Open main menu

Commons:Кандидати у вибрані зображення

Кандидати у вибрані зображення на інших мовах:

Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | فارسی | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | молдовеняскэ | norsk bokmål | português | polski | română | русский | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | українська | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | հայերեն | +/−

Shortcut: COM:FPC Якщо ви вважаєте, що знайшли або створили зображення, гідне стати вибраним, - будь ласка, додайте його в нижченаведений розділ кандидати. Якщо протягом 15-ти днів ваша пропозиція буде прийнята спільнотою, то зображенню буде присвоєно звання вибраного. Будь ласка, зверніть увагу: вибрані зображення не мають прямого відношення до Зображень дня (проте вибір зображень дня проводиться переважно з «вибраних зображень»).

Contents

КандидатиEdit

Для того, щоб проголосувати або додати нове зображення-кандидат, перейдіть за цим посиланням

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:68-104-9007 Kamianets-Podilskyi Fortress RB 18 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 23:01:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:SVG logo.svgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 21:25:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

TEST NOMINATION For the FDP template

 
Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed.

Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 21:26, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Vieux Limoilou, Québec city, Canadá 17.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 18:39:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Canada
  •   Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 18:39, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It's just an ordinary street scene, that's all.--Ermell (talk) 19:10, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ermell. -- KTC (talk) 20:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The night is coming, but it does not add anything to the photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:07, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. – Lucas 21:15, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - It's a good photo, and I like the clouds. And I think mundane scenes can produce great photos; I've supported some. I just find this good rather than great. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Colonial House in Margarita Island (Interior).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 18:36:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Venezuela
  •   Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 18:36, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Nice to see a photo from Venezuela, but it does not have anything special --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:09, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Michielverbeek and the left/right crop is not good IMHO. – Lucas 20:26, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - I disagree with the opposers. This photo has interesting forms in addition to having an atmosphere and serving as social commentary. And I'm fine with the crops, because the result is a composition that's good to move one's eyes around. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Periodic table cup cakes 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 17:09:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

This is a test NOM, it checks for redirects

File:Featured video logo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 15:26:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because reason - Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 15:33, 25 May 2019 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Reflection of trees in a pond 16-9, The Groynes, Christchurch, New Zealand.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 09:19:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Roof detail of Cardboard Cathedral, Christchurch, New Zealand.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 09:08:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture#New_Zealand
  •   Info All by me. I thought I'd try a couple of nominations that are a bit more brave than the ones you saw from me in the last few months. This is Cardboard Cathedral which replaces Christchurch Cathedral, which was significantly damaged in the 2011 Christchurch earthquakes. It's quite a trivial composition in 4:3 format. I like how the roof's edge copies the edge of the moon's light, I like how you can see the last bit of a sunshine on the roof, and I also like the colors and the sharpness. -- Podzemnik (talk) 09:08, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 09:08, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support A nice creative composition. Sad what happened to the old Christchurch Cathedral - still more so that its own diocese tried to demolish what's left of it. Cmao20 (talk) 10:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 12:02, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - I like it, and it's nice that you were able to get the moon in the picture in that position. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:22, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 16:22, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportLucas 18:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Beautiful Balthali Village.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 06:18:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Striked support per below. – Lucas 07:46, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It's a beautiful view but I have a few issues with it. a) The resolution isn't very high for a 2019 FP landscape; b) I find the plants in the foreground a bit distracting; c) Are these colours really natural? I'm not saying they necessarily aren't, but I've never seen a landscape that looked quite like this. Cmao20 (talk) 07:38, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose idem ̃--Mimihitam (talk) 07:43, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others.--Vulphere 12:01, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I have no problems with the composition; as far as I'm concerned, this is a beautiful picture. However, as Cmao20 said, it's small for a 2019 Featured Picture nominee. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Wilfredor (talk) 17:41, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Schlumbergera (actm) 13.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 05:54:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Done. Noise Reduction Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:45, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Thanks. Although, it was almost a bit too much. --Hockei (talk) 17:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Really good to me. You could reduce the noise, but it's only a fine luminance grain and it doesn't actually bother me much. Cmao20 (talk) 07:35, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment 'Tilted' background lines are distracting. Charles (talk) 08:58, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Done. Vertical correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:47, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 12:03, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - Beautiful gossamer petals in perfect light to show their texture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:26, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 16:23, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 16:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 18:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Balaclava as suggested fashion piece for winter 2018-modeld by ModelTanja.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2019 at 02:52:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •   Info created/uploaded/nominated by Tobias ToMar Maier - suggested to Tobias ToMar Maier by Ikan Kekek -- Tobias ToMar Maier (talk) 02:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment For a fashion picture, the crop is too tight. For a portrait, I would like a crop at the bottom. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:07, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - Fine portrait, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:41, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support It might not work for others, but it is good for me --BoothSift 06:25, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support For me this is very well-composed and a great example of fashion portraiture. Cmao20 (talk) 07:34, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 10:27, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 12:03, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 16:24, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 16:51, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Since it's supposed to be a model shot for the knitwear (not the coat) the crop is perfect. Looks like it was taken right out of a knitting catalogue (I should know, I love knitting! :-) ) --Cart (talk) 18:55, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  • If I could knit something that looked like that, I'm sure I would too. My attempts at knitting have generally resulted in things that looked nothing like how I wanted them to... Cmao20 (talk) 23:05, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Wegerich - Scheckenfalter auf Kamille.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 20:46:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Heart Mountain Relocation Center, Heart Mountain, Wyoming. In his barracks home at Block 7 - 21 - NARA - 539206 - Restoration.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 20:39:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
  •   Info created by Department of the Interior. War Relocation Authority - restored and uploaded by Adam Cuerden, with additional work by Janke - nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:39, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Info This is Bill Hosokawa's home at the Heart Mountain Relocation Center, part of the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II.
  •   Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:39, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment May be a historical photo but it seems to be nothing in focus and a typical family having dinner/lunch Ezarateesteban 20:55, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
    • I think there are some valuable details: The shoddy construction work, for instance. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:37, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 04:08, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --BoothSift 04:40, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Cmao20 (talk) 07:33, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 12:04, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 16:25, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Historically important because it is one of those publicity photos that lies. Sort of "Oh look how well treated the Nisei are in the internment camp, how happy they are having dinner with the camp personel." --Cart (talk) 19:11, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - You won me over with that argument. Support per Cart and Adam's remark about the shoddy construction. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:56, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Plaza de la Victoria (frente al sud).mnba.pngEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 20:35:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media
  •   Info created by Charles Henri Pellegrini - uploaded by Poutourrou - restored/nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 20:35, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ezarateesteban 20:35, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 21:05, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - The color has been drastically changed from the original. Please explain your "restoration". Besides, I don't think watercolors should be digitally restored, any more than oil paintings; there's only one apiece, generally, and it's in whatever condition it's in. Prints can be different, because they may have been published in mass-circulation periodicals or there may have been an issue of x-number printed. But that's not the case with individual paintings. If I'm wrong about any of this, explain.-- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:22, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Wrong color balance. Yann (talk) 04:09, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Yann--BoothSift 04:40, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Yann.--Vulphere 12:05, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   I withdraw my nomination I'll reprocess it another day, thanks!! Ezarateesteban 20:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Ray Strachey restored.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 20:26:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Marmora Formation closeup1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 17:35:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  Done - recategorized --СССР (talk) 21:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - This would have to work for me as an abstract composition of lines and textures; I analyse it almost as if I were looking at an abstract painting that I want to have a good linear arabesque, though the textures help and make it a bit of a bas relief. It's a great idea, but the lines are not interesting enough to me for me to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:30, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per above--BoothSift 04:40, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Ikan. It would make a good background image for design purposes though. Cmao20 (talk) 07:32, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan.--Vulphere 12:06, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Duomo vecchio facciata Brescia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 11:08:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • I love him, he is the sign of the time (besides the antenna, a precious gift from Franklin) --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • "O tempora, o mores!" --Cart (talk) 12:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Great one! Cmao20 (talk) 12:48, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♠ 15:12, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 16:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --СССР (talk) 17:36, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support And 7. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 17:43, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 22:21, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - I already was ready to support while looking at this picture at 300% of my laptop's screen, but it has extraordinary resolution. That's really a wow of a photo! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:27, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --BoothSift 04:38, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:46, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:51, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 10:24, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 16:26, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:2017.07.06.-39-Wendisch Rietz--Kanal zwischen Scharmuetzelsee und Grosser Storkower See-Schleuse.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 09:40:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info Also taken from the boat. All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 09:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Hockei (talk) 09:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A rather ordinary photo of waterway and locks. It also seems a bit dark to me (gray clouds, etc). --Cart (talk) 13:04, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Info New version. WB and brightness. --Hockei (talk) 13:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Quite yellow like an old photo from the 1970s. --Granada (talk) 15:39, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose No wow for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:22, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I don't like the bottom crop. Could you possibly extend it so that we could see the top of the center cloud reflected in the canal? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:32, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately not possible. There are boat and feet. --Hockei (talk) 07:16, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not very wowing --BoothSift 04:38, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Too gray, too yello, too green ... I'm sick of this. So I changed the WB and the brightness for my visual pleasure again and ...
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hockei (talk • contribs) 07:16, 26 May 2019‎ (UTC)
  • The bot will handle withdrawn nominations from today, please do not edit any withdrawn nominations from today Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 16:28, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   I withdraw my nomination
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hockei (talk • contribs) 07:16, 26 May 2019‎ (UTC)

File:Baumweißlinge Wittenberge-Rühstädter Elbniederung.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2019 at 06:00:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

not a mating ritual that I've ever heard of.
What do you think they're doing? Just touching each other in a friendly way? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:31, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
No, butterflies don't have friends. I don't know the time of day when the photo was taken, but the water droplets indicate it could be early morning. Butterflies do perch close together overnight. Early morning can be a good time to get a close up before they are warm enough to fly. Some photographers use painted backgrounds for these shots, but I don't know if that was done here or in the more recent FPC nomination. It's not a 'studio-shot' technique I use, but it does produce an appealing background. Charles (talk) 09:06, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportLucas 07:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:52, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 08:57, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support But the crop above is a bit too tight. --Hockei (talk) 09:29, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Extraordinary composition, quality and framing. I really like this one. Cmao20 (talk) 09:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Very sharp shot and nice water droplets. But could you correct tone (or whatever) to make the colours less dull? and I'd make the reed vertical. Charles (talk) 10:30, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support wow -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 10:33, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♠ 15:11, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 16:59, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tozina (talk) 20:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 22:15, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Wow. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:23, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support This is really good stuff Poco2 23:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 04:13, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --BoothSift 04:38, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:47, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:36, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 16:54, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Nezara viridula f. torquata MHNT.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2019 at 23:36:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

@Charlesjsharp: As Cmao20 notes, the insect is fairly small. --BoothSift 05:01, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 04:17, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support The image is interesting for the egg of the fly. It is necessary to notice on the head of the animal a white spot which is an egg of Trichopoda. The larva will parasitize the host and kill him. Thanks to Boothsift for this nomination. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:58, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support yes, the egg of the parasitic fly gives value to the image and makes it FPworth imo. --Cayambe (talk) 15:02, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Piazza Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli fontana con satiro Brescia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2019 at 20:12:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Spermophilus lateralis, Bryce Canyon National Park, USA.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2019 at 14:31:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  •   Info created by KipRobinson - uploaded by KipRobinson - nominated by KipRobinson -- Kiprobinson (talk) 14:31, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kiprobinson (talk) 14:31, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Small and cute.--Vulphere 14:34, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I so wish I could support this, but I don't think the sharpness on the squirrel is quite good enough, especially seeing it's so small in the frame. Cmao20 (talk) 14:51, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Squirrel not in focus --Dktue (talk) 16:53, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose as above Charles (talk) 17:11, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. I wish I could support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose As per others--BoothSift 23:07, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others and too centered composition. – Lucas 08:59, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Saint-Augustin Church Altar 1, Paris, France - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2019 at 08:42:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  •   Info The altar and dome of Saint-Augustin in Paris, France. Constructed between 1860 and 1868, Saint-Augustin is one of France's most visually distinctive churches, built in an eclectic style inspired by Gothic and Romanesque architecture, and with an interior characterised by cast-iron columns. Created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 08:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 08:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - I'm sure David regretted the netting, and that could be the reason or one of the reasons he didn't nominate this photo for FP, but I think it's an FP, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:13, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 14:33, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:28, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --BoothSift 23:07, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:49, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:53, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:44, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 10:33, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:59, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Caldera de Taburiente - View from Mirador de los Roques 01.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2019 at 05:22:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info Please note, the image is not tilted. Several trees, especially the two in the foreground left, are slant in reality. You can compare them with the trees in the background. Created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 05:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Nice view and terrain, but the foreground being almost completely in shadows doesn't work for me. The trees on the extreme left and right aren't cropped in a satisfying way; the left one has a thick branch going out of frame. – Lucas 06:23, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry but I agree with Lucas, it's quite beautiful but I feel that too much of the image is dominated by shadows. Cmao20 (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
    •   Info You can't avoid shadows, for the access to this viewpoint is restricted for a single person to two hours. --Llez (talk) 09:58, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  • You are right, sometimes shadows in the foreground can't be avoided. But that is when you take 2-3 photos with different EV and merge them. Like in this example where the light conditions were almost identical. It is a merge from three photos with slightly different time, one for the foreground (ferns in shadow), one for the middle (leaves on trees) and one for the lit trees in the distance. --Cart (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per others--BoothSift 23:07, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
    •   I withdraw my nomination --Llez (talk) 11:52, 25 May 2019 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 04:45, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Banz Deckenfresko Pfingsten 3070549.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2019 at 21:27:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Polystichum setiferum 'Cristato Pinnulum' (Niervaren). (d.j.b.). 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2019 at 16:11:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants #Family Dryopteridaceae.
  •   Info Polystichum setiferum 'Cristato Pinnulum', (Soft shield-fern) Beautifully rolling new leaves of this rare little fern. (Height: 30 cm). A rare form that turned out to be extinct at some point. The leaves are wedge-shaped and vary widely. The famous English fern breeder R. Kaye has managed to find him again.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:11, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:11, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:41, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 我喜欢--BoothSift 23:02, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Bijay chaurasia (talk) 04:08, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 04:45, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:55, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 05:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:18, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Perfect sharpness. Cmao20 (talk) 08:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 08:50, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Charles (talk) 17:12, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:28, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Poco2 23:33, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:54, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 10:31, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tozina (talk) 20:49, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Death Valley view from Zabriskie Point with people 2013.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2019 at 15:33:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment I full agree. --Hockei (talk) 18:50, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment They are also providing an excellent diagonal counterpoint to the peak up right. --Cart (talk) 21:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Apollo 11 Lunar Lander - 5927 NASA.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2019 at 14:22:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • They are the thrusters that guided the lunar module when landing. I tried to add the right text to the images notes, but since the system is down at the moment that didn't work. As soon as it is up again, please substitute the text with {{pl|1=Dysze RCS}}{{en|1=[[:en:Reaction control system|Reaction control system (RCS)]]}}. --Cart (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Hmm, strange... the note is edited, created and saved but the error message pops up anyway. I got three error messages but the notes are there now, see file history. --Cart (talk) 08:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you for taking care of that before I had a try. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Pierre-Auguste Renoir - Luncheon of the Boating Party - Google Art Project.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2019 at 12:49:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • The tool is broken. I will try again tomorrow. Yann (talk) 14:54, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 14:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 15:46, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Famous painting, good reproduction. Cmao20 (talk) 15:49, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 16:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - YES - more paintings! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:46, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Me gusta--BoothSift 22:59, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - I guess the last time I saw this painting in person was 2000, but it looks like a good reproduction to me. I hope you will be able to add the names of the missing people. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:51, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:53, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:38, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Charles (talk) 17:14, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:23, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:01, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Papión chacma (Papio ursinus), parque nacional de Chobe, Botsuana, 2018-07-28, DD 65.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 22:12:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  Neutral now per below--BoothSift 04:48, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 06:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Sorry for being the party pooper again, but long focal length or not, that looks pretty noisy for a 5DS R at 400 ISO. It's mostly luminance noise, so one might forgive it, but in combination with the over-all softness and remnants of CA (I blame the 2x TC), I'm less than wowed by the quality. It's not bad and actually looks quite OK at screen size, it's just not great. And the same is true for the content: It's not bad at all, but I wouldn't call it outstanding considering what else we've got. --El Grafo (talk) 08:07, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 11:07, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose a bit per El Grafo, but what is bothering me more is that the two are partly obscured by the tree so we don't get a good view of their play. – Lucas 06:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose the composition and size/sharpness of the subject. Charles (talk) 17:07, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - The con arguments are good. I'm no longer sure, so I've struck out my vote and am likely to abstain from voting. I like the photo, but I don't know for sure that it should be featured. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I find the branches way too distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 02:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I'm fine with the luma noise in the background, but the overall softness is a bit disturbing and I'd also blame the TC for that. --Granada (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • That's the tele converter. --Granada (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Apis mellifera scutellata 1355021.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 14:36:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Chicoreus orchidiflorus 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 10:25:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Bones, shells and fossils
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - A gorgeous shell and one of your best shell pictures yet. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 11:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I know that Llez does terrific work but seeing that his shell nominations rarely get critiques I will step forward to throw the first stone ;) Resolution is good, I measured that each view has about 12 MP of the possible 15 MP which is good given that you'd want to use the center area of the lens. My first real issue is the sharpening, as the structures of the shell with the very soft lighting are not easy to distinguish. More sharpening shows detail better and improves depth perception a bit. Have you tried a more directional lighting setup instead of this soft one? Secondly, the contour of the shells is too blurred, which might be caused by how you isolate the background or it's just out of focus in capture. Out of focus would be bad, but later blurring would be quite fixable. I don't want to oppose this out of respect, but for me personally such studio shots have a higher bar of quality because of the controlled environment and I think you could do much better. – Lucas 13:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    •   Comment Please remember, that this shell has only 2,7 cm in length --Llez (talk) 13:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Still, I've worked with the MP-E 60 mm lens—which I suppose you are using—with focus stacking and was able to get better results. If you aren't focus stacking than that might be a limiting factor. – Lucas 13:26, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Bahram Gur hunting.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 05:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media
  •   Info created by Painting drawn from Nizami's "Khamsah" - uploaded by Yann - nominated by Eatcha -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 05:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment This is a real nomination (not a test nom)
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatcha (talk • contribs) 05:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 05:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support This was on my list. ;) Yann (talk) 05:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - The source is very colorful, as I would expect a 16th-century Persian painting to be; is it just me, or does File:Bahram Gur hunting.jpg look almost exclusively sky blue when you try to view it? The thumbnail on the file page looks colorful. Anyone understand what's happening? The image in the nomination also appears sky blue on my screen. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:55, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek, please use chrome/safari/edge/opera etc this problem is exclusive to Firefox -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 06:05, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Firefox's latest version seems to suck. I also lost all my URL history and bookmarks in the latest update and don't even seem to be able to save bookmarks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - Thanks for the advice. It looks wonderful on Chrome. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Estornino de El Cabo (Lamprotornis nitens), parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-25, DD 56.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 02:02:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

@Ikan Kekek: The bird is multicolored, if that was what you meant. Otherwise, can you add an annotation pointing it out? Thank you --BoothSift 03:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Poco a poco: - Please see my image note. Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: The red part that you are pointing to? It is present on Charle's picture: File:Cape glossy starling (Lamprotornis nitens).jpg and quite a few other pictures on Google Images. This may indicate that it might be biological--BoothSift 03:31, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  • You're right.   Support. I'll remove the image note now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:36, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment There is a noticeable halo/white line around the bird. This should be fixed. Regards, Yann (talk) 03:43, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

  I withdraw my nomination I have two open nominations --BoothSift 03:44, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

  • I am unwithdrawing this since the other nom was given to Ikan. I will continue this nomination--BoothSift 23:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Well, I guess that I can take this nom over, if you dont mind Boothsift Poco2 20:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Poco a poco: No need, the other one is now Ivan's. Since that was the reason why I withdrew in the first place and it has been resolved, I can continue this nomination. --BoothSift 23:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment @Boothsift, Ikan Kekek, Yann: Just in case I reworked the halo and some CA a bit Poco2 19:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Poco2 20:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Glad you took over the nomination yourself Poco. I would have done so myself if I didn't have two running. Very good detail, and the quality is wonderful considering the high resolution. Cmao20 (talk) 21:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Cmao20: I am still the nominator and I don't plan on unwithdrawing. I withdrew before since the Dead Vlei picture was not yet taken over by Ikan, but now it has so this one is allowed. --BoothSift 23:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Does it really matter who nominates the picture as long as someone does? Cmao20 (talk) 23:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Not really. --BoothSift 23:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Ponte Barca Abril 2019-7.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 22:30:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
  •   Info Reflexion of the bridge over Lima river in the water, Ponte da Barca, Portugal. It's worth seing the details. Inspired in three engravings of M.C.Escher (1950, 52 and 55). All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:51, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I could really go with this if it were more abstract and only shows the reflection, but the visible non-reflected parts of the bridge with the messy grass don't work for me. Also the long narrow tube on the bridge, cutting the image in half, is distracting. – Lucas 08:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas.--Vulphere 13:33, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas.--Fischer.H (talk) 17:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas. Please get rid of the plants, etc. --BoothSift 23:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I wouldn't support cloning out the plants. They are part of the scene. I do support opposing the nomination because you don't like the way the plants look in context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
That is a better way of putting it, then--BoothSift 03:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose This might be the sort of image that wins some photo contests, but it's just not striking enough for FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   I withdraw my nomination
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvesgaspar (talk • contribs) 21:13, 25 May 2019 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Misty Minnewanka Lake.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 19:52:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • No idea where you found that template. It might not be counted by the Bot. It is also a bit hazardous since it depends on nothing new happening to the post above it. Please stick to the s, o & n voting templates, not all noms are free to test things on so be respectful to the nominator. --Cart (talk) 22:20, 21 May 2019 (UTC) All fixed now, thanks.   --Cart (talk) 19:55, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Some Portuguese for you if this counts. --BoothSift 02:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Very nice. --Yann (talk) 03:46, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportLucas 08:26, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I was a bit hesitant at first since I've seen so many similar compositions on Instagram, but it is a nice photo and well executed. --Cart (talk) 08:30, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support If you come to New Zealand, I'll print this off, ask you to sign it and I'll put it on my wall. --Podzemnik (talk) 11:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 13:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes! --El Grafo (talk) 13:53, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Wow, an excellent photo in difficult conditions --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:46, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Wow! Both tranquil and fascinating! --Aristeas (talk) 08:09, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Hockei (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♠ 02:36, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Could be a bit sharper --Llez (talk) 04:49, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I don't get it. Charles (talk) 17:30, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tozina (talk) 20:54, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Celmisia semicordata 01.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 19:10:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales
  •   Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 19:10, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 19:10, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks good to me. The composition is better for not being centred. Cmao20 (talk) 19:13, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Nicely aligned ant and a perfect amount of blur of the background for context. – Lucas 19:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 21:33, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --BoothSift 02:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I love the compo and detail, but I suppose it is a white flower and to me it looks rather gray. Looking at the histogram, there are almost no white tones in it, it goes down somewhere around 240. --Cart (talk) 07:58, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 13:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:46, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Nice sharp photo. I personally centered the flower. But that is a matter of taste. But the flower should have been a little whiter.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:49, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support The bug gives it a nice non-chalant late spring mood. Daniel Case (talk) 20:57, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:48, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --SH6188 (talk) 12:27, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:59, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:43, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I will add the template for neutral after we finish testing all features but you are encouraged to use the neutral template that cart used above. -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) - ping me 21:05, 26 May 2019 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:18, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants/Asterales

File:Webysther 20170917093348 - Caverna do diabo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 14:08:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created and uploaded by Webysther - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 14:08, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I am back! -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 14:08, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Not perfect, with the blown-out area in the bottom left, but it certainly has wow. Cmao20 (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm missing a good perception of depth, the lighting is very flat so it's not pleasing to explore this image. The visible light sources create a feel of artificiality and result in some overexposure per Cmao20. Composition is too symmetrical without any direction. We have some amazing cave FPs and IMHO this is not there. – Lucas 17:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 21:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Are there any Spanish, Japanese, French templates @Eatcha: ? --BoothSift 02:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi Boothsift, check the complete list at https://pastebin.com/raw/KuWcxtjd (Just added the strong oppose and n/N in the list, they are allowed from the next run ) -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 04:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Eatcha: Gracias. I see that Portuguese also works, if that wasn't added to the list already. --BoothSift 05:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Boothsift: What template are you referring to ? You can add it between the nowiki and it will not be counted by the bot -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 05:19, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Eatcha: I meant {{apoio}}--BoothSift 05:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Boothsift: I won't be counted by the bot -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 05:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Eatcha: Is there any way to implement it? --BoothSift 06:04, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Boothsift: Sure, it can be added to the tuple (support_template) to implement it -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 06:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas. The light really makes it look flat. --Cart (talk) 08:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 13:36, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm sure that's an amazing scene IRL, but I'll have to agree With Lucas & Cart. --El Grafo (talk) 13:58, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others, especially Cart and El Grafo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:12, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Doesn't stand out from other pictures of cave/rns. Daniel Case (talk)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:59, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Domo na estação central de trenes de recife, Estado de Pernambuco, Brasil.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 14:06:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  •   Info created and uploaded by Wilfredor - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 14:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 14:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The CA and slight lack of sharpness means it doesn't reach the high level of ceiling FPs in my book.--Peulle (talk) 14:59, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support But if the CA could be fixed it would be even better. Slight quality issues don't bother me too much because this isn't the kind of image that demands one 'pixel-peep' - the wow comes from the bold, striking composition rather than from the amount of detail at full-res. Cmao20 (talk) 16:37, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle and lack of wow for me. This doesn't really constitute a bold composition, more like a trivial/boring one, and it's not even exactly centered ... – Lucas 17:01, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 21:40, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it...but...--BoothSift 02:05, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle even if the CA could be fixed. --Cart (talk) 08:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle.--Vulphere 13:37, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Conditional support on the CA being fixed. Having taken one of our other ceiling FPs, I would consider this an FP too for its striking pattern and symmetry (it might be a little off center, but I think that could be corrected as well, or maybe it's just me). Daniel Case (talk) 16:36, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Thanks Arion for the nomination, i uploaded another version with the chromatic aberration fixed Cart, Vulphere, --Wilfredor (talk) 19:04, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Dead Vlei, Sossusvlei, Namibia, 2018-08-06, DD 085.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 06:11:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ikan may believe that I have lost faith in this nomination, by really I haven't. I misread the discussion(in a rush) and didn't clearly see where it was heading. Therefore, I would like to stay as nominator or conominator. --BoothSift 03:58, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Ridiculous. There can only be one nominator. Would some admin like to put an end to this silliness? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
No need, you are the nominator as you wish. I apologize for any difficulties I caused and my actions. --BoothSift 23:04, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- BoothSift 06:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Great on its own terms, but I find it very similar to this which is already featured. Cmao20 (talk) 06:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose We already have. Same story than this. Both similar works will be found in the same category next POTY competition. Either a delist and replace or just not this one -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Basile Morin:, @Lucasbosch: and @Ermell: We also have at least 19 FP of the Golden Gate Bridge. At least the two trees are different and please see Cart's comment below. The difference here is vastly greater than those--BoothSift 04:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Disagree. Explicit comparison here. FP is not about nominating all the good photos that can be featured, but rather to select the finest. This one is not distinctive enough. Same blue sky, same white dune, same brown dune, same kind of dead tree, same time of the day, same angle.   Where's the novelty? I think almost everybody here make the effort to choose significantly original pictures, but of course FPC can also become as boring as watching always the same nominations with very minor variations. In that case many of us will find different playgrounds, because reviewing implies effort and energy, and such redundancies can give the feeling of tiredness -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry but I remain on Basile's side here. We may have 19 FPs of the Golden Gate Bridge, but to be honest I wouldn't have voted for significant numbers of those either. If we're going to feature pictures of very similar subjects, I would personally only vote yes if there's a significantly different composition, angle or perspective on offer. I know that these aren't the same tree, but to me they're almost identical in composition and colour and so I don't see the need for both to be FP. I won't oppose though because I actually prefer this one to the other one, but I do agree that only one should be featured IMO. Cmao20 (talk) 08:49, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - Great, and the other one has a very different form and feel, although the elements of the tree and different colors of sand are in common. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I indeed prefer this one. Thank you for the nom, Boothsift! Poco2 07:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:52, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile, I much prefer the existing FP. – Lucas 09:53, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas.--Ermell (talk) 10:26, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support This one's a lot cleaner than the other one. -- KennyOMG (talk) 11:07, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support We also have this and this and people seemed fine with that. Also sorting the sub-galleries of Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural I have come across many similar "pairs" of views and compos, not to mention different flowers against the same sort of backgrounds (sky, lawn or bokeh vegitation are popular). --Cart (talk) 12:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 12:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose at different branch tips easy CAs.--Fischer.H (talk) 14:20, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I think that is fixable if we just ask the author nicely. Poco please? --Cart (talk) 14:35, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Surely Cart, thank you for stepping in. Fischer.H, the CA is cleaned up. --Poco2 19:19, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

  I withdraw my nomination Per above--BoothSift 23:03, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

  • This was still a very active discussion. Wasn't it a bit discourteous to withdraw with the vote at 7-4 in favor? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Unwithdrawn by me. I'm now the nominator. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Fine, but can we conominate? I didn't see that Poco liked this one better and I missed Cart's comment for some reason. I have regained faith in this nomination and too would like to see where it's headed --BoothSift 03:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
You seem to nominate and withdraw at the drop of a hat. You withdrew. Go ahead and observe how the nomination develops, but think a little more deeply the next time you nominate and withdraw. How long did the nomination of that bird above last? If you're really not sure what your opinion is, don't act. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 03:48, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Yann: Is it possible to have two nominators? --BoothSift 03:58, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't think so. I had no concurrent nominations. You are freed up to nominate another photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: I do not wish to do so. May I regain my nominator privileges? Thank you for the help--BoothSift 05:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I have no idea what you're talking about. What privileges? If you'd like to thank people for voting to support, go wild. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: I meant I wish to remain the nominator as I was the original one--BoothSift 05:38, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Too late. Actions have consequences. Ponder that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Yes, but you didn't even give me time to react. Right off the bat, you went "I am now the nominator" as if I no longer existed. I could have just unwithdrew. Anyways since I am reclaiming this nomination, the bird nom would not comply with the guidelines. I have another nom below. If you wish to express your opinions, please notify me first. And no I am not the only one who withdraws and renominates fairly quickly, am I? --BoothSift 05:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
You acted rashly; I did not, and this discussion is already tiresome. I will not reply further. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @Poco a poco: Since this is your photo, I believe that you should be the rightful nominator if you wish. --BoothSift 05:55, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    Boothsift: You look now for a third nominator? Ikan took over, I wouldn't change that, unless he requires that. I didn't understand the rush to withdraw this nom, and specially mentioning Cart and me as a reason to do so. Both of us have supported this version and I indeed mentioned that I prefer this version than the current FP. We have no delivery date here, be patient and as Ikan suggested, let us watch how the nom develops. I've sometimes let noms run where I thought there is no way that they succeed, but they did, if that was your concern. Poco2 06:17, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Poco a poco: I didn't blame you, I said that I withdrew without really reading what you wrote. This means that I changed my mind due to reading your comments. --BoothSift 23:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Boothsift, I didn't get it as a blame, no feelings hurt hete, everything all tight Poco2 09:19, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 13:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:48, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:13, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:59, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Hockei (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Charles (talk) 17:16, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).03.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2019 at 05:16:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yes, that needle does look rather odd--BoothSift 06:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
IMO, don't falsify the view. This is a natural view, not some idealized view of something that doesn't actually exist. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Wonderful image. Cmao20 (talk) 06:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Quality image but very ordinary shot. Nothing special -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:54, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile.--Ermell (talk) 10:27, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 12:50, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile.--Fischer.H (talk) 14:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile – Lucas 17:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 19:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 03:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile --El Grafo (talk) 09:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:51, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support The shot seems simple, yes, but it still is impressive in my eyes. --Aristeas (talk) 08:15, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Mild oppose Background seems a little too random. Daniel Case (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Info. In the background you can see the branches of the Pinus mugo. With pine needles of the same Pinus on both sides.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:36, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Technisches Rathaus Tübingen von der Brunnenstraße zur blauen Stunde 2019.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 May 2019 at 08:59:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info created by Dktue - uploaded by Dktue - nominated by Dktue -- Dktue (talk) 08:59, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Dktue (talk) 08:59, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I really like this building and this is a great camera position as the building curves away from us. Lighting looks good as well. The main problem is the building site in front (with the barricade and excavator) and the lion statue not mounted in place yet (it seems to be stored there temporarily). – Lucas 10:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Abstain because the quality and composition is IMO good enough for FP, but the subject doesn't appeal to me as I have very little appreciation for modernist architecture. I would thus incline to oppose, but it's a matter of taste and I won't vote down a good picture because of my personal aesthetic opinions. Cmao20 (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas. I recommend re-shooting at a later date.--Peulle (talk) 14:45, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - I find this very good as a shot that includes work (or actually evidence of work) in progress. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:18, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas.--Vulphere 15:40, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Weak Oppose Per Lucas--BoothSift 23:51, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Please don't use the "prohibited" voting templates, I've fixed yours. – Lucas 17:48, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • When all the testing and fixing of the FPCBot is done, we will hopefully be able to use all these templates. When/If that happens, the info will be posted on the FPC talk page. --Cart (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Abstain I don't understand architecture and won't pretend I do but my comment is in regards of the composition. I miss some more space at the bottom of the picture in proportion to the sky. -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 20:01, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:31, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:40, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose light on left, stuff in foreground. halo around building. Charles (talk) 17:25, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Part of Broälven nature reserve north of Brodalen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 May 2019 at 08:03:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Sweden
  •   Info Broälven Nature Reserve is an oddly shaped reserve, consisting of only the long, narrow, meandering stream/creek and about 50 meters of its shore-land. It is an important breeding ground for brown trout. All by me,-- Cart (talk) 08:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 08:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strong oppose, sorry. It's a too common view to me, no wow. The colors aren't really special either. – Lucas 08:18, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose as per Lucas. Yann (talk) 09:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas --Dktue (talk) 09:19, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Info Seems like a lost cause, but: Please vote on this nom and use the otherwise "forbidden" votes {{weak support}} {{strong support}} {{weak oppose}} {{strong oppose}} mixed with the normal ones. We can put this to use in the ongoing de-bugging and testing that is done to find out the faults in the FPCBot and fixing it. The end result will be checked by a human in any case. Thank you! --Cart (talk) 10:19, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose in that case. Sorry Cart, I quite like the composition but it just isn't 'wow' enough for FP for me. It was worth the risk though. Cmao20 (talk) 10:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strong oppose per this, BTW I know this vote won't be counted by the bot -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 11:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC) It's now in the tuple, will be counted from the next run -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 04:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Lucas.--Vulphere 15:38, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support a little contrary. For me this is a beautiful composition of a natural water stream. This used to be much more common in the past. Now you only see straightened locks.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Lucas--BoothSift 23:50, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support and Oppose for testing purposes. -- King of ♠ 00:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Spring is in the small things ... Daniel Case (talk) 02:51, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Sorry, but IMHO the lighting and the colours disturb the mood. --Aristeas (talk) 08:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

File:2017.07.06.-29-Grosser Storkower See Storkow (Mark)--Saphirauge-Paar und Maennchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 May 2019 at 08:03:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment Sorry, but I often wonder where people take their wisdom to suspect something. There are neither jpg artefacts nor I saved the jpg picture multiple times. I produce my pictures from the raw file. That the DOF is too shallow in your eyes also is not understandable. I used F13. What aperture would you use for more DOF and still get this picture sharp enough? --Hockei (talk) 09:46, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment There are certain artifacts/smudgniness and blocks of pixels in your image that seem to be inherent with your camera even after correct processing. Regarding the DoF I'm not saying you could have done any better, sometimes the conditions (positioning of the animals) are unfortunate. I hope this clears it up. – Lucas 10:17, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I see what Lucas means, I used to own a Panasonic camera that made similar blocks of pixels even if processed correctly. It doesn't bother me too much for this picture, which is otherwise a very good and tricky capture. Cmao20 (talk) 12:30, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - I'm wowed. Really good composition and quite interesting, what with the mating on one side and the molting on the other. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:15, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - You can make the photo even more useful by pointing out the position of the mating couple and the molting male dragonfly in your file descriptions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 13:53, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   +1 -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 19:52, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Fascinating --BoothSift 22:31, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 05:40, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 15:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A good shot, but not an excellent picture for me.--Fischer.H (talk) 16:27, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:50, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 14:14, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:56, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 08:18, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support nice capture Hockei. Would it work better with the post tilted to the vertical? Charles (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment It would cut the abdomen (or to close to this) of the female. On the other hand it would not be the reality. --Hockei (talk) 18:48, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tozina (talk) 20:57, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Tempio Capitolino Piazza del Foro Brescia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 May 2019 at 19:39:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Of course the resolution is great as with all your photos, but there are architecture shots the same size that don't have quite so much visible noise.  Support because I like the subject, but I still would prefer it if the sky had less noise and also if the CA mentioned by King of Hearts were fixed. Cmao20 (talk) 12:36, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Should have noticed the brown borders. Withdrawing my support until that's fixed. Cmao20 (talk) 10:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Please fix CA. Some NR on the sky would also help, per Cmao. -- King of ♠ 02:10, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I see a bunch of dust spots at full size, though they're subtle; the most evident ones are near the upper right corner, but there are others. After you fix them (or at least the most evident ones), I will support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:05, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose shadows interfering with the structure and the immediate surroundings are too much for me. The residential buildings in the background also don't help, maybe a different angle to hide them would have been better. – Lucas 07:53, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Done @Cmao20: @King of Hearts: @Ikan Kekek:@Lucasbosch: Thanks for the review. Fixed CA, dust spots, vignetting and sky-noise. Can't get rid of the houses and shadows, next time I'll use a drone, promise.--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Much better! Cmao20 (talk) 17:51, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • There's now a weird brown border around the top of the building. Perhaps an artefact of the CA reduction? -- King of ♠ 00:32, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:14, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --BoothSift 22:31, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment What happend with the left outline of the gable? There is a broad brown border in the sky along the edges (see note). Possibly caused by postprocessing, as it lacks in the previous version. --Llez (talk) 05:34, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 15:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for now, due to the brown borders. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 14:47, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:57, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Done @Cmao20: @King of Hearts:@Llez:@Ikan Kekek:@Daniel Case: Thanks for your patience, I hope it will do now --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:33, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - The brown border is gone, but there's still an obvious dark dust spot to the right of the temple that can be seen at full size on my 13-inch laptop without enlargement. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:20, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Done I hope it's the last. Thanks --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:00, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support now, thank you for all the improvements! --Aristeas (talk) 07:52, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - I don't understand what's happening with the bot, but I support now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:12, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Ponte Barca Abril 2019-1c.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 May 2019 at 17:56:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
  •   Info View of River Lima and bridge, in Ponte da Barca, Portugal. Second try (see here, plese). There is nothing wrong with the color space and Hugin is not to blame. Maybe only the blue channel was too close to saturation. I made minor adjustments. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:56, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:56, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I still like the colours to be honest, I think they're quite effective at conveying the mood. Cmao20 (talk) 18:29, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 20:39, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Tomer T (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --СССР (talk) 03:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Question - The sky was really that aquamarine? And did the clouds look as blotchy? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:07, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
      Info Apparently, yes. I took several photos in the place and the sky appears more or less like this on the western part. I suppose it is related to near saturation in the blue channel (not to colour temperature) in the presence of those clouds. Please notice how the colours look more natural on the right part of this other photo. Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:12, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Alvesgaspar, why isn't Daniel's comment below proof that the color of the sky is off? As he points out, the sky's reflection in the water is blue, not aqua. Can you explain that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:16, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Ikan, scientifically speaking it is actually possible for the reflection of the sky to be a noticeably different colour to the sky itself. The idea that water is a perfect mirror is not actually true, and bodies of water don't appear blue only because they're reflecting the colour of the sky; instead water itself is intrinsically slightly blue. And therefore it should be expected that a light blue/aquamarine sky should be given a deeper blue tinge in its reflection. I don't think there's anything especially implausible about the difference in blue colours between the sky and its reflection here. Cmao20 (talk) 15:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you Cmao20, you are quite right. We know, for example, that lower wavelengths (reds) are absorbed in the upper layers making reflections bluer. Other conditions have direct effects on the color of the water (and thus on the reflected sky) such as depth and the presence of organic matter. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:56, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  • The water from my tap doesn't look blue to me. I take note of this explanation, though. That great a difference in the colors of the sky and the reflection is hard for me to accept, but I wasn't there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:31, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Daniel, your argument doesn't make sense to me. A blue apple being reflected in a weird surface making it look red there doesn't fix the color of the real apple, right? – Lucas 18:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Lucasbosch: Is the sky in this image red like an apple? Daniel Case (talk) 18:40, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Daniel, no, this was just an example to show why I don't believe in your argument with the colors. – Lucas 19:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)