Open main menu

Commons:Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi

Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi        Statuksen poistoehdotukset Statuksen poistoehdotukset

Alla on tämänhetkiset ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksi. Huomaa, että tämä ei ole sama asia kuin päivän kuva.

EhdottaminenEdit

Ohjeita ehdottajilleEdit

Lue läpi Commons:Image guidelines ennen kuvan ehdottamista.

Alla on yhteenveto siitä, mitä tulee tarkastella arvioidessa kuvan sopivuutta suositelluksi kuvaksi:

  • Resoluutio – Yleensä kuvat, joiden resoluutio on alle kaksi megapikseliä, on hylätty. Alle kahden megapikselin kuva voidaan hyväksyä vain poikkeustapauksessa. Huomaa, että kuvassa, jonka resoluutio on 1 600 × 1 200, on noin 1,92 megapikseliä, joten se on kelvoton.
Commonsissa sijaitsevia kuvia voidaan käyttää muuhunkin kuin tietokoneen näytöllä katselemiseen. Niitä voidaan tulostaa tai katsella suurella resoluutiolla olevilla monitoreilla. Emme voi ennustaa, millaisia laitteistot tulevat olemaan tulevaisuudessa, joten kuvan tulee olla niin suurella resoluutiolla kuin mahdollista.
  • Fokus – kuvan tärkeimpien kohteiden tulisi olla teräviä.
  • Edusta ja tausta – edustalla ja taustalla olevat asiat voivat olla häiritseviä. Tarkista, että edustalla olevat kohteet eivät peitä mitään kuvan kannalta tärkeää ja taustalla olevat kohteet eivät pilaa asetelmaa, esimerkiksi katuvalo ei näytä tulevan jonkun päästä.
  • Tekninen korkealaatuisuus – suositellun kuvan tulee olla teknisesti korkealaatuinen.
  • Digitaaliset manipulaatiot eivät saa vetää nenästä kuvan katsojaa. Kuvassa olevien kauneusvirheiden korjaaminen on sallittua, jos korjaus on tehty hyvin ja sen tarkoituksena ei ole vääristää kuvaa. Hyväksyttäjä manipulaatioita ovat rajaus, perspektiivin oikaisu, terävöittäminen, sumentaminen ja valotuksen sekä värien korjailu. Monimutkaisemmat manipulaatiot ovat sallittuja vain, jos mallinetta {{Retouched picture}} käytetään kuvaussivulla. Kuvauksettomat tai väärin kuvatut monimutkaiset manipulaatiot ovat kiellettyjä.
  • Arvo – päätavoitteenamme on erottaa arvokkaimmat kuvat muista. Suositellun kuvan tulee olla jotenkin erikoinen.
    • Auringonlaskuista otetut valokuvat ovat kaikki vähän samanlaisia (Valokuvia)(Suomessa otettuja valokuvia)
    • Yökuvat saattavat olla hienompia, mutta päiväkuvista ilmenee yleensä enemmän tietoa
    • Kaunis ei ole sama asia kuin arvokas

Teknisiä yksityiskohtia käsitellään kohdissa valotus, asetelma, liikkeenhallinta ja terävyysalue.

  • Valotus – valotuksella tarkoitetaan valokuvauksessa kameran filmiin tallentuvaa tai digitaalikamerassa valoherkän kennon tallentamaa valon määrää. Valotuksen tulisi olla sopiva. Laajat ylivalottuneet alueet ovat usein häiritseviä.
  • Asetelma – asetelmalla tarkoitetaan kuvan esineiden sijoittumista toisiinsa nähden. ”Kolmoissääntö” (esimerkkikuva) on hyvä nyrkkisääntö siitä, millainen on hyvä asetelma. Kolmoissäännön ideana on, että kuva jaetaan kahdella pystyviivalla ja kahdella vaakaviivalla yhdeksään osaan (3×3). Pääaiheen sijoittaminen tiukasti kuvan keskelle on yleensä huonompi vaihtoehto mielenkiintoisuuden kannalta kuin pääaiheen sijoittaminen johonkin neljästä viivojen muodostamasta risteyksestä. Horisonttia ei tulisi sijoittaa kuvan keskelle, vaan jommankumman viivan keskelle. Kolmoissäännön avulla saadaan luotua dynaaminen kuva.
  • Liikkeenhallinta – liikkeenhallinnalla tarkoitetaan sitä, miten liike näkyy kuvassa. Liike voi olla terävää tai epätarkkaa. Jompikumpi aina ei ole paras vaihtoehto, vaan tärkeintä on aikomus havainnollistaa jotain. Liike on suhteellista kuvan kohteisiin verrattuna. Esimerkiksi valokuva ralliautosta, joka näyttäisi olevan paikallaan taustaa vasten, on huonompi vaihtoehto kuin valokuva ralliautosta, joka näkyy terävästi, mutta jonka tausta on sumuista, koska tällöin liikkeen huomaa helposti. Tätä kutsutaan ”panoroinniksi”. Toisaalta valokuva hyppäävästä koripallon pelaajasta, joka näyttää olevan paikallaan taustaa vasten, on hyvä sen epäluonnollisuuden takia.
  • Terävyysalue – terävyysalueella tarkoitetaan kuvan kohteen terävyyttä ympäristöön verrattuna. Terävyysalue valitaan jokaisen kuvan kohdalla erikseen. Suuri tai pieni terävyysalue voi huonontaa tai parantaa kuvan laatua. Pientä terävyysaluetta voidaan käyttää erottamaan pääkohde muusta ympäristöstä. Näin katsojan huomio kiinnittyy haluttuun kohteeseen. Suurta terävyysaluetta voidaan taas käyttää tilan havainnollistamiseen. Lähtökohtaisesti syväterävyysalue muodostuu sitä lyhyemmäksi, mitä suurempaa aukkoarvoa valokuvaaja käyttää. Vastaavasti pientä aukkoarvoa käytettäessä syväterävyysalue voi ulottua kuvan etualalta äärettömään. Aukon arvon lisäksi syväterävyysalueeseen vaikuttaa kuitenkin myös objektiivin todellinen polttoväli ja toisaalta kohteen etäisyys kuvaajasta.

Alla käsitellään vielä grafiikkaa.

  • Terävyys – pääkohteiden ääriviivojen on oltava teräviä.
  • Kolmiulotteisuus – kolmiulotteisuuden on oltava laadukasta. Parhaiten tämä onnistuu siten, että valo tulee kohteen sivulta. Yleensä kuvaajasta päin tuleva valo ei onnistu luomaan kunnollista kolmiulotteista vaikutelmaa, vaan se johtaa litteään vaikutelmaan. Paras valo ulkona on aamulla tai illalla.
  • Värit – värit eivät saa olla liian kylläisiä.
  • Tekstuuri – kohteen pinnan on oltava kolmiulotteisen näköinen ja laadukas.
  • Perspektiivi – kuvan tulee olla kolmiulotteinen.
  • Tasapaino – kuvan kohteiden tulisi olla tasapainossa keskenään. Suurta määrää kohteita ei tulisi jommallakummalla puolella.
  • Mittasuhde – mittasuhteella tarkoitetaan kuvan kohteiden kokoa toisiinsa verrattuna. Yleensä meillä taipumus esittää pienet kohteet pieninä, mutta toisaalta pienen kohteen esittäminen suurena luonnossa suurta kohdetta vasten on myös hyvä tekniikka, esimerkiksi kukan esittäminen vuorta vasten.
  • Symbolinen tarkoitus – huono kuva vaikeasta aiheesta on parempi kuin hyvä kuva helposta aiheesta.
Valokuvaaja ja/tai sen katselija voivat tarkastella kuvan kohdetta puolueellisesti. Kuvan arvoa ei tulisi arvioida arvioijan kulttuurillisen taustan perusteella, vaan se tulisi arvioida kuvan kulttuurillisen taustan perusteella. Hyvä kuva ”puhuu” katsojalle herättäen sellaisia tunteita kuin ilo, sympatia, herkkyys, suru, inho, viha ja raivo. Hyvän kuvan herättämät tunteet eivät ole vain positiivisia.

Uuden ehdotuksen lisääminenEdit

Jos sinusta tuntuu siltä, että olet löytänyt kuvan, josta voisi tulla suositeltu kuva ja jonka kuvaussivulla on hyväksytty ja totuudenmukainen tekijänoikeusmalline, toimi seuraavasti:

Askel 1: Kopioi kuvan nimi alla olevaan laatikkoon ja paina nappia ”Luo äänestyssivu”.


Askel 2: Noudata avautuvalla sivulla olevia ohjeita.

Askel 3: Lisää ehdokaslistan alkuun seuraava koodi:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:KIRJOITA TIEDOSTON NIMI TÄHÄN}}

ÄänestäminenEdit

Käytä äänestäessäsi seuraavia mallineita:

  • {{Support}} luo lopputuloksen Symbol support vote.svg Support. Käytä mallinetta, jos kannatat kuvaa suositelluksi kuvaksi.
  • {{Oppose}} luo lopputuloksen Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Käytä mallinetta, jos vastustat statusta.
  • {{Neutral}} luo lopputuloksen Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Käytä mallinetta, jos äänestät tyhjää.
  • {{Comment}} luo lopputuloksen Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. Käytä mallinetta, jos kommentoit jotakin.
  • {{Info}} luo lopputuloksen Pictogram voting info.svg Info. Käytä mallinetta, jos informoit jostakin.
  • {{Question}} luo lopputuloksen Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question. Käytä mallinetta, jos kysyt jostakin.

Jos kuvan ei ole mahdollista päästä suositelluksi kuvaksi, lisää äänestyssivulle {{FPX|KIRJOITA TÄHÄN, MIKSI KUVA EI VOI OLLA SUOSITELTU KUVA}}.

Perustele aina mielipiteesi. Muista allekirjoittaa lisäyksesi. Allekirjoittaminen tapahtuu kirjoittamalla ~~~~ kommentin perään tai painamalla työkalurivin painiketta Button sig.png kursorin ollessa sopivalla kohdalla.

Statuksen poistoehdotuksen lisääminenEdit

Jos jokin suositeltu kuva on mielestäsi kelvoton suositelluksi kuvaksi, voit ehdottaa suositellun kuvan statuksen poistoa.

Sellaisissa äänestyksissä tulee käyttää mallinetta {{Keep}}, joka luo lopputuloksen Symbol keep vote.svg Keep, halutessasi statuksen säilyvän tai mallinetta {{Delist}}, joka luo lopputuloksen Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist , halutessasi statuksen poistoa.

Luodessasi uuden äänestyksen, toimi ohjeen mukaan:

Askel 1: Kopioi kuvan nimi alla olevaan laatikkoon ja paina nappia ”Luo äänestyssivu”.


Askel 2: Noudata avautuvalla sivulla olevia ohjeita.

Askel 3: Lisää ehdokaslistan alkuun seuraava koodi:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/File:KIRJOITA TIEDOSTON NIMI TÄHÄN}}

KäytäntöEdit

Yleiset säännötEdit

  1. Äänestys on auki tasan yhdeksän vuorokautta ehdotuksen tekemisen jälkeen.
  2. Käyttäjätunnuksettomat käyttäjät saavat ehdottaa ja keskustella, mutta eivät äänestää.
  3. Ehdotus ei ole ääni. Ääni on annettava erikseen.
  4. Ehdottaja voi vetää ehdotuksen pois lisäämällä {{withdraw|~~~~}} äänestyssivulle.
  5. Wikimedia Commons ei ole vain Wikipedian kuvavarasto, joten kuvia ei tule arvioida vain Wikipediaan soveltuvuuden perusteella.
  6. Jos kuva ei saa muita kannattavia ääniä kuin ehdottajan viiden vuorokauden kuluessa ehdotuksen tekemisestä, poistoäänestys tulee lopettaa.
  7. Mallineella {{FPX}} merkitty poistoäänestys tulee lopettaa 24 tunnin kuluttua mallineen lisäämisestä, jos muita kannatusääniä kuin ehdottajan ei ole.

Statuksen muutosEdit

Kuvasta tulee suositeltu kuva, jos se täyttää seuraavat vaatimukset:

  1. Kuvaussivulla on hyväksytty ja totuudenmukainen tekijänoikeusmalline
  2. Vähintään viisi kannatusääntä
  3. Vähintään kaksi kolmasosaa äänistä kannattavia
  4. Saman kuvan eri versiosta vain yksi saa olla suositeltu kuva. Siitä kuvasta, joka on kerännyt eniten kannattavia ääniä, tulee suositeltu kuva.

Statuksen poistoehdotuksen kohdalla sovelletaan samoja sääntöjä. Jos statuksen poistoa kannattavia ääniä ei ole tullut ehdottajan äänen lisäksi viiden vuorokauden kuluessa ehdotuksen teosta, äänestys tulee sulkea.

Ohjeita äänestyksen lopettamisesta on sivulla Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished.

Arvostele hyvien tapojen mukaisestiEdit

Muista, että kuva jota kommentoit on jonkun tekemä. Älä käytä sellaista tyyliä kommenteissasi kuin ”Vihaan kuvaa”, ”Kuva on ihan ruma” tai ”Kamala kuva”.

Katso myösEdit

SisällysluetteloEdit

Contents

Ehdokkaat suositelluiksi kuviksiEdit

Jos uudet ehdotukset eivät näy tällä sivulla, purge this page's cache.

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Vanha voimalaitos.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 22:32:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:White noise - Horn loudspearkers at Brastad soccer arena.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 18:18:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info Always wanting to explore things that are normally frowned upon, I think I've found a subject where an overcast sky actually adds to the composition. -- Cart (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Maybe a useful VI, but I don't get what you found compelling about the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support – While those horns aren't anything super gorgeous, these ordinary infrastructure elements can definitely make for a somehow interesting composition. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Regretful oppose An interesting idea, but I think it might have worked better if you had had just the speakers ... the tower has different forms that sort of clash with the curvilinearity and gradients of the horns. Also, you need to rename it to eliminate the superfluous "r" in "loudspearkers", and there's a bit of CA on the rims, too. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Eternal Procession.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 02:48:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Image:20180819 Panorama ReutteBerge DSC00900 cut PtrQs.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 01:12:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created by PtrQs - uploaded by PtrQs - nominated by PtrQs -- PtrQs (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- PtrQs (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Evocative and beautiful. You half expect to find some vertical lines of kanji characters somewhere on this "scroll". --Cart (talk) 09:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The crop is too tight for me at the bottom, I miss the valleys. --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Uoaei1, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but there were reasons to cut the lower 600px of the original stitch. Below the frame you see, the shadows drop and the contrast vanishes. So instead of graded silhouettes like in the peaks you only see areas with few contours. As this happens especially on the left side and there the edge of the effect looks rather sharp, I'd call it unbalanced. So I decided to crop it like this. --PtrQs (talk) 22:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose useless for encyclopaedia Pan Tau (talk) 18:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
"Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project."
FPs are not just for the encyclopedia, they are also for all the other WikiProjects (take a look at the list at the bottom of the main page) plus those we don't even know about yet, so ALL sorts of really good photos are welcome. --Cart (talk) 20:03, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
My rating is my personal opinion. So don't proselytize me. Pan Tau (talk) 21:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Ok then. Thanks for teaching me a new English word: "proselytize". I didn't know that one. :) --Cart (talk) 21:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  Support Beautiful landscape. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Uoaei1. Doesn't really work for me structurally. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Adolfo Wildt (1868-1931) Carattere fiero-Anima gentile 3 (1912).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 19:25:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Paolobon140 - uploaded by Paolobon140 - nominated by Paolobon140 -- One of the masteripeces of sculptor Adolfo Wildt; yellowish tone is typical of Wildt's way to treat marble, I chose to divide the pic in 2 area, keeping the lower one as negative space; vignetting is natural, and given by illumination on the scenePaolobon140 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Paolobon140 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Do we really need all of the pedestal? It's dark and doesn't really add anything to the image. Daniel Case (talk) 05:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yes, in my opinion: the picture is evidently formed by 2 distinct parts: a bright golden one with the main subject at the top (eyes start looking at one object from the top, usually) and a black one at the bottom which creates a large negative space which emphasizes the top part by giving more strenghth to the sculpure and visibility. Tha lower part might even be seen as a kind of "bust" of the head, with shoulders and body. The sculpture itself is quite complicated to be framed becasue of its shape and this picture doesnt want to be a simple description of the sculpture, but wants to create a kind of atmosphere around the sculputure. No square composition was allowed here, so choice was one only. Vignetting and bottom black part area intended to focus atention on the sculpture. Paolobon140 (talk) 07:54, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A "heavy" compo, like something you'd see in a Batman or Marvel album, but such a compo needs to be flawless and the cut corner on the top is the pedestal really bugs me, even if you probably aren't responsible for how the sculpture was displayed. Also technical quality is not up to what might be expected from a static shot, lots of red CA, chromatic noise and a bit too short DoF. Camera settings might not have been optimal. --Cart (talk) 09:52, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment. I will not discuss about composition, that is the composition i chose becasue it was the one i liked the most and your taste is most respectful. Only thing id say is that the heavy composition fits the heavy expression of the face...For the quality i often have the sensation, here, that commenters are putting an over attention on the pixels. Digital photography produces large files which, when printed, become much smaller than the file itself. Many of the small details you can see at full size disappear in a normal format print. Just for information: one picture of the same set (different sculpure with different marble tones, same sculptor, but same camera settings, same place, same day and same hand of the photographer), is the cover of one quite good book by a well known editor. The editor didn't find any flaw in the file and printed it with a perfect result. When we had to print from films it was the opposite way and small flaws on the negative would look more evident in prints. A kind of photograph like this gives its best if printed at some 20x30 cm. Paolobon140 (talk) 11:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, we are much more fastidious here than most publication editors. If the technical level can be improved in post-processing or by re-shooting the photo, we would like it too be. We can overlook such things if the "wow" is so great that the situation/composition overrules the technical issues. Regarding the "heavy" compo, I never said that it was a negative thing, just commented on what kind of compo it was and as such I'd like it to be flawless for an FP. --Cart (talk) 12:06, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Btw, googling "Carattere fiero-Anima gentile" I see that the marble is a bit yellowish, but not as much as in this photo. This saturation makes it look almost waxy and not like marble. --Cart (talk) 12:50, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Yellow is much more stronger than you see in other pics; i think other pics are taken with those cameras that balance everything till it gets white. Wildt was famous for his yellow marbles, obtained by shining marble with urine and tobacco. This picture is very close to the original tone but the museum, in tht occasion, chose a yellowish illumination to enhance the golden tones of marble. I reproduced exactly what the human eye was seeing in that exposition. It was a choice by the light designer. In the book cover you will see a less yellow tone becasue that sculputure is less yellow itself and light was chosen whiter.Paolobon140 (talk) 13:50, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

  •   Oppose - This is one of the cases in which our tastes differ. A photo that's utterly pitch black in the lower half doesn't work for me, or at least this one doesn't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Snowflake macro photography 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 18:43:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Question - When you say it's heavily processed, do you think any of the colors were altered? I'm inclined to support but would like to read your answer (or anyone else's answer). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Info The author hasn't been active for years so I took the liberty of rotating the flake. Please revert if you don't like it. --Cart (talk) 11:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 19:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per rotators. Thank you, Cart. --Basotxerri (talk) 19:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 20:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Baby Huwae, c 1963, Tati Photo Studio 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 18:37:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •   Info created by Tati Photo Studio, restored and uploaded by Crisco 1492, nominated by Yann (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Yann (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Seven Pandas (talk) 20:27, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I would vote to support, but are watermarks allowed in historical photos? I hope so and would like for it to remain in the photo, but I think it's important to resolve the question. Normally, no copyrights or watermarks are allowed for featured photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Gaura lindheimeri, prachtkaars. (actm) 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 17:54:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants Gaura lindheimeri, 'Whirling Butterflies' #Family Onagraceae.
  •   Info Elegant small flower between the flower buds of the Gaura lindheimeri.
    All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support In many shots like this I would complain about the bluish whitebalance, but with these flowers and setting I think it works for the photo in a melancholy way. --Cart (talk) 19:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cart; the bluish tint nicely counterbalances the hot pink. Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment too noisy at the moment. Charles (talk) 23:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:24, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Background is very distracting and the main subject gets lost in it. A shallower dof would be better.Paolobon140 (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Lauenstein Burg 9302266-Pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 21:56:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications
  •   Info all by me -- Ermell (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:23, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Could you possibly add more to the left? The crops feel unbalanced to me because there are many more trees to the right of the fortress than to the left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:24, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
    •   Done I had an inch left. Actually I didn't miss anything but with the additional piece it really looks better.--Ermell (talk) 10:40, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it as it is with the spire on rule of thirds. Charles (talk) 09:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - That edit made the difference for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:14, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Me too. --Cart (talk) 12:27, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:13, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I want a bit more space on the top and left but OK :) --Laitche (talk) 16:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:05, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 17:09, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:01, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:23, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I know it actually is not, but it looks tilted to the right; i think due to the shape of trees.Paolobon140 (talk) 08:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:07, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 20:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Alpine House, Kew Gardens, 2018 edit.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 18:46:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#United Kingdom
  •   Info created by Daniel Case - uploaded by Daniel Case - nominated by Daniel Case -- Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment This is actually the back half of an unintentional slow delist and replace. After my 2015 version was recently demoted due to the discovery that its margin of promotion had been due to one now-banned user !voting twice with one of his sock accounts, I looked at it and decided against renominating it as it was since a) I'm not totally sure as it was that I would have voted for it if someone else had nominated it and b) I have learned more about editing my images since then. I also realized that some of the oppose !votes in the original had had some points.

    So, instead, I dragged out the original raw file and started from scratch. The result is an image that I would definitely support if someone else nominated it ... less brightness on the building and the clouds and thus easier on the eyes, its perspective slightly corrected, and not cropped in as much at the left so we can see a bit more of its locational context. (I would also like to thank Cart for one last tweak she suggested).

    I see this as not just a worthy candidate but a testament to how regular participation in this forum can help us grow and improve at our art. Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

  •   Support -- Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Yep. The Star Trek building is definitely better than before, so here is my vote. --Cart (talk) 18:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 19:03, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 19:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:41, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The lower part of the picture is quite messy. The guy on the left and the cut-off signs on the right do not belong in on the image, the lamppost on the left is not vertical. That' s no FP for me.--Ermell (talk) 21:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Ah, to live in a world where all lampposts really are vertical. I never assume that a lamppost is perfectly vertical IRL. --Cart (talk) 22:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the info. Of course I don't think that all the lampposts are vertical, but you can see here that the image is distorted, which is nothing unusual with the focal length used. But one could try to change that. Just because the building has no horizontals or verticals nobody is bothered by it.--Ermell (talk) 10:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ermell: I have cropped the image at bottom and left to eliminate those two things. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • That looks much better, but the guy with the camera doesn't make any sense at all.--Ermell (talk) 07:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support But the guy is annoying! Charles (talk) 23:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support, and I agree that this is a better composition than the 2015 version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Despite some unsharpness in the corners --Llez (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 20:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Helgolandpanorama vom Pinneberg 2018.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 18:37:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Bologoe asv2018-08 img04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 14:02:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
  •   Info An L-class steam locomotive in operation at Bologoye-2 railway station, Tver Oblast, Russia ------ all by A.Savin --A.Savin 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --A.Savin 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice old Soviet lady! The little platform in front is a bit disturbing as it partially hides the wheels. --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 16:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Definitely a QI if that were sought, but for me it has too many distracting elements—not just the platform, but the buildings, trees and tracks, for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Rich in detail. --Milseburg (talk) 18:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, I'm with Daniel here. The light is also rather glary, making it unpleasant to look at. --Cart (talk) 19:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose platform. Charles (talk) 09:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:M101 hires STScI-PRC2006-10a.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 07:18:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:M81.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 07:15:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Young girl smiling with teeth in sunshine.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:32:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support Evocative.--Peulle (talk) 11:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 19:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 19:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support. Good portrait, almost too detailed at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 18:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Man in paddy fields plowing with a water buffalo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:31:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:The Bubble Nebula - NGC 7635 - Heic1608a.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:11:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Gallina de Guinea (Numida meleagris), parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-25, DD 48.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2018 at 19:47:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

+1 Daniel Case (talk)   Support now. 23:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
+1 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Charles, Daniel, Martin:   Done --Poco2 18:50, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Ceriántido, Aquarium de Ciudad del Cabo, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-19, DD 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2018 at 17:42:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Affresco di Gioacchino Martorana Palazzo Butera Palermo quadrato.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 16:17:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:The Pashupatinath Temple 27.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 08:50:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Cumbre dorsal - Teide.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 08:30:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 08:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 08:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Lovely layers and a cloud plume in the right place. --Cart (talk) 10:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support nice shot. Charles (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Seven Pandas (talk) 21:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Laitche (talk) 18:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It had the potentials for a good photo but in my opinion there is no subject: the picture is correctly divided in 4 areas: sky, the background mountain, the right part with clouds and a foreground with anther mountain. It is a kind of composition that might give great resutls if only one of the 4 areas contained somethng notable, but as you can see none of the 4 areas of the pic contain anything interesting to watch and contemplate. Actually one subject is missing, and the dull sky doesnt help with those few small clouds. It looks like an empty scene where no subject comes out to catch the eye of the observer.Paolobon140 (talk) 20:02, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:29, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Fantastic (ship, 1996) - Sète - October 2018.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 07:16:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Frozen drop.webmEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 18:33:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support Thanks, Daniel and Cart -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very cool  . Daniel Case (talk) 06:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I like it, but surely, this is shot live and not animated, so do change the category. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:55, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 10:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Ooops, strike 'support' per El Grafo, I watched the video on mute and didn't realize there was music. It is totally redundant for this. --Cart (talk) 11:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2 (Chopin). Kruusamägi (talk) 15:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Ok, but is it free ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose as long as proper credit is not given for the music, keeping in mind that there may be separate copyrights for composition, performance, recording etc.. Also, the music is cut off abruptly at the end. Personally, I would just get rid of the audio track completely. --El Grafo (talk) 08:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
I added the information about music to the file description. Kruusamägi (talk) 16:21, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes that is good, it says which piece it is, but not who is playing or from what recording it is. How do we know the recording is free or is it the author of the video who is playing too? --Cart (talk) 19:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Maxim didn't remember who's piece it was, but he had checked that it was definitely in PD. I told him to upload a new version without music. Kruusamägi (talk) 16:46, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  Done No more music. Kruusamägi (talk) 17:57, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per El Grafo. There is lots of free licenced music available (cc-by-sa, artlibre...) in the WWW. Also the tripod appears to be not rock solid. --Smial (talk) 11:05, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per objections about the music. As a musician and composer, I should care about the use of recordings without permission. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Macro portrait of a housefly Musca domestica.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 18:29:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera
  •   Info created & uploaded by Irina Petrova - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 18:29, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 18:29, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Very impressive, but the top crop is really tight. --C messier (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose really doesn't work as a composition and close up the quality is not great. Charles (talk) 19:51, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support very good caotic composition. Habitator terrae 🌍 23:36, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles; we have better FPs of insect heads in closeup. Daniel Case (talk) 06:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The crop on top is too tight -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:31, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 15:14, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Works for me! --PierreSelim (talk) 17:59, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose High quality image on the technical side, but the crop just doesn't work. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:45, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:1858 Gustave Le Gray la batterie Royale à Brest.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 16:14:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • C’est l’une des photos de la série que Gustave Le Gray a fait dans le cadre de la visite de Napoléon III à Brest lors d’une tournée des ports français. Cette tournée a été marquante et a fait l’objet de nombreuse peintures et gravures [[1]]. À cette époque Le gray est photographe officiel du Second Empire (cf biographie). Il a du coup accès a ce site militaire, cette batterie Royale dont c’est la seule représentation (vue sous cet angle) que je connaisse. On y retrouve son style très descriptif, hérité de la mission héliographique et on peut donc observer un état des lieux de "l'art militaire" (architecture et artillerie). Le gray n’est pas seulement un pionnier de la photographie (pensée comme un art à part-entière) il est aussi un des premiers à mettre son travail au service du recensement des monuments historiques … un encyclopédiste à sa manière.
  • Please add that explanation to the description on the file's page. Also, again, please remember to sign everything you write here. --Cart (talk) 10:24, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I added information in the description --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:39, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you. --Cart (talk) 11:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Good, interesting, historically important. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:10, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Βασιλική Αγίου Τίτου, Γόρτυνα 1841.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 15:14:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  •   Info created by C messier - uploaded by C messier - nominated by C messier -- C messier (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The ruins Saint Titus basilica, built in 7th-8th century AC, when Gortyna was the capital of Crete, before it was destroyed by Arabs in 823. en:Saint Titus was an early Christian missionary and church leader, a companion and disciple of Paul the Apostle, who according to tradition was fist bishop of Crete.   Support -- C messier (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Deservedly a QI, but rather a busy composition and doesn't stand out from our other pictures of ruins like these. Also, the trees in the right upper corner are unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 03:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:38, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Castle of Selles-sur-Cher 16.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 14:23:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#France
  •   Info All by --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:23, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Abstain as author --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:23, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The right crop is too tight and the lighting IMO isn't the most appealing. BTW, the left side is leaning out and there are some spots in the sky. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:43, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Basotxerri, it looks like a pretty standard shot from someone's Instagram feed. A QI maybe ... Daniel Case (talk) 23:04, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basotxerri's remark about the lighting, etc. Definitely a QI, though, and also depending on what other photos are in the category, could be a fine VI, because it's good documentation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:38, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Wie met de heele wereld wil verkeeren, moet eerst Esperanto leeren!.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 23:06:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:2014.07.17.-16-Zadlitzgraben Pressel--Schwarze Heidelibelle-Weibchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 17:39:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Ganzenveer bedekt met dauw. (d.j.b.) 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 16:55:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds A feather of a goose.
  •   Info The geese are in the moult. Quill pen covered with dew. (Nature created artwork on the grass.) Location, The Famberhorst. All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:55, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:55, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Whitebalance is just little, little too blue for me (could be fixed), but at any larger size the feather is stunningly beautiful. --Cart (talk) 22:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I like the idea but the background is a little noisy ... could that be fixed? Daniel Case (talk) 00:18, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
    •   Done. Correction white balance and noise reduction. Thank you for your comments.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:18, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 08:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:11, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Unusual... and great! --Yann (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Field with mixed intercropping of oat and rye.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 13:51:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Sweden
  •   Info In 2018, farmers around here tested different versions of mixed intercropping. Unfortunately most of it was lost during the drought later in the summer. -- Cart (talk) 13:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 13:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like the way the rye(?) on the right (rye-t?) makes a nice golden summery haze (Was there a slight breeze at the time?). Daniel Case (talk) 00:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • On the right side is the mixed oat and rye field. There was very little wind that evening but we sometimes get hazy evenings anyway due to the proximity to the sea. That evening, the hazy light was almost magical as you might see in this photo, not sure the ambience I felt then comes across in these photos taken from the same spot. (The photo with the golden dry grass is fonder for me, but I don't see it as having a chance here since I put the focus on the grass instead of the rest of the scene since the landscape was hazy anyway. Such artistic choices are usually not well received. ;) ) --Cart (talk) 00:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support To my eyes this image represents the perfect landscape photography. BRAVO! -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • What makes it so good? I ask not to challenge but in hopes of learning something. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:35, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment First of all it is a matter of personal taste. I love photos with distinct presentation of foreground-middleground-background and the road just leads the eye from near to far. The bended road devides the image into two halves and gives the picture certain dynamics. The low standing sun models the objects by the shadows and gives nice contrasts. The decent colors of green on the left side and the yellow-green on the right half give joy to my eye. As I mentioned above, it gives me good vibes; but that is a my personal point of view. DE GUSTIBUS NON DISPUTANDUM. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Btw, Cart is a an artist with her camera, just to repeat her own words: "Such artistic choices are usually not well received." I do receive them very well. Cart, you visualize the spirit (peaceful Scandinavia) of the landscape. Thanks for contributing delicate photos to QIC like this. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:54, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 06:43, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 08:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Dull, uninteresting and without a subject; horizon is too much up in the composition and gives the feeling to be tilted. rule of thirds is not respected. Sky is not interesting and the green fields are not enough interesting to be shown. Overall this picture has no WOW at all.Paolobon140 (talk) 19:35, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It is interesting when someone who speaks so strongly about artistic freedom when it comes to vignetting, wants to impose the 'rule of third' as a law and take away artistic freedom in regard to proportions. --Cart (talk) 19:55, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • But rule of thirds is automatically recognised by a human eye like "pleasant". It is a matter of how our brains is used to look at reality. Yes, you can avoid using the rule of thirds but must find something extremely interesting to brek the rules. Actually rule of thirds is one of the few and basic rules which is tought in any photographic lessons, even the basic ones. Try to imagine your picture with more sky and less crops; try to imagine moving yourself a bit on the left and shoot from a different angle and you might see a much better result, Cyan dull skies are never photogenic (usually a wrong set camera, with too much cyan); trees on the horizon always make the horizon look tilted; a road making a curve always needs a subject in it, even someone walking, an animal, a bicycle, whatever. This picture is an empty frame; some ignetting would have added some little more interest.Paolobon140 (talk) 20:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh! Thank you for you many wise advice and comments, I will certainly remember what you said the next time I take a photo. --Cart (talk) 20:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Just to see if I understood you correctly, is this photo better: File:Field with mixed intercropping of oat and rye 2 - edited.jpg? I tried to follow your advice; step to the left, road and sky at thirds, more dramatic sky, vignetting. --Cart (talk) 23:35, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I love it: it is a very balanced composition, with brillant tones and the curve of the road ends in the bottom right corner of the photograph, escaping from the composition. Pity for those white buildings in the background. Vignetting adds much giving depth to the view, rule of thirds adds dynamicity to a very static composition. I wonder if you could wait for sometone to pass on the road and shoor when he was in some interesting position on the right bottom part of the photograph. It would add more dynamicity. Those clouds on the top left part are perfectly placed (who knows if the were on the right part to balance the trees?) I would suggest to burn parts of the clouds to make them a bit whiter. Thank you for the interesting conevrstaion.Paolobon140 (talk) 08:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It is always amusing reading certain writers. I have even read an american historician who wrote a book where he swears that the ancient egiptian pyramids were built by extraterrestrials, but it remains his own point ov view. Caravaggio used the rules of thirds constantly, for example here. No, I will not consider that writer. The rules has been used for centuries by painters and has been adopted by photographers. You can give a look at the figures here: you will find nice ways to use the rule of thirds also in portraits.Paolobon140 (talk) 11:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • My father, who was a well-known painter in his day, taught me a lot about how to read space, perceive a linear arabesque and lots of other aspects of visual arts. He never once mentioned a "rule of thirds" to me. And in the 21st century, after we've gone through over a century of avant-garde art and come out the other side, to insist robotically on a "rule" is IMO inane and contemptible. Just look at the photo and judge it by how it strikes you! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Considering that the "Rule of Thirds" was invented by an Englishman several centuries after Caravaggio, the Italian painter was not even aware of this "rule" and certainly couldn't have consciously applied it. Not one notable painter or photographer has ever claimed to have composed their work according to this so-called "rule". Paolobon140, the image you linked is notable for having no key features on any of the "rule of thirds" lines or intersections, nor on the Golden Ratio either. It does have the face on a "rule of fourths" intersection, but that's a "rule" I just made up. -- Colin (talk) 21:47, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The only significant composition element in old-school painting that has the number "3" in it is the triangular composition. Well, after that, the next number up was "4" for cubism. --Cart (talk) 22:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Left side leaning out, lack of detail in many areas --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, it is a fjord land where most parts of the land are leaning, not a flat land. The left side is sloping down towards a small stream, not much I can do about it. --Cart (talk) 10:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question What's the black stripe above the horizon on the very left side? --Milseburg (talk) 13:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It's a telecom mast, probably the one at (58.410864|11.518983). I honestly hadn't noticed it and I have no idea why it seems a bit crooked. Thanks for pointing it out, I'll fix it later tonight at home. --Cart (talk) 14:55, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Fixed Mast is now ok plus a small perspective correction. I must have accidentally nudged the mast when I was de-bugging the photo. There were a lot of creatures of all sizes out flying that warm evening. --Cart (talk) 18:50, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose There's nothing special. Sorry. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Chiesa della Martorana Palero mosaico Cristo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2018 at 14:07:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Italy
  •   Info all by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Why does this have to be photographed off-centre? Charles (talk) 19:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support The bar is very high for church ceilings and the light could have been better, but the sharpness is very good.--Peulle (talk) 07:39, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm sorry, I still don't think this is up to FP standards. It may not be your fault that the best viewpoint is inaccessible to the public, but as noted the bar for church ceiling photos is very high and this, to me, does not clear it. Daniel Case (talk) 15:15, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
    •   Comment If the best viewpoint is ineacessible better not take a picture. Or choose a different viewpoint. If there is no good viewpoint, then just choose a different subject.Paolobon140 (talk) 18:36, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
      • Well then never take a picture of a shark’s teeth since the best viewpoint is from inside his mouth--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Merfeld, Dülmener Pferde im Merfelder Bruch -- 2018 -- 1541.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2018 at 05:57:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Equidae_(Equids)
  •   Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 05:57, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 05:57, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Special. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:16, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment At thumb this looks like a dream-horse poster for any young girl's room, but at any larger size the pus in the eyes is very off-putting. Any chance of getting rid of that, or is that too much manipulation for some voters? --Cart (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
For me it is too much and not natural. The horse is a wild horse without any care by humans. So it would be wrong to manipulate the image in the way you proposed. Sorry. --XRay talk 10:45, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Unsharp, and I find the stump a bit distracting. Per Cart, the pus is also a deal-breaker when viewed at full size. Daniel Case (talk) 21:15, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Ordinary picture, not striking enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Lifeline (Schiff).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 18:52:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Overgrown dead tree stumps 15.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 16:16:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Independence museum (Copy).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 15:18:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  •   Info created & uploaded by Palla bkabir - nominated by RockyMasum -- Rocky Masum (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Rocky Masum (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support This is what i call an excellent photograph. Full of atmosphere, greatly balanced in comspoition, colours and tones. Nothing more to say. But some will notice its not sharp enough in some small portions of the image,Paolobon140 (talk) 15:43, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Regretful oppose A striking motif indeed. Unfortunately the technical level is not up to what I'd expect from such a photo. Some noise is inevitable in a dark indoors place, but the post-processing has almost enhanced the flaws instead of fixing them. The compo is not centered or level and it needs perspective correction. I also wonder if the camera settings were optimal. --Cart (talk) 16:27, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - The ghosts and couple on the right damage the composition, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:01, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Strong vignetting -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:04, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 02:05, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support for the atmosphere --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:53, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:46, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice composition.I like it. -- Syed07 (talk) 16:56, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Vignetting not corrected -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:22, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment This is a funny reaon to oppose: "vignetting is not corrected"; do you mean that vignetting is a "mistake" that must be corrected? If yes, in which manual of photography did you find such a weird weird argumentation? Vignetting is one of the creative tools that advanced and professional photographers can use to give a special and particular atmosphere to a photograph, especially a kind of photograph ike the one we see here: it is used to focus the viewer's eye into the center of the composition, where something important is seen by the photographer. It is a creative choice, not a mistake. Or you mean the photographer was so careless not to notice the heay vignetting and he forgot to correct it? Please correct and review your comment into something like "I dont like vignetting". At least will be seen as your personal Point of View and not an non-obeyed imaginative rule which is not existing. Paolobon140 (talk) 17:00, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • If you take a look at the Guidelines for QI, VI or FP photos here on commons, you will find that vignetting is generally discouraged here per consensus. Commons has a style of it's own where artistic renditions of photos are mostly not accepted, believe me: been there, done that, got the T-shirt. For fanciful, artistic photos with added image enhancements, you should seek out another forum. --Cart (talk) 18:00, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I am not that good in English, but in those guidelines i cannot find what you say; its wiritten about "inappropriate vignetting" (with some examples); and about stiching different photos (with some examples); its also written about old photos with some defects. But i cannot find anythng which says that "vignetting is generally discouraged here per consensus". Maybe i cannot see it?Paolobon140 (talk) 18:18, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The rules in the guidelines are the result of consensus and "inappropriate vignetting" can be interpreted to mean that it is discouraged. This means that a user can vote 'oppose' on an image based on vignetting being present in it. It is within the rules to do so if anyone whish. --Cart (talk) 18:47, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree. I don't like vignetting in general, as I don't like chromatic aberrations or underexposed photographs. I have no doubt some photographers will consider all these problems as "creative" features, but that's not my opinion. Chromatic aberrations come from technical defects, and modern equipment like basic softwares are very helpful to correct those instantly. Same for the vignetting, on Lightroom for example you just have to click on one button and your image will look immediately much better (in my opinion). I don't know what was the purpose here, intentional or non-intentional. I mentioned this problem first in a comment 3 days ago, and since no reaction came, I opposed yesterday for this reason. Not sure I would have opposed otherwise, sometimes removing the vignetting change radically the appearance of a picture. So I'd have liked to consider the new version before judging. But now it seems to be more a negligence (to my eyes) and I don't like the aspect on an aesthetic level. I rarely appreciate pictures with vignetting, probably our tastes differ (I'm 40 years old and have been educated with this possibility of improvement thanks to numeric photography). The dark corners are like a visual pollution, unfortunately produced by the limitation of all cameras unable to adapt to wide angle lenses. That's like a play of theater centered on the middle, while I prefer a vision of free space, not limited at the sides. In the case the effect was intentional, I regret for me this looks too much like a "dark box", closed and unappealing -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:37, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • For me, the vignetting is not a problem in this particular photo since it is the natural consequence of having one single main light source in the room, my oppose is based on other factors. Natural vignetting has it's place in FPs too (Ex 1, Ex 2, Ex 3, Ex 4. I was only commenting that there are those who don't see it this way (like Basile) and they are entitled to oppose on those grounds. --Cart (talk) 10:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Only this one (Ex 4) is ok for me (but not sure there's vignetting). I dislike the 3 others, and the so-called "creative" examples on Wikipedia too. "Vignetting is often an unintended and undesired effect caused by camera settings or lens limitations". That's why I find clever to fix it. Graphic designer is a different job. Here the effect doesn't seem natural, and I believe this is rather caused by the lens (optical vignetting). But certainly both (also single central source of light) -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:36, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Most of Salgado's photgraph are vignetted and wouldnt be consdered as featured pictures then?. Most of photographers choose vignetting as a creative choice. I agree it may happen an amatorial photographer cannot control vignetting but usually those kind of photographers are not able to set a camera in a manual mode, they usually shoot full automtic. This picture up here is evidently taked by a very skilled photographer and telling him that his vignetting "was not fixed" sounds more like an insult to a clearly skilled photographer. I myself usualy choose to vignette in certain cases by choosing a very open aperture (around f/2 with short lenses on a full frame sensor to give a natural vignetting and add a kind of gloomy atmosphere. I even had posted one of those photos here time ago, and vignetting was a very intentional part of the creative path- That is why i strongly disagree when i read that vignetting might be considered as a mistake. Photogaphy is a kind of art, and printers have been working decades to fnd the right way to vignette when needed. Even Caravaggio was vignetting his paintings to give depth tho his works and focus on parts of the painting. Paolobon140 (talk) 15:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Great, feel free to nominate your pictures, that's a matter of consensus here -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Cart. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:38, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I see, there are some bad things, but the Wow-Effect... --Habitator terrae 🌍 14:06, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Bosc's fringe-toed lizard (Acanthodactylus boskianus asper) juvenile.jpgEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2018 at 23:01:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Statuksen poistoehdotuksetEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Vanha voimalaitos.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 22:32:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:White noise - Horn loudspearkers at Brastad soccer arena.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 18:18:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info Always wanting to explore things that are normally frowned upon, I think I've found a subject where an overcast sky actually adds to the composition. -- Cart (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Maybe a useful VI, but I don't get what you found compelling about the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support – While those horns aren't anything super gorgeous, these ordinary infrastructure elements can definitely make for a somehow interesting composition. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Regretful oppose An interesting idea, but I think it might have worked better if you had had just the speakers ... the tower has different forms that sort of clash with the curvilinearity and gradients of the horns. Also, you need to rename it to eliminate the superfluous "r" in "loudspearkers", and there's a bit of CA on the rims, too. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Eternal Procession.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 02:48:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Image:20180819 Panorama ReutteBerge DSC00900 cut PtrQs.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 01:12:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created by PtrQs - uploaded by PtrQs - nominated by PtrQs -- PtrQs (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- PtrQs (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Evocative and beautiful. You half expect to find some vertical lines of kanji characters somewhere on this "scroll". --Cart (talk) 09:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The crop is too tight for me at the bottom, I miss the valleys. --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Uoaei1, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but there were reasons to cut the lower 600px of the original stitch. Below the frame you see, the shadows drop and the contrast vanishes. So instead of graded silhouettes like in the peaks you only see areas with few contours. As this happens especially on the left side and there the edge of the effect looks rather sharp, I'd call it unbalanced. So I decided to crop it like this. --PtrQs (talk) 22:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose useless for encyclopaedia Pan Tau (talk) 18:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
"Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project."
FPs are not just for the encyclopedia, they are also for all the other WikiProjects (take a look at the list at the bottom of the main page) plus those we don't even know about yet, so ALL sorts of really good photos are welcome. --Cart (talk) 20:03, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
My rating is my personal opinion. So don't proselytize me. Pan Tau (talk) 21:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Ok then. Thanks for teaching me a new English word: "proselytize". I didn't know that one. :) --Cart (talk) 21:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  Support Beautiful landscape. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Uoaei1. Doesn't really work for me structurally. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Adolfo Wildt (1868-1931) Carattere fiero-Anima gentile 3 (1912).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 19:25:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Paolobon140 - uploaded by Paolobon140 - nominated by Paolobon140 -- One of the masteripeces of sculptor Adolfo Wildt; yellowish tone is typical of Wildt's way to treat marble, I chose to divide the pic in 2 area, keeping the lower one as negative space; vignetting is natural, and given by illumination on the scenePaolobon140 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Paolobon140 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Do we really need all of the pedestal? It's dark and doesn't really add anything to the image. Daniel Case (talk) 05:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yes, in my opinion: the picture is evidently formed by 2 distinct parts: a bright golden one with the main subject at the top (eyes start looking at one object from the top, usually) and a black one at the bottom which creates a large negative space which emphasizes the top part by giving more strenghth to the sculpure and visibility. Tha lower part might even be seen as a kind of "bust" of the head, with shoulders and body. The sculpture itself is quite complicated to be framed becasue of its shape and this picture doesnt want to be a simple description of the sculpture, but wants to create a kind of atmosphere around the sculputure. No square composition was allowed here, so choice was one only. Vignetting and bottom black part area intended to focus atention on the sculpture. Paolobon140 (talk) 07:54, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A "heavy" compo, like something you'd see in a Batman or Marvel album, but such a compo needs to be flawless and the cut corner on the top is the pedestal really bugs me, even if you probably aren't responsible for how the sculpture was displayed. Also technical quality is not up to what might be expected from a static shot, lots of red CA, chromatic noise and a bit too short DoF. Camera settings might not have been optimal. --Cart (talk) 09:52, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment. I will not discuss about composition, that is the composition i chose becasue it was the one i liked the most and your taste is most respectful. Only thing id say is that the heavy composition fits the heavy expression of the face...For the quality i often have the sensation, here, that commenters are putting an over attention on the pixels. Digital photography produces large files which, when printed, become much smaller than the file itself. Many of the small details you can see at full size disappear in a normal format print. Just for information: one picture of the same set (different sculpure with different marble tones, same sculptor, but same camera settings, same place, same day and same hand of the photographer), is the cover of one quite good book by a well known editor. The editor didn't find any flaw in the file and printed it with a perfect result. When we had to print from films it was the opposite way and small flaws on the negative would look more evident in prints. A kind of photograph like this gives its best if printed at some 20x30 cm. Paolobon140 (talk) 11:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, we are much more fastidious here than most publication editors. If the technical level can be improved in post-processing or by re-shooting the photo, we would like it too be. We can overlook such things if the "wow" is so great that the situation/composition overrules the technical issues. Regarding the "heavy" compo, I never said that it was a negative thing, just commented on what kind of compo it was and as such I'd like it to be flawless for an FP. --Cart (talk) 12:06, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Btw, googling "Carattere fiero-Anima gentile" I see that the marble is a bit yellowish, but not as much as in this photo. This saturation makes it look almost waxy and not like marble. --Cart (talk) 12:50, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Yellow is much more stronger than you see in other pics; i think other pics are taken with those cameras that balance everything till it gets white. Wildt was famous for his yellow marbles, obtained by shining marble with urine and tobacco. This picture is very close to the original tone but the museum, in tht occasion, chose a yellowish illumination to enhance the golden tones of marble. I reproduced exactly what the human eye was seeing in that exposition. It was a choice by the light designer. In the book cover you will see a less yellow tone becasue that sculputure is less yellow itself and light was chosen whiter.Paolobon140 (talk) 13:50, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

  •   Oppose - This is one of the cases in which our tastes differ. A photo that's utterly pitch black in the lower half doesn't work for me, or at least this one doesn't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Snowflake macro photography 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 18:43:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Question - When you say it's heavily processed, do you think any of the colors were altered? I'm inclined to support but would like to read your answer (or anyone else's answer). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Info The author hasn't been active for years so I took the liberty of rotating the flake. Please revert if you don't like it. --Cart (talk) 11:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 19:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per rotators. Thank you, Cart. --Basotxerri (talk) 19:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 20:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Baby Huwae, c 1963, Tati Photo Studio 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 18:37:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •   Info created by Tati Photo Studio, restored and uploaded by Crisco 1492, nominated by Yann (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Yann (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Seven Pandas (talk) 20:27, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I would vote to support, but are watermarks allowed in historical photos? I hope so and would like for it to remain in the photo, but I think it's important to resolve the question. Normally, no copyrights or watermarks are allowed for featured photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Gaura lindheimeri, prachtkaars. (actm) 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 17:54:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants Gaura lindheimeri, 'Whirling Butterflies' #Family Onagraceae.
  •   Info Elegant small flower between the flower buds of the Gaura lindheimeri.
    All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support In many shots like this I would complain about the bluish whitebalance, but with these flowers and setting I think it works for the photo in a melancholy way. --Cart (talk) 19:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cart; the bluish tint nicely counterbalances the hot pink. Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment too noisy at the moment. Charles (talk) 23:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:24, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Background is very distracting and the main subject gets lost in it. A shallower dof would be better.Paolobon140 (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Lauenstein Burg 9302266-Pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 21:56:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications
  •   Info all by me -- Ermell (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:23, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Could you possibly add more to the left? The crops feel unbalanced to me because there are many more trees to the right of the fortress than to the left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:24, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
    •   Done I had an inch left. Actually I didn't miss anything but with the additional piece it really looks better.--Ermell (talk) 10:40, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it as it is with the spire on rule of thirds. Charles (talk) 09:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - That edit made the difference for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:14, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Me too. --Cart (talk) 12:27, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:13, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I want a bit more space on the top and left but OK :) --Laitche (talk) 16:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:05, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 17:09, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:01, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:23, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I know it actually is not, but it looks tilted to the right; i think due to the shape of trees.Paolobon140 (talk) 08:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:07, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 20:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Alpine House, Kew Gardens, 2018 edit.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 18:46:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#United Kingdom
  •   Info created by Daniel Case - uploaded by Daniel Case - nominated by Daniel Case -- Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment This is actually the back half of an unintentional slow delist and replace. After my 2015 version was recently demoted due to the discovery that its margin of promotion had been due to one now-banned user !voting twice with one of his sock accounts, I looked at it and decided against renominating it as it was since a) I'm not totally sure as it was that I would have voted for it if someone else had nominated it and b) I have learned more about editing my images since then. I also realized that some of the oppose !votes in the original had had some points.

    So, instead, I dragged out the original raw file and started from scratch. The result is an image that I would definitely support if someone else nominated it ... less brightness on the building and the clouds and thus easier on the eyes, its perspective slightly corrected, and not cropped in as much at the left so we can see a bit more of its locational context. (I would also like to thank Cart for one last tweak she suggested).

    I see this as not just a worthy candidate but a testament to how regular participation in this forum can help us grow and improve at our art. Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

  •   Support -- Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Yep. The Star Trek building is definitely better than before, so here is my vote. --Cart (talk) 18:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 19:03, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 19:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:41, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The lower part of the picture is quite messy. The guy on the left and the cut-off signs on the right do not belong in on the image, the lamppost on the left is not vertical. That' s no FP for me.--Ermell (talk) 21:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Ah, to live in a world where all lampposts really are vertical. I never assume that a lamppost is perfectly vertical IRL. --Cart (talk) 22:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the info. Of course I don't think that all the lampposts are vertical, but you can see here that the image is distorted, which is nothing unusual with the focal length used. But one could try to change that. Just because the building has no horizontals or verticals nobody is bothered by it.--Ermell (talk) 10:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ermell: I have cropped the image at bottom and left to eliminate those two things. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • That looks much better, but the guy with the camera doesn't make any sense at all.--Ermell (talk) 07:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support But the guy is annoying! Charles (talk) 23:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support, and I agree that this is a better composition than the 2015 version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Despite some unsharpness in the corners --Llez (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 20:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Helgolandpanorama vom Pinneberg 2018.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 18:37:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Bologoe asv2018-08 img04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 14:02:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
  •   Info An L-class steam locomotive in operation at Bologoye-2 railway station, Tver Oblast, Russia ------ all by A.Savin --A.Savin 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --A.Savin 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice old Soviet lady! The little platform in front is a bit disturbing as it partially hides the wheels. --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 16:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Definitely a QI if that were sought, but for me it has too many distracting elements—not just the platform, but the buildings, trees and tracks, for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Rich in detail. --Milseburg (talk) 18:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, I'm with Daniel here. The light is also rather glary, making it unpleasant to look at. --Cart (talk) 19:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose platform. Charles (talk) 09:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:M101 hires STScI-PRC2006-10a.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 07:18:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:M81.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 07:15:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Young girl smiling with teeth in sunshine.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:32:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support Evocative.--Peulle (talk) 11:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 19:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 19:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support. Good portrait, almost too detailed at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 18:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Man in paddy fields plowing with a water buffalo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:31:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:The Bubble Nebula - NGC 7635 - Heic1608a.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2018 at 02:11:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Gallina de Guinea (Numida meleagris), parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-25, DD 48.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2018 at 19:47:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

+1 Daniel Case (talk)   Support now. 23:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
+1 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Charles, Daniel, Martin:   Done --Poco2 18:50, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Ceriántido, Aquarium de Ciudad del Cabo, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-19, DD 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2018 at 17:42:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Affresco di Gioacchino Martorana Palazzo Butera Palermo quadrato.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 16:17:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:The Pashupatinath Temple 27.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 08:50:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Cumbre dorsal - Teide.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 08:30:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 08:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 08:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Lovely layers and a cloud plume in the right place. --Cart (talk) 10:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support nice shot. Charles (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Seven Pandas (talk) 21:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Laitche (talk) 18:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It had the potentials for a good photo but in my opinion there is no subject: the picture is correctly divided in 4 areas: sky, the background mountain, the right part with clouds and a foreground with anther mountain. It is a kind of composition that might give great resutls if only one of the 4 areas contained somethng notable, but as you can see none of the 4 areas of the pic contain anything interesting to watch and contemplate. Actually one subject is missing, and the dull sky doesnt help with those few small clouds. It looks like an empty scene where no subject comes out to catch the eye of the observer.Paolobon140 (talk) 20:02, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:29, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Fantastic (ship, 1996) - Sète - October 2018.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 07:16:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Frozen drop.webmEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 18:33:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support Thanks, Daniel and Cart -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very cool  . Daniel Case (talk) 06:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I like it, but surely, this is shot live and not animated, so do change the category. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:55, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 10:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Ooops, strike 'support' per El Grafo, I watched the video on mute and didn't realize there was music. It is totally redundant for this. --Cart (talk) 11:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2 (Chopin). Kruusamägi (talk) 15:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Ok, but is it free ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose as long as proper credit is not given for the music, keeping in mind that there may be separate copyrights for composition, performance, recording etc.. Also, the music is cut off abruptly at the end. Personally, I would just get rid of the audio track completely. --El Grafo (talk) 08:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
I added the information about music to the file description. Kruusamägi (talk) 16:21, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes that is good, it says which piece it is, but not who is playing or from what recording it is. How do we know the recording is free or is it the author of the video who is playing too? --Cart (talk) 19:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Maxim didn't remember who's piece it was, but he had checked that it was definitely in PD. I told him to upload a new version without music. Kruusamägi (talk) 16:46, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  Done No more music. Kruusamägi (talk) 17:57, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per El Grafo. There is lots of free licenced music available (cc-by-sa, artlibre...) in the WWW. Also the tripod appears to be not rock solid. --Smial (talk) 11:05, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per objections about the music. As a musician and composer, I should care about the use of recordings without permission. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Macro portrait of a housefly Musca domestica.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 18:29:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera
  •   Info created & uploaded by Irina Petrova - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 18:29, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 18:29, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Very impressive, but the top crop is really tight. --C messier (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose really doesn't work as a composition and close up the quality is not great. Charles (talk) 19:51, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support very good caotic composition. Habitator terrae 🌍 23:36, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles; we have better FPs of insect heads in closeup. Daniel Case (talk) 06:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The crop on top is too tight -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:31, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 15:14, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Works for me! --PierreSelim (talk) 17:59, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose High quality image on the technical side, but the crop just doesn't work. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:45, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:1858 Gustave Le Gray la batterie Royale à Brest.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 16:14:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • C’est l’une des photos de la série que Gustave Le Gray a fait dans le cadre de la visite de Napoléon III à Brest lors d’une tournée des ports français. Cette tournée a été marquante et a fait l’objet de nombreuse peintures et gravures [[2]]. À cette époque Le gray est photographe officiel du Second Empire (cf biographie). Il a du coup accès a ce site militaire, cette batterie Royale dont c’est la seule représentation (vue sous cet angle) que je connaisse. On y retrouve son style très descriptif, hérité de la mission héliographique et on peut donc observer un état des lieux de "l'art militaire" (architecture et artillerie). Le gray n’est pas seulement un pionnier de la photographie (pensée comme un art à part-entière) il est aussi un des premiers à mettre son travail au service du recensement des monuments historiques … un encyclopédiste à sa manière.
  • Please add that explanation to the description on the file's page. Also, again, please remember to sign everything you write here. --Cart (talk) 10:24, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I added information in the description --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:39, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you. --Cart (talk) 11:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Good, interesting, historically important. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:10, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Βασιλική Αγίου Τίτου, Γόρτυνα 1841.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 15:14:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  •   Info created by C messier - uploaded by C messier - nominated by C messier -- C messier (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The ruins Saint Titus basilica, built in 7th-8th century AC, when Gortyna was the capital of Crete, before it was destroyed by Arabs in 823. en:Saint Titus was an early Christian missionary and church leader, a companion and disciple of Paul the Apostle, who according to tradition was fist bishop of Crete.   Support -- C messier (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Deservedly a QI, but rather a busy composition and doesn't stand out from our other pictures of ruins like these. Also, the trees in the right upper corner are unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 03:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:38, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Castle of Selles-sur-Cher 16.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 14:23:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#France
  •   Info All by --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:23, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Abstain as author --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:23, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The right crop is too tight and the lighting IMO isn't the most appealing. BTW, the left side is leaning out and there are some spots in the sky. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:43, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Basotxerri, it looks like a pretty standard shot from someone's Instagram feed. A QI maybe ... Daniel Case (talk) 23:04, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basotxerri's remark about the lighting, etc. Definitely a QI, though, and also depending on what other photos are in the category, could be a fine VI, because it's good documentation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:38, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Wie met de heele wereld wil verkeeren, moet eerst Esperanto leeren!.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 23:06:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:2014.07.17.-16-Zadlitzgraben Pressel--Schwarze Heidelibelle-Weibchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 17:39:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Ganzenveer bedekt met dauw. (d.j.b.) 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 16:55:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds A feather of a goose.
  •   Info The geese are in the moult. Quill pen covered with dew. (Nature created artwork on the grass.) Location, The Famberhorst. All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:55, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:55, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Whitebalance is just little, little too blue for me (could be fixed), but at any larger size the feather is stunningly beautiful. --Cart (talk) 22:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I like the idea but the background is a little noisy ... could that be fixed? Daniel Case (talk) 00:18, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
    •   Done. Correction white balance and noise reduction. Thank you for your comments.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:18, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 08:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:11, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Unusual... and great! --Yann (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Field with mixed intercropping of oat and rye.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 13:51:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Sweden
  •   Info In 2018, farmers around here tested different versions of mixed intercropping. Unfortunately most of it was lost during the drought later in the summer. -- Cart (talk) 13:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 13:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like the way the rye(?) on the right (rye-t?) makes a nice golden summery haze (Was there a slight breeze at the time?). Daniel Case (talk) 00:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • On the right side is the mixed oat and rye field. There was very little wind that evening but we sometimes get hazy evenings anyway due to the proximity to the sea. That evening, the hazy light was almost magical as you might see in this photo, not sure the ambience I felt then comes across in these photos taken from the same spot. (The photo with the golden dry grass is fonder for me, but I don't see it as having a chance here since I put the focus on the grass instead of the rest of the scene since the landscape was hazy anyway. Such artistic choices are usually not well received. ;) ) --Cart (talk) 00:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support To my eyes this image represents the perfect landscape photography. BRAVO! -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • What makes it so good? I ask not to challenge but in hopes of learning something. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:35, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment First of all it is a matter of personal taste. I love photos with distinct presentation of foreground-middleground-background and the road just leads the eye from near to far. The bended road devides the image into two halves and gives the picture certain dynamics. The low standing sun models the objects by the shadows and gives nice contrasts. The decent colors of green on the left side and the yellow-green on the right half give joy to my eye. As I mentioned above, it gives me good vibes; but that is a my personal point of view. DE GUSTIBUS NON DISPUTANDUM. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Btw, Cart is a an artist with her camera, just to repeat her own words: "Such artistic choices are usually not well received." I do receive them very well. Cart, you visualize the spirit (peaceful Scandinavia) of the landscape. Thanks for contributing delicate photos to QIC like this. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:54, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 06:43, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 08:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Dull, uninteresting and without a subject; horizon is too much up in the composition and gives the feeling to be tilted. rule of thirds is not respected. Sky is not interesting and the green fields are not enough interesting to be shown. Overall this picture has no WOW at all.Paolobon140 (talk) 19:35, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It is interesting when someone who speaks so strongly about artistic freedom when it comes to vignetting, wants to impose the 'rule of third' as a law and take away artistic freedom in regard to proportions. --Cart (talk) 19:55, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • But rule of thirds is automatically recognised by a human eye like "pleasant". It is a matter of how our brains is used to look at reality. Yes, you can avoid using the rule of thirds but must find something extremely interesting to brek the rules. Actually rule of thirds is one of the few and basic rules which is tought in any photographic lessons, even the basic ones. Try to imagine your picture with more sky and less crops; try to imagine moving yourself a bit on the left and shoot from a different angle and you might see a much better result, Cyan dull skies are never photogenic (usually a wrong set camera, with too much cyan); trees on the horizon always make the horizon look tilted; a road making a curve always needs a subject in it, even someone walking, an animal, a bicycle, whatever. This picture is an empty frame; some ignetting would have added some little more interest.Paolobon140 (talk) 20:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh! Thank you for you many wise advice and comments, I will certainly remember what you said the next time I take a photo. --Cart (talk) 20:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Just to see if I understood you correctly, is this photo better: File:Field with mixed intercropping of oat and rye 2 - edited.jpg? I tried to follow your advice; step to the left, road and sky at thirds, more dramatic sky, vignetting. --Cart (talk) 23:35, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I love it: it is a very balanced composition, with brillant tones and the curve of the road ends in the bottom right corner of the photograph, escaping from the composition. Pity for those white buildings in the background. Vignetting adds much giving depth to the view, rule of thirds adds dynamicity to a very static composition. I wonder if you could wait for sometone to pass on the road and shoor when he was in some interesting position on the right bottom part of the photograph. It would add more dynamicity. Those clouds on the top left part are perfectly placed (who knows if the were on the right part to balance the trees?) I would suggest to burn parts of the clouds to make them a bit whiter. Thank you for the interesting conevrstaion.Paolobon140 (talk) 08:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It is always amusing reading certain writers. I have even read an american historician who wrote a book where he swears that the ancient egiptian pyramids were built by extraterrestrials, but it remains his own point ov view. Caravaggio used the rules of thirds constantly, for example here. No, I will not consider that writer. The rules has been used for centuries by painters and has been adopted by photographers. You can give a look at the figures here: you will find nice ways to use the rule of thirds also in portraits.Paolobon140 (talk) 11:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • My father, who was a well-known painter in his day, taught me a lot about how to read space, perceive a linear arabesque and lots of other aspects of visual arts. He never once mentioned a "rule of thirds" to me. And in the 21st century, after we've gone through over a century of avant-garde art and come out the other side, to insist robotically on a "rule" is IMO inane and contemptible. Just look at the photo and judge it by how it strikes you! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Considering that the "Rule of Thirds" was invented by an Englishman several centuries after Caravaggio, the Italian painter was not even aware of this "rule" and certainly couldn't have consciously applied it. Not one notable painter or photographer has ever claimed to have composed their work according to this so-called "rule". Paolobon140, the image you linked is notable for having no key features on any of the "rule of thirds" lines or intersections, nor on the Golden Ratio either. It does have the face on a "rule of fourths" intersection, but that's a "rule" I just made up. -- Colin (talk) 21:47, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The only significant composition element in old-school painting that has the number "3" in it is the triangular composition. Well, after that, the next number up was "4" for cubism. --Cart (talk) 22:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Left side leaning out, lack of detail in many areas --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, it is a fjord land where most parts of the land are leaning, not a flat land. The left side is sloping down towards a small stream, not much I can do about it. --Cart (talk) 10:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question What's the black stripe above the horizon on the very left side? --Milseburg (talk) 13:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It's a telecom mast, probably the one at (58.410864|11.518983). I honestly hadn't noticed it and I have no idea why it seems a bit crooked. Thanks for pointing it out, I'll fix it later tonight at home. --Cart (talk) 14:55, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Fixed Mast is now ok plus a small perspective correction. I must have accidentally nudged the mast when I was de-bugging the photo. There were a lot of creatures of all sizes out flying that warm evening. --Cart (talk) 18:50, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose There's nothing special. Sorry. --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Chiesa della Martorana Palero mosaico Cristo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2018 at 14:07:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Italy
  •   Info all by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Why does this have to be photographed off-centre? Charles (talk) 19:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support The bar is very high for church ceilings and the light could have been better, but the sharpness is very good.--Peulle (talk) 07:39, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm sorry, I still don't think this is up to FP standards. It may not be your fault that the best viewpoint is inaccessible to the public, but as noted the bar for church ceiling photos is very high and this, to me, does not clear it. Daniel Case (talk) 15:15, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
    •   Comment If the best viewpoint is ineacessible better not take a picture. Or choose a different viewpoint. If there is no good viewpoint, then just choose a different subject.Paolobon140 (talk) 18:36, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
      • Well then never take a picture of a shark’s teeth since the best viewpoint is from inside his mouth--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Merfeld, Dülmener Pferde im Merfelder Bruch -- 2018 -- 1541.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2018 at 05:57:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Equidae_(Equids)
  •   Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 05:57, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 05:57, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Special. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:16, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment At thumb this looks like a dream-horse poster for any young girl's room, but at any larger size the pus in the eyes is very off-putting. Any chance of getting rid of that, or is that too much manipulation for some voters? --Cart (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
For me it is too much and not natural. The horse is a wild horse without any care by humans. So it would be wrong to manipulate the image in the way you proposed. Sorry. --XRay talk 10:45, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Unsharp, and I find the stump a bit distracting. Per Cart, the pus is also a deal-breaker when viewed at full size. Daniel Case (talk) 21:15, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Ordinary picture, not striking enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Lifeline (Schiff).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 18:52:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Overgrown dead tree stumps 15.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 16:16:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural # The Netherlands.
  •   Info Autumn in the Wijnjeterper Schar. Overgrown dead tree stumps. You can almost smell autumn and decay. All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:16, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:16, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Great autumn mood, but the leaves in the background (especially in the upper right) were not handled well. Daniel Case (talk) 06:46, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- -donald- (talk) 12:54, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 08:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:39, 12 November 2018 (UTC)