydroelectic-Plant-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  CommentPlease, clean the noise from the sky --Nino Verde 07:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)  Done applied more denoising. --Cccefalon 14:57, 21 March 2014 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Arctic Kangaroo 17:33, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tinompok Sabah Puncak-Borneo-Resort-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:24, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nabalu Sabah Dewan-Pekan-Nabalu-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 17:29, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Vegetable-Market-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Arctic Kangaroo 18:22, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-05.jpg

File:Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-05.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

88.64.113.125 15:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-07.jpg

File:Sandakan Sabah SK-St-Monica-07.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

88.64.113.125 15:27, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Sepilok Sabah Forest-Research-Centre-01.jpg

File:Sepilok Sabah Forest-Research-Centre-01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

88.64.113.125 15:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Telupid Sabah Milestone-of-Malaysia-Federal-Route-22-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 21:11, 22 March 2014 (UTC) JLPC, I take the liberty to set it back to nomination since there is an simple issue that needs to be done first, okay? ;-) --DXR 21:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)  Done Awwww, I oversaw that. Thanks! Upload in progress :) --Cccefalon 22:01, 22 March 2014 (UTC) Tiny triumph over the master-bird-spotter :D --DXR 22:13, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Telupid Sabah Gereja-Basel-Murok-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tuxyso 14:26, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beaufort Sabah SJK-C-Kung-Ming-11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 18:05, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Telupid Sabah Gereja-Basel-Murok-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:34, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Pangi-Hydroelectic-Plant-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 21:57, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Hospital-Duchess-of-Kent-00.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 21:33, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sepilok Sabah Forest-Research-Centre-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 20:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sepilok Sabah Rainforest-Discovery-Centre-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 20:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sepilok Sabah Forest-Research-Centre-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

?

So what exactly do I have to do? Do I have to judge other people's nominations so mines won't be immediate declined? —Blurred Lines 13:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Just read the QIC guideline, it will probably answer your question. QIC project is not just a place to upload dozens of photos and wait that other people will do the review work. However, i9f you are not capable of contributing reviews according to image guidelines, it might be a good choice to restrict the daily amount of nominations.

If my answer is not helpful or you are not satisfied with my comments, ask at the discussion page for a third opinion. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 14:02, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

• In other languages: Deutsch, ‎español, ‎français, ‎日本語, Nederlands, русский, ‎svenska, ‎Türkçe, ‎українська

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Cccefalon/Archives,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

• In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
• In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sandakan-War-Memorial-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 23:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Sandakan-Memorial-Park-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 21:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Glees Germany Maria-Laach-Abbey-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 22:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Glees Germany Maria-Laach-Abbey-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Bien lograda--Ivan2010 14:46, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kemabong Sabah MESEJ-Getah-Kangkawang-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 19:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Hospital-Duchess-of-Kent-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 19:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rundum Sabah Maligan-Range-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 18:07, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cologne Germany Electric-Car-Charging-Point-at-TUV-Rheinland-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Masjid-Jamek-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Seminar-Center-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

By Ivan2010 Again

Thank you Cccefalon, I will take another photo more of this: USSR Selena Radio receivers Model B210, with more quality in agreement to your suggestions, and I will upload on it some days, fodder that there is no one another one in Commons, and it can be valid that he is present. I will inform you in order that I appraised it. Thank you very much again. Ivan2010

Sure, I will review it then. A good idea is always, to read the Image Guidelines; most reviewers take them as their basis for assessment. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 14:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

New Upload. By Ivan2010

Hello Cccefalon, as I commented you recently, I upload a new file of the Radio Selena, , trying to reach for better quality and result, and for such reason, I would be grateful to you than you equally appraise the same. He would value your opinion highly. Besides, I upload another someone else's image radio, , which, in the same way, would request to him that also I appraise it. A cordial greeting: Iván: Ivan2010

The second photo is having quality issues. My recommendation is, to take a photo of the receiver again, if possible. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:14, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done Hi Cccefalon , answering your question, I make a comment to you that definitely he works at RAW, perhaps the problem that you see be illumination. That's why I upload a new version of the: with better illumination, in order that then you appraise it. A greeting for you and I will always be thankful of your suggestions and helps. I will see your present-day opinion on this version. Ivan201012:08, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Headquarters-07a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 22:22, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia National-Mosque-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 23:11, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom-Sabah SJKC-Yuk-Hwa-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Thien-Mu-Temple-and-Pagoda-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Petronas-Tower-Philharmony-Entrance-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --DXR 21:31, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Ship-anchoring-at-Melaka-Straits-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 19:55, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Water-wheel-replica-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 11:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Signpost-at-Stadhuys-Red-Square-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 15:16, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melaka Malaysia Document-Service-at-Stadhuys-Red-Square-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 10:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cologne Germany TÜV-Pruefstelle-Max-Glomsda-Strasse 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:59, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Thien-Mu-Temple-and-Pagoda-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 00:11, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam A-lady-with-her-bike-transporting-goods-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 00:23, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Hue-Railway-Station-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 00:21, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Nun-with-bicycle-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 21:08, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia National-Mosque-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 00:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Skyline-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --J.-H. Janßen 19:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuala Lumpur Malaysia National-Mosque-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 14:39, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kundasang Sabah Vegetable-Market-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok. --Blurred Lines 15:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cologne Germany TÜV-Pruefstelle-Max-Glomsda-Strasse 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Blurred Lines 15:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kemabong Sabah Kampung-Kapulu-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 00:38, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Hospital-Duchess-of-Kent-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 22:25, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Telupid Sabah Dewan-Serbaguna-Telupid-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 22:25, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Telupid Sabah Gereja-Basel-Murok-10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 22:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beaufort Sabah SJK-C-Kung-Ming-10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 20:17, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Pangi-Hydroelectic-Plant-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 22:22, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany TUV-Rheinland-Seminar-Center-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:21, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Köln Germany Catkins-at-TUV-Rheinland-Headquarters-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 12:35, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Perfume-River-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:06, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Perfume-River-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 19:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Refurbishing-work-in-Càn-Thành-Palace-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 18:44, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Hand-truck-in-Càn-Thành-Palace-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 19:52, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Broom-in-Càn-Thành-Palace-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Blurred Lines 15:41, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Cổng-Trai-cung-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Blurred Lines 15:41, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 11:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 10:06, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 10:06, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nabalu Sabah Dewan-Pekan-Nabalu-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:37, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Perfume-River-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:38, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Arsenal Heeresgeschichtliches Museum Fassadendetail-DSC 7930w.jpg

Servus Cccefalon,
danke für dein review von obigem Bild. Zu deiner Anmerkung bezüglich Perspektive: Ich habe lange gegrübelt, warum die Vertikalen in den Nischen der Statuen vertikal sind, die kleinen Nischen rechts unten im Hintergrund aber nicht. Des Rätsels Lösung ist glaube ich die Form dieser kleinen Nischen kombiniert mit dem Blickwinkel. Die Begrenzungen dieser Nischen gehen nach oben hin schräg nach außen, wenn man dann von der Seite draufschaut sind die Linien einfach nicht mehr vertikal. Vielleicht kannst du auf diesem Bild links vom Turm erkennen was ich meine. Liebe Grüße, --P e z i (talk) 12:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Ergänzung: Die Mörtelfugen der Ziegelmauer ganz rechts unten im Eck sind nämlich vertikal. LG --P e z i (talk) 12:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Das kann ich soweit gut nachvollziehen. Aber genau die Mauerfugen links illustrieren mein Problem sehr deutlich. Die und der äußere Rahmen des viereckigen Mauerausschnittes mit der Rosette sind gekippt. Ich hab das mal eingezeichnet. Auf der rechten Seite ist das mit den Mauerfugen grenzwertig, das hätte ich noch durchgehen lassen, aber links ist es selbst unvergrößert ziemlich augenfällig. Oder? Schau mal, ob sich da noch was machen lässt. Gruss, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 12:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Links ist mir eh auch aufgefallen, da war ich jetzt mit dem Raufladen gleichzeitig mit deinen Anmerkungen; das rechts springt halt so ins Auge, dass ich dachte du meinst die Nischen (ich habe nämlich längere Zeit gekämpft, bis ich draufgekommen bin was da los ist :-)) LG --P e z i (talk) 13:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Hab grad gesehen, dass Du eine neue Version hochgeladen hast. Das passt dann schon. Ich promote das Bild jetzt. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 13:07, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:48, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beaufort Sabah SJK-C-Kung-Ming-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:24, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tinompok Sabah Puncak-Borneo-Resort-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:24, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Telupid Sabah Sungai-Labuk-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 11:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Bindsteinmühle-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 07:51, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Riedmühle-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Herzi Pinki 07:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tiles-in-Càn-Thành-Palace-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Doors-in-Càn-Thành-Palace-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Gasthof-Rössle-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 22:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Village-view-from south-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Malchen53 20:56, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Former-Monastery-Anhausen-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 20:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Composite image for Kota Kinabalu

Hi again Cccefalon, can you help me create a new composite image for Kota Kinabalu article to replace the old one here with any from your Kota Kinabalu images collection or from category in here? I know you professional on images, especially if the image show the icon of the city as the city represent "Nature Resort City". :) — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 11:08, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

A good composite photo should use high quality photos with appropriate light and perspective corrections. In general it is not a big problem to find such photos; I still have a lot of unpublished material here or can upgrade former releases to that purpose. Any wishes, which buildings or curiosities should be represented? --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 11:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, mm, some of my suggestion for the city symbol are The Swordfish, The City Mosque, City Highway or the panorama of the city centre like this one. While the others I didn't know yet what to put, let's see if you know more about KK symbols based on your collections? :) — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 11:22, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Let me check out at the weekend. I think there are better shots available :) --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 11:29, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, just inform me when it is already done. Sorry for the late replying, been so busy in this article before. ;) — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 08:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I will. It's not forgotten. Just a lot of work load at the moment. I saw your work for en:Sandakan - well done! I think I should re-work some of the photos there; some of them need perspective correction and should be made available in higher resolution. I will update my to-do-list for that purpose. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 08:22, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! You can expand the paragraph too if you have a better suggestion. :) — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 15:52, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Bindsteinmühle-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI IMO --Jbribeiro1 23:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Burg-Falkenstein-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:20, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Gasthof-Rössle-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support good. --A.Savin 19:47, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Protestant-Church-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 19:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Bindsteinmühle-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 21:11, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Burg-Falkenstein-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 09:13, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Bindsteinmühle-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Alberto-g-rovi 06:30, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah View-from-Harbour-Mall-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jbribeiro1 03:25, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany River-Brenz-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 23:07, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany River-Brenz-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Burg-Hürgerstein-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Putrajaya Malaysia Menara-Usahawan-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 16:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Burg-Falkenstein-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 15:50, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Metzingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Enzian-Seifenfabrik-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 14:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Former-Monastery-Anhausen-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 18:00, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Riedmühle-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 16:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Kindergarten-St-Martin-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 06:31, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Forsbach Germany Listed-Monument-No78-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany River-Brenz-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 18:43, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Kneippanlage-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 00:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Incense-stick-sale-near-Tomb-of-Emperor-Tự-Đức-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 00:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Riedmühle-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --DXR 21:45, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Houses-in-Steigstrasse-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 11:16, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Evangelische-Kirche-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 11:16, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Gasthof-Rössle-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 11:16, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Former-Monastery-Anhausen-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 08:56, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Former-Monastery-Anhausen-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 08:56, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Burg-Hürgerstein-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --JLPC 19:22, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Houses-in-Steigstrasse-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:48, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Charlie-O-Pang-Su-Pin-00.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:01, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Village-view-from south-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:01, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany River-Brenz-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:02, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kohlberg Baden-Württemberg Germany Panoramic-View-01a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 16:04, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Kindergarten-St-Martin-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 03:27, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Gia-Long-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 21:22, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Freight-ship-on-the-Perfume-River-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 18:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Ferry-over-the-Perfume-River-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:01, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Gia-Long-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Malchen53 17:09, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 14:55, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Gia-Long-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 15:18, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Wehranlage-mit-Fischleiter-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Former-Monastery-Anhausen-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 19:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --J.-H. Janßen 11:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Houses-in-Steigstrasse-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Halavar 10:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anhausen Baden-Württemberg Germany-Former-Monastery-Anhausen-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 09:30, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Gasthof-Rössle-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 18:05, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Protestant-Church-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 08:39, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Kindergarten-St-Martin-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 09:27, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-03a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Gia-Long-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 21:38, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Dredger-on-the-Perfume-River-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 08:42, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cologne Germany Flamenco-Guitarist-Katja-La-Paquita-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 08:32, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany River-Brenz-05a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:22, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Gia-Long-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:25, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Gia-Long-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK. --A.Savin 14:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Confused

Cccefalon, can you translate this to English? I'm confuse with this, is it means; "They (the Indonesians) drive a vehicle and hit a land mine?" or "they stole a vehicle?" (based on Google Translate) :D — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 14:32, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

“

Im August 1965 versuchten unbekannte Angreifer, einen Hochspannungsmasten in die Luft zu sprengen und im September fuhr ein Forstfahrzeug auf eine Landmine

”

Sure, try this: "In August 1965, unknown assailants made an attempt to blow up a high-tension electricity pylon and in September, a logging truck was blown up by a land mine". Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 17:30, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought the Indonesians who been blown up. :) — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 19:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hehe, nice try :) Don't trust google translate too much! --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:20, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Town-Padang-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 21:38, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tenom Sabah Railway-Station-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --DXR 20:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kohlberg Baden-Württemberg Germany Panoramic-View-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --A.Savin 09:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Kindergarten-St-Martin-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 14:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Gia-Long-04a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Tilted, but fixable. --Halavar 16:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)  Done you are right, thank you for your hint! --Cccefalon 19:13, 8 April 2014 (UTC)  Support Good now. --Halavar 19:28, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Freight-ship-on-the-Perfume-River-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support good --A.Savin 09:35, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Gia-Long-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me now. --Cayambe 21:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CheSuiKhor-Pagoda Kota-Kinabalu-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 16:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bolheim Baden-Württemberg Germany-Houses-in-Steigstrasse-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Clipped white; maybe fixable in raw. --A.Savin 14:53, 7 April 2014 (UTC)  Done I uploaded a version with diffent highlight handling. Please be aware, that a white painted wall in full sunlight might appear as what it is - a white wall. The histo shows no problems. --Cccefalon 19:23, 8 April 2014 (UTC)  Support OK --A.Savin 17:54, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah View-from-Harbour-Mall-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK, maybe just a little bit perspective on the right --A.Savin 17:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Bit unsharp in areas. Mattbuck 21:55, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Fixed You are both right, guys. I forgot to add sharpness and there was an incline of Wisma Sandakan. Should be ok now. --Cccefalon 20:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)  Support OK. --A.Savin 17:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 20:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-20.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 20:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Forsbach Germany PUSTEBLUME-Artwork-Robin-Kurka-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:08, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Forsbach Germany PUSTEBLUME-Artwork-Robin-Kurka-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 22:08, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 20:41, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-25.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:29, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-26.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:48, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 17:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 17:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Forsbach Germany PUSTEBLUME-Artwork-Robin-Kurka-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:48, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-35.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI.--Jebulon 15:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-36.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good ! --Jebulon 15:49, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-37.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Yes.--Jebulon 15:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 14:40, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-30.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:53, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-31.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Malchen53 14:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kohlberg Baden-Württemberg Germany Panoramic-View-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-28.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 14:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-29.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --P e z i 14:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany Former-Augustine-Monastery-Rösrath-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --A.Savin 14:17, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-40.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:29, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 08:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:38, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 08:17, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-11a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Bottom crop and deformation in the top could be better but anyhow QI to me --Poco a poco 10:06, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-27.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Chromatic noise on the gates. --A.Savin 17:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)  Done Yes, very. I removed it. --Cccefalon 07:06, 12 April 2014 (UTC) OK for QI. --A.Savin 14:03, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany Hauptstrasse-8-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah St-Michael-And-All-Angels-04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:12, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Father-Mulders-Centre-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --DXR 09:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Hong-San-Tze-Temple-00.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 08:28, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah Remains-of-Old-Staircase-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 14:40, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-55.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality --Halavar 09:28, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sandakan Sabah St-Michael-And-All-Angels-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 08:28, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Notre Dame de Paris DSC 0846w.jpg

Servus Uwe,
ich schätze deine reviews wirklich sehr und auch wenn es manchmal Kleinigkeiten sind, die du beanstandest, so ist es für die weitere Verbesserung der Bilder wirklich hilfreich. Aber diesmal kann ich dir nicht wirklich folgen: Bei der Perspektivkorrektur bin ich lange gesessen, weil an diesem alten Gebäude offensichtlich nichts wirklich gerade oder rechtwinkelig ist. Ich habe mich dann an den beiden Häusern links und rechts orientiert und da kann ich beim besten Willen jetzt keine Abweichung von der Vertikalen mehr entdecken. Vielleicht kannst du eine Notiz machen, wo du das "leaning in" siehst. Auch die CAs sind für mich selbst bei 400% an den Stellen wo ich sie erwarten würde nicht auffindbar. LG --P e z i (talk) 18:08, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Ich hab mal zwei Notizen gemacht. Schau mal nach. Aber ich will ja nicht päpstlicher als der Papst sein, also lass uns ggf. drüber reden. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Danke für die rasche Antwort. Die senkrechte Anmerkung beruhigt mich: In der nächsten Etage darunter ist links außen eine Säule, schau dir die bitte mal an (steht m.M. exakt senkrecht). Wie gesagt, da ist nichts wirklich gerade oder rechtwinkelig.

Zur zweiten Anmerkung: Ja, da hast du recht; werde mal schauen, ob ich das noch weg bekomme. LG --P e z i (talk) 20:03, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Пмз-интерьер-02-никольская-2-этаж-0104.jpg

• You say, too much magenta. Where do you see too much magenta?
• You say, too much reflections in the glass boxes. The exposition consists of the glass boxes, so there have to be many reflections. What can be done in this case? Polarizer does not help, for the glasses are in different angles.
• Thanks for an advice. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 09:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Brilon-Propsteikirche-Orgel.jpg

Hallo Cccefalon,

die hast bei den QI Kandidaten bei dem Bild eine Magenta CA angemerkt und geschrieben, dass das behebbar wäre. Habe es mit einer Korrektur versucht, bin mir aber nicht sicher das dadurch das von dir beschriebene Problem behoben ist. Wenn du magst kannst du mir ja hier eine ausführlichere Erläuterung hinerlassen.

Gruß --SteveK (talk) 14:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Hallo SteveK, ich hab mir die Überarbeitung angeschaut. das Magenta ist noch immer da, besonders deutlich auf der rechten Seite an den Pfeifen oben an der Kante und im Zinnton der Pfeifen. Aber auch das Gehäuse zeigt das Magenta. Mit Photoshop kenne ich mich nicht so aus, aber ich hätte vermutet, dass Du vielleicht die Sättigung von Magenta runterregelst. Oder falls eine Funktion "Remove Chromatic Aberratopn" verfügbar ist, dass Du "Defringe Amount" auf "3" setzt. Gruß, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 17:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Die Farben auf den rechten Pfeifen kommen durch die Sonnenstrahlen durch ein farbiges Fenster rechts der Orgel, in dem lila Töne enthalten sind. Das wäre mir jetzt nicht als Fehler aufgefallen. Mal sehen ob ich noch eine Korrektur mache, denn die Orgel selbst hat im Original auch so einen leicht in lila gehenden Farbton. Danke erstmal für die Antwort.--SteveK (talk) 18:30, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Habe nochmal einen Versuch gemacht und die Entwicklung von vorne angefangen. Im Photoshop gibt es bei der Objektivkorrektur dafür Regler mit denen man das einfach korrigieren kann, wenn man weiß wonach man schauen muss. Danke für den Tip. Kannst ja mal schauen.--SteveK (talk) 22:57, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Ja, das ist doch prima - die Farben wirken auch viel natürlicher und der magenta-Rand ums Gehäuse ist auch weg. Allerdings ist die Helligkeit jetzt dramatisch abgesunken. Vielelicht kannst Du die nochmal leicht anheben. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany Hauptstrasse-8-03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 13:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Forsbach Germany PUSTEBLUME-Artwork-Robin-Kurka-07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 12:57, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-42.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --A.Savin 10:06, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-43.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Malchen53 18:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rivers-of-Sabah Sungai-Padas-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 08:36, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Forsbach Germany PUSTEBLUME-Artwork-Robin-Kurka-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. But why landscape? --Smial 11:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 11:24, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hue Vietnam Tomb-of-Emperor-Minh-Mang-06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Pleclown 11:24, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Rösrath_Germany_St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-11.jpg

Hallo Cccefalon,

mir fällt bei dem Bild auf, dass die rechte Seite leicht schief ist (nach oben zum Bildrand). Die linke Seite ist gerade. Dadurch wirkt die rechte Säule insgesamt schief. Will mich da in die QI-Diskussion nicht einmischen.

Gruß --SteveK (talk) 22:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-31a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support good. --A.Savin 16:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Malchen53 15:21, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany Augustinushaus-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany Hauptstrasse-8-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:47, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rösrath Germany St-Nikolaus-von-Tolentino-34.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 07:02, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eselsburger-Tal Herbrechtingen Baden-Württemberg Germany Bindsteinmühle-05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bucolic QI.--Jebulon 13:35, 15 April 2014 (UTC)Near the place where I grew up. Thanks for providing me with a so far unknown english vocabulary. --Cccefalon 15:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Brilon-Mahnmal zur Judenverfolgung.jpg

Hallo Cccefalon,

ich habe mir das Original (liegt im RAW vor) angeschaut, an dem Himmel kann ich nix machen, das ist auch im RAW-Format vorhanden. Die Magenta Flecken im Gebüsch habe ich auch gesehen, weiß aber nicht woher die kommen. Macht es aus deiner Sicht überhaupt Sinn etwas an dem Foto zu korrigieren?

Gruß --SteveK (talk) 07:46, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Na klar, ein Versuch ist das immer wert. Die CA kriegst Du ja relativ einfach weg. Für den Himmel würde ich erst mal versuchen, die Highlights bzw. Whites runterzuregeln und sehen, ob es eine Verebsserung gibt. Und schliesslich kann man immer noch einen Square-Crop machen und den Himmel weglassen. Ob das gut aussieht, musst man halt dann schauen. Gruss, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 08:54, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:Autotranslate Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

ArchiveBot

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Corpus Christi College

Hi Cccefalon-

Would you mind having another look. I see where I messed up the sky and reworked the image from the beginning. I hope this is better.-Godot13 (talk) 17:39, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

help

hi, can u plz help me by removing CA in the flower petals here. . i dont know how to do. plz help. thx--Aathavan jaffna (talk) 07:25, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

good morning. If I am starting to work on the JPG, it will result in a loss of quality. I have no idea about the program, that you are using. For my part, I am using Adobe Lightroom, which easily can handle such issues. Have you ever thought about trying Lightroom? There is a free 30-day-trial version available. If you intend to postprocess frequently your photos for QIC, you should consider to use a mighty but still easy to operate software. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:58, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

i am using photoscape but i dont know how to use that for this. so, what u mean???--Aathavan jaffna (talk) 13:46, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I want to say that I cannot help you with photoscape. But I suggest, that you try out Adobe Lightroom. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 13:48, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

ok i will try... can i contact u using email?--Aathavan jaffna (talk) 13:53, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

ok. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 14:02, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

"leaning out"

Hi Cccefalon, could you explain what "leaning out" means? Tried googling but no results. :P Thanks. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 00:05, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

I think it is not really good English :) It's a term, that is used here to describe a perspective distortion. It refers to a vertical that is leaning outwards. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 05:48, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Could you explain your comment on Mattbuck's train QI candidate nominated on 26 April? I don't see any distortion. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 06:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

I made an annotation there for you. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:26, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

flooding

besides the fact, that i think all of my nominated images have the appropriate quality (and there are no double and trippe duplicates, as others nominate) i didn´t know, that nominations also need the participation as a reviewer. the easiest way to explain that to me would have been my talkpage, i think. so i´ll do some reviewing and hope, we can close this case. --Kulac (talk) 06:55, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

My decline is not about the quality of your photos. It's purely the big amount of the upload. The procedure is already stated in the QIC guideline: Adding more than a couple of images at once can be considered flooding, which is at least frowned upon or may even lead to immediate decline. The best way to resolve the issue might be to withdraw some and renominate in smaller batches. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk)

Vielleicht noch ergänzend diese Informationen: Wenn es nur wenige Bilder sind, die nominiert werden, gibt's in der Regel kein Problem, wenn jemand keine Reviews macht. Es gibt schließlich durchaus Leute, die gerne ein Bild nominieren, aber nicht viel Ahnung von der Bewertung von Photos haben. Bei Photographen aber, die regelmässig und ggf. auch viele Bilder hier nominieren, wird erwartet, dass die Anzahl der Reviews die der Nominierungen übersteigt. Es gab zu diesem Thema im Übrigen schon entsprechende Diskussionen, die man im Archiv nachlesen kann. Ja, und dann ist es nicht verkehrt, lieber mehrmals wenige Bilder, als viele Bilder auf einmal zu nominieren. Gruss, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:31, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

how much is a couple of images? since you declined already several of them, 10 could already be fine, or 8? please do me a favor and just delete/decline as many, as you think are too much and the rest will go the review-way. --Kulac (talk) 07:50, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

My proposal: Let's keep 6 in one batch. As you suggested, I will remove some of them now. As this was yesterday and you reviewed some today, you can renominate some of the deleted photos again today. Be wisely: Nominate some now, some in the afternoon and some in the evening. As long as your amount of reviews is bigger than your nominations, it can be more than a total of six re-nominations today. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:57, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Question

Hi Cccefalon- I think I've fixed the monitor calibration issue (too much magenta) that I was having. Can you give me any good tips on how to reduce or smooth noise in the sky (without creating what looks like solarization layers). I use CS6 but also have Lightroom as well. Any advice would be helpful. Thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 03:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't have an idea, how to use Photoshop but I rely since long years on Lightroom which is the best representation of the workflow you already had in ancient analogue photography. For denoising, I suggest to read this article - it's comprehensive. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 09:45, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Iglica

Hallo Cccefalon,

du findest die Geokoordinaten in der Kategorie, wo das Bild einsortiert ist. Wenn du es prüfst, wirst du feststellen, dass die Skulptur sich auf einem breiten Weg zwischen der Jahrhunderthalle und einem Platz mit hohen Säulen umringt von Bauwerken befindet. Das Areal, auf dem man ungehindert auf diese Nadel fotografieren kann ist ca. 100 x 20 Meter. Bei 96 Meter Höhe sind damit Verzerrungen unvermeidbar. Du darfst gerne weitere Bilder auf Commons oder im Internet konsultieren und schauen, wie andere Fotografen es meistern. Die Schärfe finde ich zwar generell okay, kann hier aber gerne noch nachschärfen.

Ach so: alles Gute zum dritten Commons-Geburtstag :-) ~

Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:59, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Danke für die "Geburtstagswünsche" - das war mir gar nicht bewusst, dass ich heute drei Jahre bei Commons bin :) ... und es soll keiner sagen, ich verschließe mich guten Argumenten: Ich war davon ausgegangen, dass man das Ding eventuell aus mehr Abstand photographieren kann. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:07, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Habe die monierten Punkte am Bild vom Breslauer Dom auch behoben. Schau mal bitte nach, ob es so i.O. ist. VG --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:47, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Schon gesehen, schon promoted. Ich war noch mit der Durchsicht der letzten Flutkatastrophe beschäftigt :) --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:05, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

"t I decided to give it a try"

Thanks for your comments on my QI nom. You're right; it is a little dicey (it's the first QI nom of mine that I took with a DSLR as opposed to a P/S; perhaps I bit off more than I could chew). I was probably so obsessed with correcting or minmizing a slight tilt that I forgot to see about the perspective; I'll see what I can do there. Daniel Case (talk) 15:24, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

User:DXR tried something that is leading into the right direction. I made a comment under your photo. QIC project is a good opportunity to enhance your knowledge in postprocessing. At the beginning however, it might be painful to get declined frequently. Just in case: Don't take a decline personal; most reviewers just challenge you to produce better results. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 09:36, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like it ultimately failed, and I agreed with Mattbuck that his improvements couldn't quite get it there. I take it perspective correction seems to be a newer feature in Photoshop? Because I still use CS 6 and it doesn't seem to have it (but I'm hoping to upgrade to CC soon).

Actually, I've submitted a few before when I used a P/S (or, as a National Geographic photographer at a seminar I went to calls them, a "create and manipulate". Believe it or not, three of them made it to QI. But I'm certainly aware that it takes more than just having a better camera ... I find myself thinking more about post-processing than I have before. Daniel Case (talk) 03:51, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Invitation to take part in the categorization of QI

Dear Cccefalon! Your images were reviewed and have been promoted to Quality Image status. Congratulations! I invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. All new images with this status are automatically placed to the page Commons:Quality_images/Recently_promoted. They have to be manually tagged with relevant categories using the QI categorization tool (see link at the top of the page, the author of this tool is User:Dschwen). Very few users do this job now, so a large number of uncategorizated photos accumulates on this page time to time… --Bff (talk) 11:51, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

About "File:Cologne Germany Ship-Carl-Straat-01.jpg"

Hi, Uwe, Only a few words about our comments under your photo. Every day some pictures are declined for unsharpness. If I write "prefectly sharp" it's just because of your usual standards and, of course, because I dowloaded your picture and tried to improve it before reviewing ( as I usually do). In fact, a slight high-pass filter would make your boat better with an invisible loss of detail at 100 % imho. Of course, this is not compulsory and I won't oppose if someone finds it OK. -- Sorry for my English, congrats for your work on the QIC page and best regards. --JLPC ([[User talk:JLPC|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Hya JLPC, no worries, I just could not resist to comment the term "perfectly". I appreciate any suggestions how to make a photo better and everybody here knows, that I am doing my best to provide suitable advises to other photographers. However, the more I try to deliver very good results the higher the expectations to my photos. I fear, there will be a limit soon Template:Smile. concerning your suggestion: I am using Lightroom and there is no High Pass Filter present. But I will try to use the clarity filter and compare the results. Mercie bien encore une fois, c'était mon plaisir. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 15:01, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I tried something. Please have another look, JLPC. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 15:20, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Tweaked the sky color a bit...

I've made a slight adjustment to the sky color per your QI comment. Is it better?-Godot13 ([[User talk:Godot13|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:59, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot ([[User talk:FPCBot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:02, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Your VIC nomination

Hi Cccefalon, I have changed the scope of your VIC nomination and informed P e z i who previously supported and he reconfirmed his support. Hope you didn't mind the changing of scope. --Joydeep _Talk 16:37, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me with my first VI nomination. I appreciate every move, that is bringing the nomination on the right track. cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

File: Nationaal_Park_Weerribben-Wieden._Bomengroep_01.JPG

Good morning Cccefalon,

Thanks for your writing. Because I do not master the English language, I often do not understand what you mean. Sorry about that.

Sincerely, --Famberhorst ([[User talk:Famberhorst|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Traffic-police-02.jpg

Hi, very good use of a small DoF, well done in my opinion. :) -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 07:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate your comment very much! --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot ([[User talk:FPCBot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:04, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:St Paul's Cathedral from Monument 2014.jpg

Thanks for reviewing St Paul's on QI. I had to laugh a little at the suggestion it is mirror slap as I used a Sony A33 and the semi-transparent mirror doesn't move. The photo was taken on a sunny morning and St Pauls is 1km away. I think it is heat haze. -- Colin ([[User talk:Colin|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:22, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, heat in the morning can also be an explanation, I agree. I always try to give a reasonable explanation for a decline fault, but as I am not in the shoes of the photographer, I might be wrong sometimes. However, most important is, that you understood the reason for the decline. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:26, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Tipps bei QI

Hallo! Vielen Dank für deine Tipps bei den Quality Images (-> File:Dülmen, Naturschutzgebiet -Karthäuser Mühlenbach- -- 2014 -- 0215.jpg). Die Bilder im Gegenlicht reizen mich, aber irgendwie fehlt der letzte Kick. Ich werde deine Tipps beherzigen und es einmal mit HDR versuchen. Die Verlaufsfilter scheue ich ein wenig, da sie einerseits die Aufnahme dauerhaft verändert - ich habe später weniger Einfluss - und andererseits die Filter benötigen. Und es werden auch Teile abgedunkelt, die ich nicht abgedunkelt haben möchte, also zum Beispiel die oberen Bereiche der Bäume. Alle meine Effektfilter habe ich schon vor Jahren abgegeben. HDR in der Natur ist nur bei wenig bis gar keinem Wind akzeptabel, da sich die Blätter oft zu sehr bewegen. Aber trotzdem versuche ich es mal. (Und nun warte ich auf den passenden Morgen. ;-) ) --XRay ^talk 08:18, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

QI Review

Thank You for reviewing my image. I am new to photography and was wondering if you could tell me what, "artefacting", "noisy " and "DoF". I also am wondering what you mean by over processed because I only sharpened it. I am not criticizing your review I am just wondering. StudiesWorld ([[User talk:StudiesWorld|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 22:06, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

QI / Neue Version und Rückfrage

Hallo Uwe! Vielen Dank für dein Review des Bildes File:Leinpfad 1 Mülheim mit Boot.jpg. Ich habe eine neue Version hochgeladen mit verbesserter korrigierter Verdrehung. Ich habe zudem den Crop verändert, so dass die Uferlinie nun genau auf einer Linie des goldenen Schnitts liegt. Zwar ist die Spiegelung jetzt nicht mehr vollständig drauf, aber mir gefällt das Bild so besser, weil es insgesamt harmonischer wirkt. Was meinst du? --Tuxyso ([[User talk:Tuxyso|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Es wirkt sehr harmonisch jetzt. Mit der Spiegelung ist nicht schlimm, weil es in diesem bewegten Wasser sowieso keine "perfekte" Spiegelung ist. Was hier wichtig war - nämlich den hellen Teil des gespiegelten Hauses vom Bildrand fernzuhalten - hast Du ja beherzigt. Ja, gefällt mir sehr gut. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 04:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Ein wenig spät.

Hallo! Sorry, die von dir bemerkten Korrekturen am Bild File:Merfeld, Wildpferdebahn -- 2014 -- 7889.jpg konnte ich leider erst gerade eben anbringen - ich hatte ein paar Tage keine Gelegenheut. Ich habe deine Bewertung "Decline" daher auf "Nomination" zurückgesetzt und möchte dich bitten, vielleicht noch einmal nach dem Bild zu sehen. Danke - für deine Anmerkungen und die erneute Bewertung!--XRay ^talk 06:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Kein Problem, hab ich sofort gemacht. Wäre schade um das Bild gewesen :) Ach ja, wenn ich am Wochenende dazukomme, wollte ich Dir noch einen Praxisartikel über HDR-Gegenlichtaufnahmen in Wäldern einscannen, der vor drei Monaten in einer Photozeitschrift erschienen ist. Vielleicht hilft Dir das weiter. Gruß, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:08, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

QI

hallo, nur mal so ne Frage... was steckt dahinter das Bilder von Nicht-Commoners keine QI werden können, sie können doch trotzdem von hoher Qualität sein? - Liebe Grüße --Sjokolade ([[User talk:Sjokolade|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Sicher. Aber es gibt bestimmte Regeln für die Teilnahme am QIC, und da heisst es unter anderem All nominated images should be the work of Commons users. Das heisst, dass nur Werke von Usern, die einen Account bei WikiCommons haben, teilnahmeberechtigt sind. Gruss, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

ja gut, wenn dem so ist... ich dachte bis jetzt es würde darum gehen die guten Bilder rauszufiltern. Trotzdem danke für die schnelle Antwort. - lg --Sjokolade ([[User talk:Sjokolade|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

QI declines

Hi. User nomination behaviour is not a reason for declining an image at QI. If you don't want to review it, don't, but declines should only be for images which do not meet QI criteria. -mattbuck (Talk) 07:00, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

It is. See QIC rules: Adding more than a couple of images at once can be considered flooding, which is at least frowned upon or may even lead to immediate decline. This is exactly , what I did. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:28, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

P.S. 14 photos in one batch is beyond the tolerance limit for me. In the past, we always declined such batches. I reverted your revert and added a hint about this talk to my first decline. --07:40, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I have never seen the guy at QIC before, he's probably a newbie to it, give him a break. Yes 14 images is too many, so just don't review them. I left a message on his talk page saying it was too many. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:29, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

My advise in similar cases is: Withdrawing the whole declined batch and wisely re-nominate some of them. As he made some reviews afterwards, you can advise him to re-nominate the same amount than he reviewed. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:04, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Sorry, I forgot to come back to you regarding this photo. Of course no need for the raw. I of course trust if you say you have not rescaled it in a way, which has stretched it in the horizontal direction. I just appeared so, so I wanted you just to check it. Cheers, --Slaunger ([[User talk:Slaunger|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for trusting me and no worries for delaying. Sometimes, it also happens to me, that one of my reviews is slipping through my fingers or has to be postponed because I just have a smartphone available (and the screen is scarcely a good review substitute for a calibratet monitor). Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Lijiang Yunnan FPC

Hi! I just nominated one of your pictures for FP (here), because I found it outstanding. I hope you don't mind. --Kadellar ([[User talk:Kadellar|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 10:34, 23 July 2014 (UTC) btw, I forgot to check the sign picture again, sorry! Thanks for reworking!!

Of course I don't mind :) Thank you. I'm a little bit postponed with reworking photos and looking after my reviews because I got a new computer system and have to transfer all my work there. Nethertheless, I keep an eye on QIC Template:Smile --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:14, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Thx for letting me know

Thx for letting me know the rules for Normination QI's, sorry I have overlooked that. --Villy Fink Isaksen ([[User talk:Villy Fink Isaksen|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:43, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome. You are not the first, you is experiencing the mass-decline at his first day. Anyway: welcome in QIC and I hope you will be a frequent nominator and reviewer. The presence here will help you to improve your skills. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:57, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SDI_In.jpg

Hi Cccedfalon !

Is it a bad day for you or something ? Template:Smile

I found your comment a bit derogatory. Well, I would be pleased to know how you would have pictured a SDI card yourself (if by chance you find one)...

Regarding the DOF, if you check the EXIF infos, you will see that this shot is taken at f/14 (which is pretty much and pretty not random, the exposure time also is not specially random for daylight shooting) in order to insist on the first wire on the top (SDI in) and let the wiki reader see that on such a SDI graphic card used for movie editing there are also SDI out.

Regarding the compositorial idea, it sounds like a subjective comment and I personnaly feel that most of the QI are not using a special compositorial idea in particular because these images are to be used in encyclopedic articles. However, the composition of the image is the following : I decided to place the SDI connectors at the center of the image on a vertical line, to place the wire on a diagonal line and to have the good angle in order to have the SDI connectors approximately at the same level with the sound connectors behind (which is not the case in reality). I do not claim to be an artist, but at least I think that this composition is not what you call "random".

So what ?

All the best,

Gormé ([[User talk:Gormé|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Of course, if I had to produce a macro of a SDI card, I had a lot of ideas, what I would do better. Template:Smile

• If the subject is the SDI card, you better showed all the connectors and not only part of them.
• Yes, it would have been a good idea to get the connectors on a vertical line; however you failed this and added a clockwise tilt.
• The perspectively distorted tin plate at the right side is distracting.
• As the main parts of the composition are within the same focus distance range, focus stacking had resolved the challenge.
• Use of a polarisation filter had tackled the problems with reflections.

Sorry, that my criteria for object shooting are not that easy to meet ...

Anyway, I am sure that my decline can challenge you to deliver a much better SDI card shot soon Template:Smile

Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:20, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality images candidates

Das Bild in der Kandidatur (File:2014-07-26 Clan of Xymox (Amphi festival 2014) 005.JPG) habe ich leicht gedreht und erneut beschnitten. --Atamari ([[User talk:Atamari|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:52, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Compact camera

Well, if you look at the EXIF data, it says you took it with a G11, and that isn't SLR, that's compact ;) --Kadellar ([[User talk:Kadellar|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 10:58, 11 August 2014 (UTC) I answered where I started the talk. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Anzahl von offenen FPCs

Hallo Uwe, eine de strengsten Regel bei FPC is die Anzahl von Nominierungen, die gleichzeitig von einem einzigen Benutzer gestarted werden können, und zwar zwei. Die dritte und vierte sind damit ungültig und ich befürchte, dass man sie nochmals starten soll. Poco² 18:56, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Die beiden anderen waren eh tot nach den vernichtenden Urteilen. Ich hab sie zurückgezogen. Damit sollte es eigentlich gut sein. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:06, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

(EC) Bin nicht überzeugt, zumindest was die dritte angeht, sie war 3 Tage offen und keiner hat das Problem gemerkt. Aber vielleicht gab es den Fall schon und hatte man sich auf eine Lösung geeinigt. Poco² 19:18, 11 August 2014 (UTC) PS: Entscheidend ist wer die Nominierung STARTET (also der Nominierer), nicht der Author. Bitte, schau dir das hier an. Poco² 19:18, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Labuan clock tower

Cccefalon, is this clock tower is the same one like on the old picture? — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 04:48, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

• 
  Present clock tower.
• 
  The clock tower during World War II.
• 
  Plate with inscription.

Hi, Ranking! Following your request I added a photo with the exact explanation and I also added more views of the clock tower. Finally, I also reworked the photo from scratch with higher resolution, perspective corrections and geo locations. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought that was an old structure. — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 16:29, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot ([[User talk:FPCBot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot ([[User talk:FPCBot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:04, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Facebook?

You put a message which prohibits the establishment of your pictures on Facebook. This point interests me a lot. I never understood why my images were on Facebook. What should we think? --Archaeodontosaurus ([[User talk:Archaeodontosaurus|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:38, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Your QI mi'lud

Template:QICpromoted

Comment

I also have problems with the wires (or cables). See this photo. The trees and surrounding buildings made impossible other composition (for me), but there is a wire: Photo not proposed because the wire. It is like your wire.

Thanks for your lovely pictures--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 02:09, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Good morning, Miguel. If the wires are too dominant, I agree, a photo either should not be nominated or it is prone to be declined. But it has to be calculated in every single case, of the wires are really disturbing or just part of the location. Sometimes they cannot be avoided and you can try to move some steps left or right to place them in a less disturbing part. Nethertheless, they are always a thorn in the side of the photographer.

I appreciate the perpetual high quality of your photos. Always a pleasure to watch. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 04:16, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Ullswater MMB 06.jpg

Dein Abschluß des CR dieses Bildes ist IMHO etwas verfrüht. Denn die von Taxiarchos228 vorgebrachten Punkte wurden behoben (man sollte ihm Zeit lassen, sein Voting zu ändern), und das Kontra von XtoF finde ich, wie schon im Kommentar gesagt, unangebracht; ein Bild, das technisch QI genügt, sollte nur in extremen Fällen wegen rein ästhetischer Gesichtspunkte abgelehnt werden. --Kreuzschnabel ([[User talk:Kreuzschnabel|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 22:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Naja, ich finde neun Tage sind schon genügend Zeit, um ein Urteil zu ändern. Außerdem war Matt selbst nicht von seinen Änderungen überzeugt. Von daher denke ich mal, dass es diesem Bild nicht anderes ging als anderen, die wegen der Unmengen an Bildern im CR einfach nicht mehr beachtet werden. Taxiarchos war noch am 19. August aktiv mit Reviewarbeit beschäftigt, von daher hätte er Zeit gehabt sein Urteil zu ändern, wenn er es denn ändern wollte. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 04:04, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:2014-08-22 0712 rueppurr auferstehungskirche.jpg

Danke dir für das Feedback! Ich hatte erst einen Ausschnitt, wie von dir skizziert, das erschien mir aber zu eng. Ich werde aber nachher noch eine neue Version hochladen zum Vergleich. Noch eine Verständnisfrage: Was meinst du mit white/highlight clipping too excessive? Grüße, ireas ([[User talk:Ireas|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:49, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Der Himmel war wohl ursprünglich überbelichtet. Du hast das Histogramm dann nach links geschoben, so dass die überbelichteten Stellen dunkler wurden. Damit das mit den hellsten Stellen links funktioniert hat, sind die anderen etwas zu dunkel geraten. Jedenfalls interpretiere ich das Ergebnis so. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:52, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Pont du Tivoli, Sète, Hérault 20.jpg

Hi Cccefalon, how are you? After your comment on the QIC page, I tried to correct the tilt of this image, is it ok now? -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 07:16, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot ([[User talk:FPCBot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:01, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Menggatal Sabah SJKC-Good-Shepherd-Menggatal-04.jpg

Template:Autotranslate -mattbuck (Talk) 10:34, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot ([[User talk:FPCBot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:01, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Danke

Hallo! Ich muss mich echt einmal bei dir bedanken! Auch wenn ich meine Bilder kontrolliere, rutschen immer wieder welche durch, bei denen CAs zu sehen sind. Und du bist oft genug der findige Betrachter. Danke für deine unermüdlichen Reviews! Natürlich behebe ich die Fehler. Ich hoffe nur, dass ich nicht zu viele WLM-Beiträge mit Fehlern hochgeladen habe.--XRay ^talk 07:04, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Alhambra as seen from Mirador de San Nicolas

Template:U instructs Template:U in the use of his new tripod.

Yes, you are quite right it is crowded there. Luckily, Template:U, who was kind enough to direct me to the place, also had the largest and most rugged tripods of all at the Mirador, and once he turned on the deflector shield on the apparatus, and I simultaneously raised to full Scandinavian male adult height, competing photographers knew they were defeated and allowed us to have unobstructed sight to the Alhambra Template:Smile. --Slaunger ([[User talk:Slaunger|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 16:27, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

That's what I call a "Dream Team"...Template:Clin--Jebulon ([[User talk:Jebulon|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 18:24, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

QI oder nicht QI...

Bin etwas verwirrt als ich diesen kommentarlosen Edit gesehen habe. Gibt es ein Problem mit der Promovierung von deinem Bild? Poco² 06:57, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis. Das ist wieder das Resultat eines Edit conflictes. Von derlei Problemen gab es gestern mehrere. Ich stelle das einfach wieder her. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah, hast Du schon gemacht :) Danke. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you very much for your comments at Quality images candidates, I'm noticing some of my errors :) Bye, --Elisardojm ([[User talk:Elisardojm|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 10:53, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

QIC Review von File:Kimanis Sabah SOGT-Kimanis-01.jpg

Hallo Cccefalon! Schade, dass du deine Nominierung zurückgezogen hast. Ich habe bei dem Review in der Tat nicht berücksichtigt, dass durch das Gas natürlich die Schärfe reduziert wird. Dafür gibt es ja die Möglichkeiten auf Reviews zu antworten - ein großer Vorteil von offenen Peer Reviewing - Prozessen, den man nutzen sollte. Also von daher: Du kannst das Foto gerne noch mal einstellen, dann schaue ich mir es unter den neuen Randbedingungen noch mal an. Grüße (und immer ruhig Blut :) ) --Tuxyso ([[User talk:Tuxyso|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 22:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Das war mir in den letzten Tagen einfach zuviel, dass ich die Abende damit verbringe, Bilder zu verteidigen, bei deren Review die Randbedingungen nicht beachtet werden oder wo das Review schlicht falsch und grottenschlecht ist. Zum einen kommen einige Reviewer wohl nicht mit der entzerrten von-unten-Ansicht eines Ultraweitwinkel-Tilftshift-Objektivs klar und zum anderen nicht mit der Pixeldichte in der vollen Auflösung beim Einsatz einer Vollformatkamera. Da verliert man irgendwann den Spass an der Sache, vor allem wenn wie gestern massenhaft Photos declined werden. Im Moment sehe ich nur den Ausweg, zum einen, nur noch maximal mit 3-4000 px Kantenlänge hochzuladen, zweitens alle Photos, die nach einer Woche nicht bewertet wurden, prophylaktisch zurückzuziehen, um diese aberwitzigen last-broom-Bewertungen abzuwenden und drittens TS-Aufnahmen mit einem Hinweis auf's Objektiv zu versehen. Gruß, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:46, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Uwe! Ich kann deine (hoffentlich nur zeitweise) Verärgerung über solche Reviews gut nachvollziehen. Gerade wenn man wie du sehr viel Zeit in das Projekt steckt. Ich fühle mich allerdings mit deiner Aussage von schlicht falschen und grotttenschlechten Reviews nicht wirklich angesprochen, zumal ich über eine Woche nicht auf QIC aktiv war. Im Normalfall nehme ich mir genügend Zeit, um ein Bild zu bewerten. Insbesondere bei Decline begründe ich ausführlich, warum ich ein Bild ablehne. Das hat den Vorteil, dass der Bewertete weiß, was er falsch gemacht hat, oder (wie in deinem Fall) darauf reagieren kann und auf besondere Randebedingungen hinweisen kann. In dem Fall geht das Bild dann nicht in CR, sondern kann trotz des Decline promoted werden, weil der ursprüngliche Reviewer sein Urteil ja revidieren kann. Ich glaube deine allgemeine Verärgerung über Commons traf in dem Fall den Falschen :) Du nennst aber weitere interessante Punkte:

• Tilt&Shift: Ein T&S-Objektiv verwendet man ja gerade, damit beim optischen Entzerren keine großen Qualitätseinbußen zustande kommen. Ich habe z.B. File:Ruhrturm-2012.jpg mit einem T&S-Objektiv aufgenommen (Shift etwa auf 3/4 der maximalen Position). Große Qualitätseinbußen an dem 36 Mpx (!!)-Sensor der D800 kann ich dort nicht erkennen. Welches T&S verwendest du? Das tolle 17mm von Canon? Da soll es doch auch eine neue und eine ältere Version geben, oder? Mich würde mal ein Beispielbild interessieren.
• Du kritisierst, dass die Pixeldichte in der vollen Auflösung beim Einsatz einer Vollformatkamera bei Bewertungen nicht berücksichtigt wird. Da gehen jetzt aber Dinge durcheinander. Die Pixeldichte von Vollformatkamera ist geringer als die von APS-C-Kamera. Demnach stellen Vollformatkameras bei gleicher Auflösung sogar geringere Anforderungen an das Auflösungsvermögen von Objektiven. Sehr schön kannst du diesen Effekt nachvollziehen wenn du auf DxoMark mal das Auflösevermögen eines Objektivs an einem APS-C und einem Vollformatsensor gleicher Auflösung vergleichst. An dem Vollformatsensor löst das Objektiv generell höher auf, weil eben die Pixeldichte (und damit die Anforderungen an das Objektiv) geringer sind. Anders verhält es sich natürlich in den Randbereichen. Schraubst du ein Vollformatobjektiv an einem APS-C-Kamera werden bei der APS-C-Kamera die Randbereiche in der Regel besser aussehen als bei dem Vollformater, weil eben nur ein kleinerer Bildkreis ausgeleuchtet werden muss.
• Nochmal generell zur 100%-Ansicht: Man kann lange darüber philosophieren, ob eine Schärfebewertung bei 100% sinnvoll ist. Im Rahmen einheitlicher Bewertungskriterien und im Sinne der Praktikabilität sehe ich dazu aber keine wirkliche Alternative. Ich kann ja nicht jedes Bild erst runterskalieren um es zu bewerten. Außerdem bekommst du dann Schwierigkeiten wie weit man runterskalieren soll, das macht alles nur unnötig komplizierter und ergänzt eine weitere subjektive Bewertungskomponente. Wenn du ein Bild in voller Auflösung zur Verfügung stellst, sollte auch die Schärfe in der 100%-Ansicht stimmen, was bei deiner tollen Ausrüstung keine wirkliche Hürde darstellen sollte. Es gibt ja auch einige Spezis auf Commons, die generell nur 2 Mpx-Versionen zur Verfügung stellen. Andere, Christian macht das gelegentlich, skalieren minimal runter (auf ca. 90%). Klar verliert man dadurch ein paar Bildinformationen, allerdings sehen die Bilder in der Vollansicht dann schön knackig aus. Grüße und noch einen schönen Sonntag, --Tuxyso ([[User talk:Tuxyso|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Ich habe mir die Geschichte auch gerade angesehen und wollte drauf reagieren, aber auf der Projektseite hat das ja keinen Sinn mehr. Daher hier ganz kurz: Die Kritik sprach ja nicht davon, daß die Flamme unscharf sei, sondern der Turm mit der Flamme, und da muß ich zustimmen. Er ist definitiv deutlich weniger scharf als beispielsweise die Lampe rechts von der Bildmitte, oder auch die Steine am Flußufer. Eine Art Unschärfe, die mir ein wenig danach aussieht, als sei hier ein Farbquerfehler elektronisch korrigiert worden. Generell scheint mir in diesem Bild die Schärfe nach links dramatisch abzunehmen – vielleicht ist das eine Schwäche dieser Optik. Der Draht, den du als Schärfebeleg anführst, ist eher als unscharfer Schatten zu ahnen. Schade, denn das Bild an sich ist wirklich schön. --Kreuzschnabel ([[User talk:Kreuzschnabel|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 10:25, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Nein, es war nicht gegen Tuxyso gemünzt. Und das Bild von der Fackel hatte ich schon morgens zurückgezogen. Ich bin dann erst abends richtig sauer geworden, als immer mehr zusammengekommen ist. Ich rede nicht von den Bildern, die nachvollziehbare Fehler haben. Die korrigiere ich oder ziehe das Bild zurück. Aber ich habe mich angesichts dessen, was da alles bei mir kommentiert und abgelehnt wurde ernsthaft gefragt, ob wir hier eine Review machen um ordentliche Bilder aus dem Commons-Schrott rauszufischen, wie es kürzlich so treffend formuliert wurde, oder ob wir nur noch Hochglanzbilder ohne jeden Makel promoten. Pincushion-Effekte auf der Mittellinie, Perspektivprobleme beim TS-Pbjektiv, Overexposed sky bei einwandfreiem Histogramm, etc. um nur ein paar Highlights zu nennen.

@Tuxyso: Für TS habe ich das 17mm von Canon. Auslösung auschließlich aus der Live-View mittels wireless remote um den Spiegelschlag zu vermeiden. Genauso verfahre ich übrigens bei Brennweiten oberhalb 200 mm.

Danke für Eure Kommentare, ich komm schon irgendwie wieder auf den Boden zurück. Gruß, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:20, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Response

Guten Tag Cccefalon , i wait from 3 days for your response,can you check when is possible? Danke --LivioAndronico talk 11:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Template:Ping; I am a little bit delayed, I know, that is because of a bussiness assignment. However, yesterday evening, I checked again and compared with the version that I uploaded for you on my server. The comparison left me a little bit helpless because the left side of your new version is still inclined. I tried to figure out, if it is a limitation of the software you use, as with my Adobe Lightroom I easily can get the lines straight. I asked myself, if I am too strict and if I am asking too much from a beginner. I was tempted to upload my version, but if I do that, I cannot promote. So, the good question is, if I wait for other reviewers or better ask you for another try. I will make an annotation, which verticals you should observe. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Valtice (Feldsberg) - Kostel Nanebevzetí Panny Marie.JPG

The actual categorization is perfectly correct and without the two red links the image would not have been better categorized, it is a fact. there is nothing in the guideline concerning the red links. It is said Quality images must be categorized, and it is. If you look at the file history you will see that the two red links are not the fact of the author/nominator so you have not to ask or to require him to correct this. And Wikimedia Commons authorize the use od red links so it is not a reason for to oppose or even for to delete these two red links. -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 09:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I got your point, Christian, and at a certain degree, you are right. However, Pudelek nominated the photo after the modification. As he didn't objected to the addition of the categories, he kind of authorized them. The more, I am still waiting, that the author himself is making a statement about that.

Would you please be so kind to transfer this part of the conversation to CR, as it might be of a general importance for the discussion. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 09:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• • I agree with you, Cccefalon. Please have a look here, and participate !--Jebulon ([[User talk:Jebulon|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:58, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• Keep your shame for you. -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 10:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
• Ok, ok for my part it's the end. My purpose when I opened a discussion here was not to make a war or to disturb you, sorry. It was just to say my point of view concerning the red links (there are always the same concerning this file) and to be the most precise possible. But if you want to discuss with me or with someone else, just a little advice : don't talk so quickly with words like shame or others, nobody is perfect.... and a war can easily begin for less than that. Especially with me who have a very, very good and nice character Template:Clin. For me end of the story, and I thank you very much for to make so fastidious rewiews even if we don't agree on that one. Nice day to you :) -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 13:58, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• Dear Christian, I guess that this discussion started off on the wrong foot of both of us. Today, we both used words, that were not appropriate in the shed of the good understanding, we cultivated so far. For my part, I apologize, if I was too harsh or if I made you feel insulted. It is easy to get my temper stirred up, but I am not resentful. Peace! Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 15:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted}} Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Cologne Germany St-Kunibert-10.jpg

That was petty of you. Please don't do that again, it is little more than vandalism. I did not mean to insult you with my review, and I apologise that you took it that way, I will attempt to be more understanding in future. -mattbuck (Talk) 07:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, first I think that it is my good right to decide which resolution of my photos I contribute to Commons. The more, a second version - even with smaller resolution - is a second version in Commons as the high resolution version is still available and can be used by everyone. Pushing me in the corner of vandalism is not appropriate in my humble opinion.

While doing reviews in QIC, I had to learn that QIC is not FPC. I'm trying not to be nitpicking and not to ask miracles. I'm not always happy with the nominations in QIC, but I try to see it from the point of selecting good photos out of the pile of garbage that is populating Commons. I believe, that I reduced my demands of perfectness to a reasonable degree. Perhaps you can understand, that I was not happy about the big amount of really strange reviews that I got recently. I had to make my decisions, how to continue with my nominations and one of my decisions was, to provide a smaller size of my material in future.

Concerning the quality of the St. Kunibert transept, I really could not understand your decision. The photo was taken from a very short distance under natural light conditions with a TS lense. It covers a height of more than 12 metres. The loss of sharpness under the badly illuminated arches is minimal. I really could not believe to hear, that the "Top is too unsharp due to perspective". My opinion is, that such a review is the result of looking at the image at full resolution. So, what else can I do than providing photos with a lower resolution?

I really appreciate your deep and profound knowledge about photography, Matt, but sometimes I have the impression you feel, you have to make a final decision about every photo, that is at the end of the queue. Sometimes however, it might be better to leave an image as "unassessed" than "looking for the bone in the egg" as a chinese saying goes.

No hard feelings and if I said something hurting, I apologize. I'm looking forward to seeing your reviews of my images again. Cheers --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 08:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I apologise for the late reply - I've been out of town for a few days and not had time to compose a reply before now.

You are right that it is your right to decide what size image you release. However, if you (for example) upload a 12MP image, then later replace it by a 2MP version, that is not acceptable. You already released the high resolution image, you can't take it back (at least not after a reasonable amount of time has passed). Especially so when the only reason for the change is to pass QIC.

I do leave some images unreviewed, when I am genuinely undecided. Perhaps I was too hasty in declining this particular image, but I stand by my comments - to me, the top is too unsharp. You're quite right, that we can tell it's unsharp is because it's high resolution, but that is by no means a reason to upload lower resolution images. QI is, in principle, a place to showcase high quality photography. But only in principle. What it really is is a place for good photographers to preen in public. It's one of those places where we can be a bit selfish on Commons, promote our own work. But that we have this place does not override the whole purpose of Commons, which is to provide freely-usable educational media. That purpose is helped by the highest resolution images possible. Yes, if you downsample images stuff becomes sharper, mistakes less visible, but the image also becomes less useful. And usefulness is why Commons exists in the first place.

I apologise for calling it vandalism, and if you disagree with a review by all means discuss it - I know I have different standards to other reviewers, and if people think I'm wrong they'll say so (and they frequently do). I welcome discussion, as it helps make all our photos better, and thus more useful. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Picture declined, wondering

Hi Cccefalon, first of all thanks for taking the pain to look through the pictures. However, I added one myself, but you declined it as not being good quality pointing to "too much noise" and being artifact... I am lost as to the reasons. The picture has not been tweaked, is topic specific, broad and detailed picture at the same time. I just would like to know the reasons. Thanks for your time Iñaki LLM ([[User talk:Iñaki LLM|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:49, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Iñaki. In a nutshell: When the light conditions are complicated, a camera is amplifying the current at the sensor which raises not only the brightness but also the noise. Also, the setting of the camera (ISO500 and maximum aperture f/2,7) will result in grainy jpg with compression losses when using an ultracompact camera without the possibility of storing and editing in RAW format. I marked some parts where you can observe the noise and the artefacts (the white "strokes"). In my review, I didn't mentioned the chromatic aberrations and the perspective distortion which is also present in your picture. Sorry, that I cannot give you a better rating for this photo. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:21, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

That's quite a lot of technical stuff I will have to check in order to understand. I get to understand Image noise, and can make out some of it only when the picture is zoomed in at its biggest (which is quite big as compared to the minimum requirements, as far as I remember). I do not mean to get on the defensive, but I would just say the picture is good quality, it is aesthetic, does not distort the real scene, it provides a true image and the framing is good. Iñaki LLM ([[User talk:Iñaki LLM|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:55, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

No one of the reviewers is infallible, though after reviewing some thousands of images I think I got a nose on what is QI and what is not. You always can send an image to consensual review, if you think, that a review is not appropriate. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I will give it a miss this time. Iñaki LLM ([[User talk:Iñaki LLM|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 08:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Help!

Haha, Cccefalon, can you help me translate this. I don't understand anything on this part using a translator machine. What is "E-Werk"? — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 08:15, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:Cquote

Template:Cquote

Thanks, and the last one? — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 09:14, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Not so hasty - I am not a machine Template:Smile Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 09:23, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the translation. :P — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 09:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hee, finally I have finished translating the article. Can you check it if there is something error on it (for example the wording, etc..)? See --> Sandakan POW Camp. — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 12:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, partly, the translation seems to come from a translation program. I'm not a native speaker, but I think, there are a lot of mistakes in the text. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:42, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I'm going to wait if there is any English speaker who can fix it when they review it. :) — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 12:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Flooding-Vorwurf gegen Böhringer

Hallo Cccefalon! Ich habe sämtliche deiner Declines der Fotos von Böhringer auf Discuss gesetzt. Ich halte deinen Flooding-Vorwurf für nicht berechtigt. Flooding ist kein formales Kriterium, das man anwendet, wenn jemand mal mehr als drei Bilder zur Bewertung einstellt. Der "Tatbestand" des Floodings ist für mich nur nach einer sinnvollen Gesamtwürdigung der Aktivität und des Editierverhaltens auf Commons erfüllt. Der besagte User hat sich aus meiner Sicht in der Vergangenheit sehr stark bei QIC/FPC und natürlich als herausragender Fotograf engagiert. Er wird es sicher auch zukünftig tun, hatte vermutlich gerade keine Zeit ebensoviele Bilder zu reviewen. Vielleicht hast du da etwas über das Ziel hinausgeschossen. --Tuxyso ([[User talk:Tuxyso|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

na toll, jetzt soll also nicht derjenige, der 19 Bilder in einem batch nominiert hat gemassregelt werden, sondern derjenige, der das abgewehrt hat? Ist Dir aufgefallen, dass Böhringer keinerlei Anstalten gemacht hat, auf das Decline zu reagieren? Er hätte die Bilder zurückziehen können und dann einigermassen vernünftig neu nominieren. Dagegen hätte niemand was gehabt. Es wäre für mich auch leichter, morgens einen Riesenbatch auf QIC loszulassen. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Ui, die anderen Bilder habe ich übersehen. 19 Fotos sind natürlich schon recht heftig. Hattest du Böhringer denn mal auf seiner Talk-Seite angesprochen. Eigentlich ist er recht ungänglich. Ich lass deine anderen Declines mal stehen, 19 ist wirklich ein bissel viel. --Tuxyso ([[User talk:Tuxyso|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:28, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Ich hatte ihn in meinem ersten decline gefragt, ob er sich bewusst sei, dass das flooding ist, was er da macht. Er hat aber ein paar Minuten später zwei weitere Bilder hochgeladen. Ausserdem sollte man von so einem langjährigen User erwarten können, dass er die einschlägigen Diskussionen zu diesem Thema kennt. Ich konnte eigentlich gar nicht anders reagieren, als dann (fast) alle zu declinen. Wegen seines sonstigen Engagements hatte ich bereits drei von ihm nicht abgelehnt. Mehr kann ich wirklich nicht in dieser Sache machen. Außer wegschauen natürlich. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

das ist aber nett, dass du wegen meinem Engagement 3 stehen gelassen hast. Wer bist du eigentlich? Ich habe dich die letzten 7 Jahre in denen ich nahezu 14.0000 Bilder hochlud noch nicht bemerkt. Im Übrigen wusste ich nicht, dass man nur 3 Bilder nomnieren darf. Und zum zeitlichen Ablauf will ich dir sagen, dass ich nach dem Bemerken deines ersten Declines weitere Nominierung eingestellt habe und dir dankte. @Tuxyso: ich danke dir. --Böhringer ([[User talk:Böhringer|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:17, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

das ist aber interessant, dass man nach 7 Jahren und/oder 14.000 Bildern einen Credit für die Anzahl der Nominierungen bekommt... Du weisst ja, dass die wer-bist-du-eigentlich-Frage eine gewisse Überheblichkeit ausdrückt? Es gibt keinen Grund mich hier persönlich anzugreifen. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:28, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

So, jetzt gebt Euch die Hand, vertrag Euch wieder und ladet weiter tolle Fotos hoch :) Ich hätte übrigens genauso reagiert, wenn eine solche Mehrfachnominierung von Uwe komplett zurückgewiesen worden wäre. Ihr seid beide doch sehr fleißige Contributer und Reviewer, da muss man ja nicht gleich alle Fotos aus formalen Gründen ablehnen, sondern kann das erst mal laufen lassen. --Tuxyso ([[User talk:Tuxyso|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

also, wie viele Bilder darf man nominieren? Ich habe von zwei Usern am heutigen Tag nahezu 20 Nominierungen gesehen. Da finde ich es komisch, dass man bei mir alle bis auf 3 wegen meines Engagement auf löschen setzt und das nehme ich persönlich! Mit über 2200 QI-Bilder hat man anscheinend das Recht dazu. Wünsche weiterhin viel Erfolg und reiche dazu meine Hand. Guten Abend --Böhringer ([[User talk:Böhringer|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 22:24, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Nominier' doch so viele wie Du willst; ich werde mich nicht mehr einmischen. Soll ich mich etwa für irgendwelche Regeln einsetzen, nur um dann von langjährigen Benutzern angegriffen und verspottet zu werden? Danke, nein. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 06:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Wo ist die Regel zu finden, daß solche Bilderserien abgelehnt werden müssen und deshalb keine Wahl besteht? Ich habe das immer als Bitte um Fairness verstanden, nicht als Gesetz. Natürlich mit der möglichen(!), wenn auch nicht zwingenden(!) Konsequenz, daß sowas von den Eingeborenen auch mal zurückgewiesen wird, wenn man übertreibt oder keine Gegenleistung bietet. -- Smial ([[User talk:Smial|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:35, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Ich kann mich entsinnen, dass ich die Regel korrekt zitiert habe: [..] may even lead to immediate decline. Warum gibt es plötzlich ein Problem, dass ich diese Regel - wie bereits in der Vergangenheit mehrfach - angewendet habe? Muss zur Anwendung dieser Regel erst ein Konsens erzielt werden? So langsam drängt sich mir wirklich der Eindruck auf, ich hätte unwissentlich einen Prominenten mit besonderen Verdiensten ungebührlich behandelt.

Im übrigen habe ich bereits deutlich gemacht, dass ich mich zukünftig nicht mehr um diese Regel scheren werde und jeder von mir aus soviel uploaden kann, wie er will. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:10, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Du schrubst oben "Ich konnte eigentlich gar nicht anders reagieren". Aber ich habe wohl alles flashc verstanden. Sorry. -- Smial ([[User talk:Smial|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:15, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

"Prominenten mit besonderen Verdiensten" liest sich auch komisch. In der Tat, wir leisten beide besondere Dienste für die Commons, wenn ich mir das so überlege. Als Nachsatz: Ich habe mich bis jetzt immer an die Regeln (soweit ich sie kannte) gehalten und tue dies auch in Zukunft. Im übrigen stehe ich selbst ab und an auf meinem "Schlips", da hat kein zweiter drauf Platz. Laden wir gemeinsam weiterhin gute Bilder hoch. Ich habe mir deine Bilder angesehen. Die verdienen da QI-Label, ehrlich. Liebe Grüsse --Böhringer ([[User talk:Böhringer|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:34, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Danke. Mir ist Streit unter Photographen auch zuwider, ich widme mich lieber der Erstellung von Bildmaterial als Grundsatzdiskussionen. Deine Bilder sind übrigens klasse. Lieben Gruss aus Köln, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:48, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Thanks for your QI reviews

Hi,

You are right to contest flooding. Personally, I would just skip reviewing flooders... Regards, Yann ([[User talk:Yann|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:55, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your reviews. What do you mean by "the red fringing amount"? Regards, Yann ([[User talk:Yann|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 16:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

If you look carefully at the black brush strokes, you will find a fine reddish/magenta line between the black stroke and the background. For sure, the painter didn't add this line purposely - it is just a kind of chromatic aberration in your lense system. As it is not really disturbing, there was no reason to decline. However, if you want to make the photo even better, you could try to use the "defringing tool" (no idea, if it is same in GIMP as I am using LR) to remove it. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I see what you mean now. I installed the addon for Gimp, but I can't really manage to get a good result. I am a bit busy now, and will try again later. Regards, Yann ([[User talk:Yann|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:25, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot ([[User talk:FPCBot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Dein QI

Hi Uwe, ich glaube das gehört dir ;-). --DXR ([[User talk:DXR|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 08:37, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Danke Dir! Das scheint wohl ein nicht wirklich nachzuvollziehender Bug des QICbots zu sein. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 08:55, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Naja, wenn ich mich recht erinnere, war deine Sig nicht substituiert worden (also nur das TildeTildeTildeTilde), ohne deinen Username. --DXR ([[User talk:DXR|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 09:19, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

File:Amiens France Mégacité-Exhibition Hall-01.jpg

Template:Autotranslate -mattbuck (Talk) 20:08, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Affected:

• File:Anapen+Box.jpg

And also:

• File:Jext300-Autoinjektor+Box+Schutzhülle.jpg

--  Gazebo ([[User talk:Gazebo|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 06:22, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Weshalb wurde ich angepingt?

Ich habe Nachricht bekommen das ich von dir auf der Kandidatenseite für QI erwähnt worden wäre, habe aber nichts gefunden. Um was ging es?--Tobias "ToMar" Maier ([[User talk:Tobias "ToMar" Maier|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 23:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

PS. Ich denke die Frau für den Bio Artikel ist schiefer abgebildet als sie eh schon steht. Wäre bei dem einen Bild richtbar. Aber dann die ganzen anderen mit der Beschriftung?

Guten Morgen, Tobias. Ich wüsste nicht, dass ich Dich angepingt habe. Das ist rätselhaft.

Ja, mein erster Eindruck war auch, dass die Frau irgendwie komisch da steht. Ich hatte das dann mal ausgemessen und bin zu dem Ergebnis gekommen, dass nicht das Photo, sondern die Haltung der Frau schuld ist, also eine schlechte Ponderation. Kann auch sein, dass ihr linker Fuss minimal kürzer ist und sie das dann ausgleichen muss. Ich fand es nicht 100% optimal aber immer noch QI-würdig, weswegen ich nur "ok." in der Review geschrieben habe. Gruss, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 03:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

CR

Hello, I hope you were not offended by my statement in QI. I meant that often Spurzem goes directly into CR without leaving a normal review. Of course I didn't want to be neither attack nor pedantic. If you had seen the way I do, you may have bothered, I'm sorry. Guten Tag. Template:Smiley

Don't worry, Livio, I'm relaxed. I also noticed that Spurzem is sending a lot of photos immediately to CR - which is not the right way to handle it - and as he perhaps did it in good faith, I felt compelled to give a hint on that. Of course it would be ok to oppose immediately but I am convinced, that a lot of photos can be rescued by some simple tweeks or rework operations. Buongiorno! --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:52, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

QIC banner

Hi Cccefalon,

Thanks for inserting the banner in QIC. But I thik that the text is not clear enough. Why not just "The new rule is effective from today. Please add only a maximum of 5 photos per day"? Otherwise the editors may think that they can nominate more than 5 photos, if they come from different authors (sources). Alvesgaspar ([[User talk:Alvesgaspar|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 18:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot ([[User talk:FPCBot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 06:01, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Answer to your email.

Good evening Aranas,
I had a note in the vertical lamp which stands to the left of the photo. On the right I see a hazy green blue stripe. The vertical lamp itself is also hazy, but that is f / 5.6. If you say that no CA is then i accept the picture right.
Sincerely, Dominic Bergsma.

Hi Dominic, thank you for clarification. Though I think, it is not a CA but a reflection of the green surroundings, your hint made me perform some enhancements as reducing the sharpness and raising the green defringing level. I hope, it is better now. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 18:54, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image discussionː lettering guidesː No scansǃ

File:Standardgraph 2522 2.5 to 7mm lettering guides.jpg

Hi, I just wanted to clarify that my quality image candidate you commented on is in fact not a scan, although it does look like one. I've used two flashes and the individual lettering guides were placed on a clear plastic plate so light could shine through from below. Then I used a 100mm Macro lens which creates the flat projection. Please resolve the discussion in the QI candidate. Thanks and greetings from Munich.--Lucasbosch ([[User talk:Lucasbosch|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:46, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I trust your word. Good work then. No need to send to CR. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Tun Mustapha Memorial

I'm a little bit confused on this, when I see this article in German Wikipedia, there is a picture of Tun Mustapha grave and it is located in Putatan. While when I found a similar article in the English Wikipedia, it says "The memorial was built near the Mat Salleh's fort in Tambunan". I tried a search and found this reference to support the claimed with the quote: "One can also visit the memorial of one of the state's famous leaders, Tun Datu Mustapha, which is near the Mat Salleh fort". So where is the exact location of the true Tun Mustapha grave? — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 04:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Mat Salleh had several forts. None of them survived the raids of the British, the WWII and the ravages of time. The main fortifications of Mat Salleh are those in Ranau, Tambunan and Putatan. Concerning the tomb of Tun Mustapha: For your convenience I added the geo coordinates to all of the photos in the Category:Taman_Memorial_Tun_Datu_Mustapha. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:39, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the coordinates! But umm.. no, not about the Mat Salleh fort. I mean the Tun Mustapha tomb, there seems to be two memorial site, one in Tambunan and the other one in Putatan. I wonder which one is the site of Tun Mustapha grave? — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 12:30, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I this was not clear: Tun Mustapha is burried in Putatan on a hill which used to be a Mat Salleh Fort in 19th century. Mat Salleh died in Tambunan and the memorial there is commemorating the Tambunan battle and the place where Mat Salleh met his death. There is no specific tomb of Mat Salleh but only this memorial stone. I added some more photos to the category to help clarifying this. The coordinates on the photos with the tomb indicate the tomb of Tun Mustapha. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:33, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I think that is clear now. ;) — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 06:30, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Category:Oil_Industry_in_Sabah

Template:Autotranslate Alan Liefting ([[User talk:Alan Liefting|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:06, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Category:Palmoil_Industry_in_Sabah

Template:Autotranslate Alan Liefting ([[User talk:Alan Liefting|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 10:54, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Tilt ccw

Hallo Cccefalon, ich habe bei Deinen QI-Reviews schon oft "tilt ccw" gelesen - was bedeutet das? Viele Grüße --Code ([[User talk:Code|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 16:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Code, das hört sich kryptisch an, ist aber eigentlich ganz einfach. Ein "tilt" ist eine Neigung oder eine Schiefstellung. ccw ist die Abk. für counter clockwise, also entgegen des Uhrzeigersinns (cw entsprechend dann clockwise, also im Uhrzeigersinn). "Tilt ccw" bedeutet in Deinem Fall, dass eine ganz leichte Neigung nach links vorhanden ist, wobei man jetzt drüber streiten kann, ob die Kamera nicht ganz horizontal lag (also eine Rotation zur behebung ausreicht) oder das Entzerren nicht 100%ig war (so dass man eine vertikale Entzerrung plus Drehung anwenden müsste). In diesem Fall stand der "Tilt ccw" aber einer QI-Promotion nicht im Weg, es sollte lediglich für Dich ein Hinweis sein, falls Du das Bild weiter perfektionieren möchtest. Und es soll auch ein Hinweis an andere Reviewer sein, dass ich die leichte Neigung wohl bemerkt habe, sie aber als nicht weiter störend werte. Gruß aus Köln, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]

Alles klar, vielen Dank für die Erklärung und für das Review. Das Bild schaue ich mir nochmal an, vielleicht kann ich es verbessern. Viele Grüße aus Berlin --Code ([[User talk:Code|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 18:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC))

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Pennsylvania Route 225 north in Little Mahanoy Township, Northumberland County, Pennsylvania 1.JPG

I believe I've now straightened this image. Would you mind taking another look? It's under December 12 at QIC. Thanks, --Jakob (talk) 01:50, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Category:Images_of_England_by_User:Cccefalon

Template:Autotranslate Adam37 ([[User talk:Adam37|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 15:34, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Merry Xmas and happy new year

Merry Xmas and happy new year Template:Smiley--LivioAndronico talk 11:11, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.png

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

A barnstar for you!

	Malaysia Barnstar
	Thanks for providing a huge collection of images especially on the Malaysian topics! You deserve this barnstar! ;) — иz нίpнόp ʜᴇʟᴘ! 16:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm really touched.

Still several thousand photos of my beloved Negara Malaysia and Negeri Sabah to upload and categorize.

--CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

int:wikilove-barnstar-special-title

After my return from a longer wikibreak, I have noticed your high level of activity as a nominator and reviewer at QIC. Your reviews strike me as being of a high level, you have a sharp eye for dust spots and of the defects, and when improvable things are noted by you, nominators are given a fair chance to solve the issues before declining. A pleasure to witness! Slaunger ([[User talk:Slaunger|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

	int:wikilove-barnstar-original-title
	hi sir, could you please tell me where are you taking this photo, i'm really like your photo, thank you http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SabahStateRailway_JungleStationInPadasValley.jpg Ryliang (talk) 11:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you ...

... for the barnstar - it makes me very happy. I took the photo during one of my rides from Beaufort to Tenom when I was preparing to write the comprehensive article about de:Sabah State Railway. One of my tasks was to collect informations about the stesen keretapi along Sungai Padas. I have to consult my notices to find out the exact location of this place or to look into the original photo of the station. It will take some days, but I will give you an answer as soon as possible. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 12:28, 18 April 2013 (UTC) Ok, I solved it: The tram shelter is Salinwangan Lama at railway Kilometer 104.3. click to see map. Cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Photo Challenge Silver

Template:Photo Challenge Silver Template:Photo Challenge Silver Template:Photo Challenge Silver(Note the last one listed here was a second place tie.) HelenOnline 07:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Cccefalon

Hi, could you create a new map about the Sulu and British Treaty to avoid confusion between Filipino and Malaysian people, because I see many map on google search are wrong. For example, like this, the western part are didn't ever given to Sulu by Sultanate of Brunei. I didn't know where they get this map. It's really wrong. Hope you can create a new map with the line to show the real border between the treaty. — иz нίpнόp  12:06, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

This is the correct map as a revision. — иz нίpнόp  12:09, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I could do that - the question is, what is the real border. The big problem is, that the original contract excempted the tulin areas. I was planning to write an article about the tulin and within that project to create a map with the correct borders. Concerning the border on the philippine islands part, I am not an expert and I had to review some sources. It is not really a work that can be done instantly, but I will give it some priority. I will keep you updated. cheers, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 12:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

If I didn't wrong, the real Brunei and Sulu border are between Sungai Pandassan until Sungai Sibuku. Ok, I know it's really a very difficult work, but I will wait any news about that. I appreciate your help. Thank you :) — иz нίpнόp  12:33, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, a description of the cession can be found here, but it is complicated though ;-) --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 13:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations. Did you watch football? Template:;) — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 22:18, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Who did not in Germany, this night? Template:;) Unfortunately, contrary to Malaysia, Germans don't get a public holiday after such a wonderful victory. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:28, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Eh, I thought you're in Malaysia at present. Yeah, Germany deserve to win this game. I hope this will continue in Russia and Qatar. But weird why there is no holiday, the citizen should also receive a "gift" too. ;D — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 08:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

No, I am back from Sabah since June 8 with 4500 usable photographies. My next trip will start October 11. I checked my archive and found, that one of the place to go again will be Beluran. So by November I possibly can update you with a comprehensive collection of photos from Beluran. The available photos of Beluran in my archive will be post processed before. Keep an eye on my upload stream. If you are looking for something special, ask me. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 09:30, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I will contact you later.. Btw, I like how you capture the highway photo like this one. ;) — ᴀʟʀᴇᴀᴅʏ ʙᴏʀᴇᴅ ^ʜᴜʜ? 13:30, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

You might find similar photos among Category:Roads in Sabah, Category:Rivers of Sabah, Category:Bridges in Sabah and (almost blurred) Category:Road signs in Malaysia Template:Smile --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas ([[User talk:Cccefalon#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)