Commons:Featured picture candidates

This project page in other languages:

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

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal thingsEdit

NominatingEdit

Guidelines for nominatorsEdit

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing - Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. Note that a 1600 × 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. A 1920 × 1080 image, commonly known as Full HD, has 2.07 Mpx, just more than the 2 million level.
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful colour adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.


Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolours, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution. For instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are none the less wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file hosting page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Digital cameras (or images) have a narrower latitude than film. Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of Thirds" is a good guideline for composition and is an inheritance from the painting school. The idea is to divide the image with two imaginary horizontal and two vertical lines, thus dividing the image into thirds horizontally and vertically. Centering the subject is often less interesting than placing the subject in one of the "interest points", the 4 intersection between these horizontal and vertical lines intersect. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. The upper or lower horizontal line is often a good choice. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, colour, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Colour is important. Over saturated colours are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or colour AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of colour brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio

Set nominations

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set.

  • All images should be processed and presented in a similar manner to ensure consistency amongst the set.
  • All images should be linked to all others in the "Other Versions" section of the image summary.
  • If the set of subjects has a limited number of elements, then there should be a complete set of images. This may result in images in this kind of set with no "wow" factor, and perhaps little value on their own. Their value is closely bound to the value of having a complete set of these subjects. The decision to feature should be based on this overall value.
  • If the set of subjects is unlimited, the images should be chosen judiciously. Each image should be sufficiently different to the others to add a great deal of value to the overall set. The majority of images should be able to qualify for FP on their own.
  • All images should be of high technical quality.

Adding a new nominationEdit

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2


Set nominations ONLY

All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".


Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify him/her using {{subst:FPC-notice}}.

VotingEdit

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use following templates:

  • {{Support}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Oppose}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment ),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram voting question.svg Question),
  • {{Request}} (Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidatesEdit

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as an FP.
{{Delistandreplace}} Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policyEdit

General rulesEdit

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{withdraw}} ~~~~
  7. 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.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rulesEdit

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least 7 supporting votes
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, he/she should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between the bot has counted the votes and before they are finally closed by the bot, this manual review can be done by any user that are familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be politeEdit

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See alsoEdit


Table of contentsEdit

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:St Etheldreda's Church 1, London, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 22:33:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:St Etheldreda's Church 1, London, UK - Diliff.jpg

File:St Stephen Walbrook Church Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 22:29:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:St Stephen Walbrook Church Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpg

File:TF Wildpark Johannismuehle 03-14 img11.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:45:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Harris Hawk (Parabuteo unicinctus) in Wildpark Johannismühle, Brandenburg, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by A.Savin
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 07:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, but maybe a portrait crop would be even better. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much in shadow and want a more detailed image from a captive bird at FP. -- Colin (talk) 13:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Notable chromatic noise under the wings and on the breast. Not sharp enough, sorry. No offense Colin, but I don't see why it should be more detailed because captive: anyway, the bird is as mobile as in the nature, no ? It is not a stuffed specimen...--Jebulon (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Not less sharp than some of building photographs getting promoted here (and also supported by you sometimes); yes, quite mobile birdy which does not stand still for more than some seconds; and - yes, some noise but certainly not chromatic (=colour) one. --A.Savin 19:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Don't be angry ! I know what "chromatic" means, I learnt ancient greek when I was young, and the word is the same in French. So, there is chromatic noise, as I said. And I find the bird, especialy the face, not sharp enough, sorry. And yes, I've probably made mistakes in my votes. Didn't you ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    I don't buy the "we have promoted images that are worse than this" argument you've raised here and in another photo. That some weak images get through isn't an reason to promote another weak image. If that argument held, we'd be on a downward spiral towards mediocrity. Perhaps we are :-(. I'd be very surprised if any 10MP unsharp building image got promoted these days. Comparing building and animal photography is pretty silly anyway. Jebulon, a captive bird can be trained to land and stay quite close to people. So it it would be possible to get as close as one desired and the keeper/circumstances allow. With a wild bird, one would be happy to even get the bird to fill the frame of a huge zoom lens. We have lots of highly-detailed head-portraits of captive birds of prey, for example. -- Colin (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition, nice moment, nice pose. Well done --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMHO not sharp enough for a bird FP. The level of detail is relatively poor - even at the sharper areas. Also f/5 at 130mm could be a problem - the claws a very unsharp. Light is not really good, the background is bumpy. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Trompe l oeil Emperor's Courtyard Residenz Munich.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 15:59:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trompe l'Oeil in Residenz, Munich.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This facade is flat, round windows are fakes, it is just a trompe l'oeil painting, as a restoration work. Emperor's Courtyard of the Residenz, Munich, Bavaria, Germany.-- Jebulon (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. And the man in the archway is perfectly posed. Or is he fake too? :-) -- Colin (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Oh, what a good idea ! I'll think of it next time ! --Jebulon (talk) 18:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition with harmony feels :) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 07:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 07:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking shot. --Baresi F (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great! I should have had this idea myself and already a long time ago. Yet I didn't. Good work, Jebulon! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks Martin Falbisoner. That's because I was a tourist, with a "new eye". I'm fan of pictures of Paris by non Parisians: they see some things I've never seen before ! Anyway: Es lebe München !--Jebulon (talk) 15:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not the quality I'd wish for a building photo. Missing sharpness; artefacts. Not very much wow for me, so I'd have abstained if it at least was a real QI. --A.Savin 21:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment See discussion regarding the picture just above in order to understand what this vote means in real ...--Jebulon (talk) 21:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Your assumption is wrong. This picture is really unsharp, if examined at 100 percent. If it wasn't unsharp, I'd have not voted here at all; because this picture is not that interesting to me to take time to review (matter of taste; therefore it would be unfair to oppose just because of this). Believe me or not, but I find "revenge votes" sort of kindergarten behaviour and I don't practice them. Maybe you do; but nonetheless please do not judge others by your own standards. --A.Savin 21:58, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
        • "believe me or not" ? I don't believe you, of course.--Jebulon (talk) 22:30, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
          • Which also means that these are indeed your own standards. Well, OK, thanks for the info, I'll acknowledge. --A.Savin 05:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I added a comment about that in FP talk --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:03, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Please Wilfredo, don't involve yourself in this farce. A.Savin wrote: "I'd have abstained if it at least was a real QI". Right ? Now, have a big laugh when looking at the candidacy of this picture in QIC. Funny, isn't it ? --Jebulon (talk) 23:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak) I also like the innovative composition as said by other reviews. But imho the problem of the photo is the bad light. It looks for me as if you extremely pushed the shadow parts of the building which lead to some unfavorable noise at the facade. Probably you just excluded the sky because it had been burnt out due to back light. For a photo with a strong accentuation on the structure of the facade it is not crisp enough. --Tuxyso (talk) 04:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • "excluded the sky because it had been burnt out due to back light": well possible; see this small burnt area behind the arch. --A.Savin 05:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Blassenstein Erlauftal mit Nebel 02 Panorama.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:19:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fog over Erlauf river, seen from Blassenstein mountain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Also see the original nomination. Created by User:Uoaei1 - uploaded by User:Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 08:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better. Yann (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Caecilius Mauß (talk) 09:55, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 11:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I still think cropping along the top of the dark clouds makes a much more dramatic picture -- the shaft of light from the left then forces the eye into the clouds in the middle of the picture and the dark clouds then frame the picture rather than having a distracting bright part in the top left or blue part in the top right. If you don't want as extreme as 3:1 then keeping the bottom but cropping the top is still better imo. -- Colin (talk) 13:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --King of ♠ 18:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 04:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Alternative CropEdit

Fog over Erlauf river, seen from Blassenstein mountain

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uoaei1 - uploaded by Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is a very nice scene but the crop isn't good. Too much sky (and vapour trail) and the nearby rocks are distracting. A 6000x2000 crop as indicated would imo make a great panorama. So I suggest that as an alternative. -- Colin (talk) 18:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for your valuable proposal! I'd rather take a 2:1 crop instead of 3:1, which well-preserves the rule of thirds and some of the details in the foreground (trees disappearing in the fog). What is your opinion about this? --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Summer fields near Rosehearty, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - pomprint.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 06:25:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Summer fields near Rosehearty, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - pomprint.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Steve Allen - uploaded by TeleComNasSprVen - nominated by TeleComNasSprVen -- TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In thumbnail view, oversatured, white balance... --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:32, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree the green is a bit vivid but don't see any white balance issue. I've suggested a 2.4:1 crop that I think is much stronger. -- Colin (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Sure, but would it be more appropriate to upload a crop as a separate file derivative work? I wouldn't want to touch the original, to keep the loss minimal and other concerns, but if you decide to make a cropped version we can link it here and vote on that. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Of course yes, you could upload in another version in this nomination --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Beat Zberg TdF2006.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 05:56:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beat Zberg during the prologue of the Tour de France 2006

File:Saturn diagram.svgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 02:24:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Diagram of the planet Saturn
Please don't forget my spanish version. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Dean Franklin - 06.04.03 Mount Rushmore Monument (by-sa)-3 new.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 00:47:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:16 wood samples.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 20:23:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

16 types of wood

File:Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 19:39:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle") of Mülheim an der Ruhr at blue hour
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, too dark. Yann (talk) 07:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    • IMHO it is not that bad, even dark structures are still visible. Yann, have you looked on the correct version? Yesterday I've uploaded a brighter version, probably you've seen an old version in the cache. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's too dark. Trust us on this one. Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Daniel it is not the question if I trust you and Yann or not. If it is the perception of you then I take it seriously. Nonetheless a few questions: What is the best brightness for such a shot? As you can see it is not a classical cityscape - you have only lights which brighten the main building and few lights at the left part of the bridge - the dark parts are trees. In short: Longer exposure with HDR or earlier shot? I've exposed in a way that the bright parts of the building are barely not burnt. Additionaly the sun sets behind the right part of the building thus you have at the beginning of the blue hour a strong brightness gradient on the sky. Another possibility had been to take the shot early in the morning before sunrise (sun behind me), but I do not know if the nice lighting of the building is there at that time. What would you suggest? --Tuxyso (talk) 07:41, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • In my opinion, the darkness is correct. It is night, and this emphasizes the situation. A night shot, in which can be seen more than is lit, I think is unrealistic. This composition with the lights reflected in the water and the rest of the twilight hour I find a good balance.--XRay talk 08:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
There's no EV in this one because we can't really see the shape of the building behind the lights. Therefore the darkness is not correct. Daniel Case (talk) 03:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Yann, Daniel, XRay and others: I am always surprised about the dynamic range of my D7000. I've created an alternative version with shadow and brightness correction. IMHO noise stays at an acceptable level:
    Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014 Alternative.jpg. Do you think that version is better and could have a chance here? --Tuxyso (talk) 08:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

AlternativeEdit

Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle") of Mülheim an der Ruhr at blue hour

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Alternative nomination, with improved shadow details. After certain consideration I also think that this one is better than the previous nom. I look forward to your comments. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 18:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So ... much ... better! I love the eight-point flares around the street lamps and the reflections in the river! Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Hôtel des Invalides, North View, Paris 7e 140402 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 10:04:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by DXR - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 10:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice but needs a 0.3° rotation to make the horizontals level. -- Colin (talk) 11:51, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 19:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks again, Tomer. I personally like this image, but I was slightly worried about the fences. Colin, I have followed your suggestion and removed the tilt. --DXR (talk) 18:56, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 04:45, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:10 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 07:49, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Redningsbåden køres gennem klitterne (high resolution).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 10:03:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Lifeboat is Taken through the Dunes by Michael Ancher

File:The flower of a Trichosanthes cucumerina in hand.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 07:44:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The flower of a Trichosanthes cucumerina in hand

File:An ocean of motion about Spanish commotions or the windy explosion of pot-hous oration LCCN2003681692.tiffEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 15:51:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cartoon of British views on the war against Spain, Pyne 1790-1810.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William Pyne, scanned by the Library of Congress - uploaded by
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator; see this jpeg version if you prefer to use the Commons ZoomViewer. This is a difficult document to digitize due to size (45 inches or 1.14 metres wide) and this is part of the reason for nominating it as an exemplar of the excellent work of the archivists at the Library of Congress in releasing the British Cartoon Prints Collection. Pyne was notable for establishing the Royal Watercolour Society. This cartoon is historically significant as it was made at the time of the Anglo-Spanish War (1796–1808) showing stereotypes of the Spanish as expressed by different classes of the British population. It is a rare example of William Pyne's humorous cartoons (the only political cartoon of his that I can find on Commons), the majority of his published work being palace illustrations and British costumes. The digitization shows detail of costumes and characters, sufficient for each to be taken as a separate detailed illustration. The full size image shows natural foxing due to age, and creases from being folded up, which it was designed to do, but these do not detract from the impact or quality of the etchings. The main humour of the text is to poke fun at the Spanish, with the cobbler calling them "fish-eating rascals" and the journalists for the Spanish Gazette having nothing to report (on the left) while the British cryers (on the right) are exhausted from having ten years worth of incidents to report in one day. I would hope that a consequence of bringing attention to this cartoon would be to help improve Wikipedia articles about Pyne, at the moment the article about his life exists only in English and is a stub. -- (talk) 15:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Remember add a short description in image hint look up .tiff|600x300px|SHORT DESCRIPTION]] --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Missed that, added one now. -- (talk) 16:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Capilla de Lourdes.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 15:01:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Capilla de Lourdes
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice scene but overprocessed and soft at 6MP. Why are the colours so different in File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg which appears to be the same photo but without the bird removed. The trees in the nomination photo have a white outline against the sky, compared to the other photo. The sloping white faces of the church are near white in the second photo but considerably darker in this nomination, suggesting the highlights are lowered too much -- a white surface facing the sun would be expected to be white. This makes the tonal range compressed. The scene could be fantastic at a slightly better time of year when the trees are less bare. -- Colin (talk) 12:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The other version is a pratice test with CaptureNX2 without real colors and with a fake bird. You can download the NEF file and try by yourself develope the jpg, if you want (you can find the link in file description) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm not particularly impressed that this is the second fake you've uploaded to Commons. At least File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg now admits this, but wouldn't it be better to request its deletion. -- Colin (talk) 20:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
This nomination is not a fake. Why delete File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg? If you consider that in commons should not be altered images, please also nominates all pictures in Photomontages of animals and Photomontages, You are free to nominate it to deletion. ;). By the way, it's a good idea to focus on this nomination. A hug --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Crown Queens Bavaria Schatzkammer Residenz Munich.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 14:33:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crown of the Queens of Bavaria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Biennais, Nitot and Leblond - Photographied, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support New in "Commons", a masterpiece of the french 19th-century jewelry, made in Paris for Queens of Bavaria in 1806-1807 (altered in 1867), when the bavarian electorate was erected as a kingdom, allied of Napoleon. In use until 1918. Gold, silver, pearls, diamonds and other gems. On display (behind a glass...) at the "Schatzkammer", in the Residenz of Munich, Bavaria, Germany.-- Jebulon (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 16:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. IMO it would better with the full base (at the bottom).--XRay talk 16:40, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Frankly, such a reason for oppose to this kind of image leaves me speechless...--Jebulon (talk) 19:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Ups. Sorry. It's a good picture, but IMO it looks incomplete with a significant part of the base.--XRay talk 17:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you elaborate a bit on the shooting conditions? I obviously have no business with this sort of photography and will therefore not make a vote, but the exif leaves me a bit wondering. Did you hand-hold it for 0.2s or could you push it against something stable? It looks a bit soft (in the sense of denoised) to me for a ISO 400 image. --DXR (talk) 20:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Speechless again... Lack of base of the cushion, and questions about Exif Data, that's only what suggests this picture ? I took this image hand hold (or maybe I used the glass as stable surface, I don't remember). I post processed with Lightroom5, and after that with GIMP. I used luminance and color denoising with Lightroom5, adjusted sharpness a very little, and the white balance too. After that, with GIMP, I used the selective blur tool in order to correct the noise of some pearls, one after the other. I removed some disturbing elements in background by cloning out, and corrected the perspective a very little bit. This image was taken without tripod nor flash in a museum full of tourists, behind a glass, it is as difficult as it is interesting, a real challenge.--Jebulon (talk) 21:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I'm not looking to get into an argument here, but I'm not sure you should be "speechless" that an image of a crown, even if it's admittedly a beautiful one, will not blow everyone of his feet if nominated as a commons FP. As I said, I will refrain from voting, but I think my question regarding the quality was legitimate and your comments help assess the quality of your work here in a postive way. --DXR (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The fact that it was challenging to capture this picture does not add any value to the photo. Photographers often mistakenly think it does but I'm afraid it doesn't. Some get rewarded because they were lucky, some work hard and and the outcome is slightly above the average. That's life.. --85.253.101.104 21:24, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    Nonsense imo. Of course it makes a difference, but IP commenters have usually presented themselves to be fairly stubborn in their opinions, so what's the point of debating here... --DXR (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • As for me, I just asked for assessments, nothing else. I gave explanations because I was asked for. I don't think long discussions make a photo better (I tend to think the contrary). Shall I suppress Exif Data next time ? That's the question... Something like "Love it, or leave it"--Jebulon (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For once I'm not bothered by the bottom crop ... because the base blends so well into the background that you might not notice unless it's pointed out. And, really, the crown captures so much attention you won't mind. Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:57, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support given the circumstances quality is very decent. High EV! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The cropped base allows the attention to concentrate on the crown. Enough of the base is there to let the imagination (our brain) 'see' the missing part. Very good technical quality and high EV. --Cayambe (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Mallard duck and her 12 chicks.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2014 at 20:42:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mallard duck and 12 chicks

File:Terrace of the Lions 05.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2014 at 17:06:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Terrace of the Lions in Delos, Greece
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bgag - uploaded by Bgag - nominated by Bgag -- Bgag (talk) 17:06, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bgag (talk) 17:06, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very well known place, but I find this perspective interesting, and I like this composition very much. Maybe a crop below would help ? FP anyway.--Jebulon (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Southern Warthog.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2014 at 17:04:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southern Warthog (Phacochoerus africanus sundevallii)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bgag - uploaded by Bgag - nominated by Bgag -- Bgag (talk) 17:04, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bgag (talk) 17:04, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interesting animal, but the contrast with the background is low. Can this be corrected? Yann (talk) 16:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Pyrrhula pyrrhula female 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2014 at 14:25:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eurasian Bullfinch, Pyrrhula pyrrhula, female
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Really very nice, well done. I remember being camouflaged for hours at the mercy of bloodsucking mosquitoes in the jungle of Margarita Island for a poor decision. Sometimes it is simply a matter of luck --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Wilfredo. It would be worth putting up with a lot to get a lucky shot like that :) --Baresi F (talk) 18:55, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
In certain circumstances, it is about making a burst of 100 pictures, and then do the big task of evaluating each photograph. Nice Shoot, you are welcome --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 02:30, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 11:14, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 13:31, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We have so many birds, that the bar is very high... I can only oppose when it has chromatic noise on the "shoulders" (see note)--Jebulon (talk) 16:47, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out Jebulon, as I'd definitely missed it. I've uploaded a new version with the chroma noise reduced - is it any better? comment of Baresi franco who forget sign
Yes, it is better, and I'm proud if my comment made the picture better, but I still see something... Anyway, I'm not a good judge anymore. I've seen a flaw once, and now I only see this part of your picture, sorry...--Jebulon (talk) 16:08, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Human nature. :) We may not see the flaws initially, but when we eventually spot it, we keep focusing on that. I've had this experience many time before. ;) --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Mosquito coil.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2014 at 05:49:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mosquito coil.JPG

File:Vista de Teruel desde la torre de la iglesia del Salvador, España, 2014-01-10, DD 82.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2014 at 04:31:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Teruel at dusk from the tower of the Church of St. Salvador, Aragón, Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of Teruel at dusk from the tower of the Church of St. Salvador, Aragón, Spain. All by me, Poco2 04:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 04:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support of course --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joydeep Talk 08:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 09:00, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 10:41, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you try a tighter crop ? (and maybe work on the perspective, as the window in front is not aligned) Pleclown (talk) 11:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
    I saw your point, I uploaded a new version with an improved perspective Poco2 20:33, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg SupportPleclown (talk) 12:03, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:30, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Kaiserkrone Pflanze.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2014 at 21:08:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fritillaria imperialis in a bedding with Viola and Tulipa
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mariofan13 - uploaded by Mariofan13 - nominated by Mariofan13 -- Mariofan13 (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mariofan13 (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background way too distracting. Subject doesn't stand out from the rest. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 10:41, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I really like the colorfull background. I wonder why the photo is rather soft - is it blurred? 1/100sec at 55mm could be critical for APS-S cameras. Was the photo hand-held or did you use a tripod? --Tuxyso (talk) 07:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It was handheld, because my tripod is under repair since two weeks. I didn't do an "photoshopping", it's the orignial picture. Mariofan13 (talk) 12:26, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Due to the relatively long exposure time (1/125sec or 1/160 had been better at this focal length) the image is not fully sharp (not fully sharp = blurry). --Tuxyso (talk) 12:33, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Tuxyso/AK. -- Colin (talk) 08:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Eisbach Surfer3.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2014 at 21:07:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Munich, Germany: Eisbach surfer
Its not only AF, your composition is amazing too --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:30, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Behind any camera, even the best, there is a photographer...--Jebulon (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Didn't want to miss the party :) Poco2 19:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. and Jebulon: Surely was is Martin who take this great shot with his photographic skills. My point was that this shot is an example where the camera does matter. A perfect interplay of man and machine :) --Tuxyso (talk) 07:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Of course we all agree with this.--Jebulon (talk) 11:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Yes, maybe in the future, be enough, you throw the camera in the air and she will do everything --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

File:997 GT3 RSR of Flying Lizard 24h Le Mans 2012 (8234776578).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2014 at 17:05:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Porsche 997 GT3 RSR of Flying Lizard Motorsports at the 24h Le Mans 2012
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by besopha - uploaded by FAEP - nominated by FAEP -- FAEP (talk) 17:05, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- FAEP (talk) 17:05, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

File:2013 Porsche 911 Carrera 4S (991) (9626546987).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2014 at 17:02:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

2013 Porsche 911 (Type 991) Carrera 4S coupe
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by David Villarreal Fernández - uploaded by AVIA BavARia - nominated by FAEP -- FAEP (talk) 17:02, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- FAEP (talk) 17:02, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 06:39, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bottom-up view is not the best possible shooting angle + distracting foreground as a result of the bottom-up view. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The angle ot the view is ok, the quality is ok, but the foreground is distracting and the licence plate is tilted. -- -donald- (talk) 07:35, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding --EveryPicture (talk) 17:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the angle, which makes the shot special. Also, the colors fit well overall. Great image! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 09:18, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the quality, the angle and the surroundings. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:51, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Cirque de Mourèze, Hérault 37.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2014 at 15:21:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dolomite rock
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A dolomite rock in a funny shape sculptured by the erosion. Mourèze, Hérault, France. Another try with this subject after that and that. All by Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:20, 13 april 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:20, 13 april 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 06:40, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joydeep Talk 08:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This one has the best composition and lighting. --King of ♠ 10:42, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Still NO WOW :( --Kikos (talk) 12:11, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As before. I don't see how sticking a slightly unusual rock on a rule-of-thirds line makes an FP. Nor how taking the same photograph a few steps closer has changed things dramatically since the previous nominations. What's so great about the composition and lighting? Or the subject? The world is full of funny shaped rocks. Some of them are notable. -- Colin (talk) 12:30, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great candidate for QI, but not FP. Nothing special about the shape of the rock and the rock doesn't resemble anything. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:17, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Frankly, I think that the negative comments here are too strong. It is not very fair to shout "NO WOW", and not very polite neither. This image is very good to me, very well composed, with good light and sharpness. The subject is interesting enough and has high geological value. As for me, it deserves the seal, like the tons of birds or landscapes or "blue hour" views we promote so often...--Jebulon (talk) 20:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Well, frankly, I think submitting more-or-less the same unexciting image to FP three times is "not very polite" and just gaming the system. What if everyone did this in the hope that one time the previous opposers might be on holiday or grow tired of opposing? This is a long way from the most impressive example of rock formations in the region (try Google). So are we to expect every funny looking rock in the region to get nominated here? I await Cirque de Mourèze, Hérault 3745.jpg. This is just a QI. The camera did its job. The purpose of FP is to select our finest images, not to pat Christian on the back because this attempt is slightly better than the last one. -- Colin (talk) 08:08, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 06:21, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I had seen photos with less wow factor get rubber-stamped on FPC, probably just due to the name of the photographer. In general: yes to a higher threshold, but then please for everyone. Still, this is a nice landscape and I had supported a similar version some time ago; so it's just consequent to support this one either. --A.Savin 14:49, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Caecilius Mauß (talk) 09:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Front de Seine as seen from Pont Mirabeau 140412 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2014 at 12:00:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by DXR - uploaded by DXR - nominated by Paris 16
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 12:00, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Oops, that's wow indeed. --A.Savin 12:45, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 13:12, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colours look artificial. --PierreSelim (talk) 13:23, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks a lot to Paris 16 for the nomination! I agree that the colors were somewhat off, I adjusted the purple tint and reduced overall saturation slightly. Apart from that, I do not consider the colors artificial (obviously, the scene is a bit brighter than reality to better illustrate the scene, but I think I have the freedom to do that). From previous comments, I assume that Pierre might still disagree, but that's fine for me. --DXR (talk) 14:40, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:07, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:26, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose with Pierre Selim. I'm sorry for the following DR, but too many of these buildings are protected by copyright. There is no Freedom of Panorama in France. --Jebulon (talk) 22:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • no problem with copyright here, no prolems with colours, very nice view, good technical accomplishment, but I am not happy with some strong overexposed parts, especially the area of the Statue of Liberty and surrounding. The strong flashlight at top of the Eiffel Tower and some not very important illuminated advertising I`m willing to excuse. But the mentioned area is eye-catching and should be reprocessesed IMO. --Wladyslaw (talk) 17:42, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Wladyslaw, I agree with you that it is not ideal, but you should keep in mind that bridge is extremely bright while the buildings are only illuminated by ambient light. I have already tried all what can be done with normal raw files and I think the result is borderline but just acceptable, although I understand other opinions here. In principle, HDRs could solve that, but that will probably cause a massive mess with the water, especially when stiched. Perhaps this conflict could be avoided by shooting earlier (I will certainly do this in the future), this was not possible on that day since a cruise ship was turning in the river, pretty much destroying the scene. --DXR (talk) 20:40, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Can you try partial HDR only in this mentioned areas? I know it's much work. I agree with you that HDR will destroy the water, this is here definitivly a highlight. So I thought about partial work. -- -donald- (talk) 07:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately I do not have the exact frame in different exposures, so HDR is not really an option here. The only possiblity would be cloning these areas from a slightly different frame. This would certainly take hours if done very well on my desktop with a fast processor and a good mouse, but unfortunately I cannot access this PC until the end of May since it is at my home in Germany. I have tried it on my slightly old laptop but the results are just not good enough in gimp since everything is just lagging and precise operations are very difficult when dealing with such large files. --DXR (talk) 12:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes of course, I thought about new pictures. -- -donald- (talk) 18:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I will take more photos, but not sure whether they will make their way to commons given the issues with FoP. If they come out well, I'll probably upload them at the Wikipedias that are less restrictive... --DXR (talk) 21:34, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 18:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Copyright concerns alleviated by cityscape, making everything de minimis. Otherwise excellent. Daniel Case (talk) 22:12, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:24, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Naqsh-e Jahan Square by Pascal Coste 1 Ver2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 15:45:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Naqsh-e Jahan Square by Pascal Coste 1 Ver2.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pascal Coste, Monfie - uploaded by Monfie - nominated by Monfie -- Monfie (talk) 15:45, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Monfie (talk) 15:45, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 15:52, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Problems with white balance and irreal sky color and tones, Remember upload color enhanced in another file version without overwrite the original version. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:15, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:43, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 05:48, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 06:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Clockery Fairfeld who, me? 17:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Strongly Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, strongly per Wilfredor.--Jebulon (talk) 22:59, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Alborzagros (talk) 08:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • strong Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very hard to review, the new version have very different colours and the source link dosnt work for me. For a historical work of art, I expect that the reproduction is as faithful as possible. The image is also cropped!--ArildV (talk) 11:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
This is the the original version I got directly from source. I remind you: First of all This image is not cropped. Second, Even if you see images from original source, it is not faithful. This small water paint has been drawn on a piece of paper about 200 years ago. During the time paper color became dark yellow to brown (If you see unretouched black and white images of this book, you can see this effect much better). The paints color has been changed as well during time. Therefore after changing some tones, not 100% sure but I believe it is more likely to the original image at the time it has been drawn. You can see drawings, specially sky, is much more clear than before.Monfie (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Not cropped? The original version have more sky.--ArildV (talk) 16:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose modifications (crop and color changes) alter the original significantly and beyond what I think is reasonable. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 08:32, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

AltEdit

Naqsh-e Jahan Square by Pascal Coste 1 edited.jpg

File:View from Balcón de Europa in Nerja 2014.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 13:31:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from Balcón de Europa in Nerja, view north-east
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 13:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 13:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 13:35, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Certainly. Yann (talk) 14:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Who is the girl? --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Wilfredor, I don't know who she is but from a photographic viewpoint it was very friendly that she was just walking over the beach when I was talking the photo :) --Tuxyso (talk) 06:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 19:03, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 00:11, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:42, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice composition but white houses and crests of waves are overexposed. --King of ♠ 05:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done IMHO overexposure was marginal (technically not obvious in histogram) but I made some careful corrections. King of Hearts, please take another look. Is it better now? --Tuxyso (talk) 06:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Unfortunately, the detail is still not there. Maybe the white is now 253 rather than 255, but when it's uniformly 253, that doesn't help. (A simple trick I use to look for washed-out areas is to tilt my laptop LCD backwards. Everything should go dark except for the brightest areas, which are still bright.) But reassessing the image, it seems the problem is not as big as I thought, so I'll move to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. --King of ♠ 10:39, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Are my eyes fooling me or is there a lot of clarity and contrast added here? I love the scene and composition but it all seems a bit harsh to me. --DXR (talk) 07:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
    • DXR, the new version should have less clarity than the previous one. Probably you've taken a look on the old one. Nonetheless a bit (local) clarity enhancement helps to bring out the structure of the waves and the foggy mountains in the background. I have not added additional contrast (in the new version). --Tuxyso (talk) 08:03, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Yeah, you're right. The new version is nicer, still a bit harsh, but certainly good enough to Symbol support vote.svg Support. --DXR (talk) 08:07, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:37, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joydeep Talk 08:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ximonic (talk) 05:38, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 07:06, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Memorial J Kubitschek Brasilia 2009.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 13:18:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
I am Brazilian. I like Brasilia (or Brasília, in Portuguese) and the works of the city, the federal capital of Brazil. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 21:07, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 13:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- For sure..The Herald 16:30, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Roque Agando, Parque nacional de Garajonay, La Gomera, España, 2012-12-14, DD 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 13:15:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roque Agando (Agando rock) belongs to the Garajonay National Park (UNESCO World Heritage Site) and is not far from San Sebastián de la Gomera, capital of the island of La Gomera, Canary Islands, Spain. This 1251 m high volcanic plug is one of the landmarks of the island and has a prominence of 180 m (220 m from the south side).
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Roque Agando (Agando rock) belongs to the Garajonay National Park (UNESCO World Heritage Site) and is not far from San Sebastián de la Gomera, capital of the island of La Gomera, Canary Islands, Spain. This 1251 m high volcanic plug is one of the landmarks of the island and has a prominence of 180 m (220 m from the south side). All by me, Poco2 13:15, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 13:15, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:41, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hi Poco, What about geolocation and altitude?. And could be nice too see interwikis in description. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 04:22, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ There you go: altitude is already documented in the description here, I also copied it and translated in the file page. I added 16 iws in the file description, along with the geodata. Poco2 05:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose more environment/syntax please: to tide crop. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with the user above. A bit tight and awkward composition. WLMBP (talk) 10:19, 13 April 2014 (UTC) Invalid vote, User has less than 50 edits, sorry --DXR (talk) 10:53, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:04, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very impressive. The extra space at the left really made a difference. --King of ♠ 10:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, but are the gray patches clouds? I think I have commented something similar in prior QIs or so. I looks a bit awkward imo (though not really disturbing). Just to check, are these things also visible in the unedited raw file? --DXR (talk) 20:47, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
    Hi DXR, I assume that that was a cloud but cannot 100% say it with certaincy. I will not be able to look up the RAW file until Sunday, sorry. Poco2 06:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    Never mind, as I said, just a minor thing. --DXR (talk) 09:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 10:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 07:59, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

File:St Matthew's Church - Paisley - Stained Glass Window.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 10:26:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Memorial stained glass window by Robert Anning Bell
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Colin - uploaded by Colin - nominated by Colin -- Colin (talk) 10:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Memorial stained glass window by Robert Anning Bell, located in St Matthew's Church in Paisley. Detailed, high resolution, perpendicular viewpoint and well exposed. Issues in previous nomination have been resolved. -- Colin (talk) 10:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 10:57, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Extremely detailed stained glass, well framed and nicely exposed. Have you considered tone mapping to recover some of the stonework detail though? ;-) Diliff (talk) 12:14, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I did take different exposures of this window in case I needed HDR but in the end one of the exposures was sufficient for the window itself. I was mainly concerned with the glass as the stonework isn't particularly attractive round the window, with lots of white/dark staining. Although I could raise the shadows to include more of it, the result could be distracting and somewhat artificial; I prefer the near-silhouette. You can see an HDR image of the church interior including this window: File:St Matthew's Church - Paisley - Interior - 5.jpg. The exposure of the window area in that shot is generally brighter with a more compressed tonal range. -- Colin (talk) 16:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 12:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 14:23, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as per Diliff. Yann (talk) 14:40, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:16, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done, perfect quality --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:17, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:40, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 03:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice detail and contrast. WLMBP (talk) 10:22, 13 April 2014 (UTC) Invalid vote, User has less than 50 edits, sorry --DXR (talk) 10:57, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:05, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 07:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Animales-aiguamolls l'emporda-2013 (8).JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 08:38:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Lido de Thau, Sète, Hérault 07.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 04:11:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lido de Thau, Sète, Hérault, France.

File:Backlit Margarita Island Sunset in Las Guevaras, Venezuela.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 03:13:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blacklight Margarita Island Sunsat in Las Guevaras, Venezuela
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Stepping back to neutral after a review in QIC. The quality is just not at FP level, the lower part of he picture looks like painted. Poco2 17:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
This version is not in QIC :) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer 15:05, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could be the next Bliss. Daniel Case (talk) 00:17, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Beautiful, but technically just okay, imo. --DXR (talk) 11:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. Dull and not the best of sunsets or sunset pictures I've seen. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:01, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great mood! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:13, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 07:10, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joydeep Talk 08:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Quote: "almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others". A pretty picture, but that's it. Kleuske (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With Kleuske, even if it is not forbidden to support a sunset picture !--Jebulon (talk) 20:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Grey highlight. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 08:32, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

CaptureNX versionEdit

Blacklight Margarita Island Sunsat in Las Guevaras, Venezuela CaptureNX
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Powered by DXR commentary, I developed the image again with CaptureNX2 and not Lightroom --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support better! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:06, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better! ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 19:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support also prefer this one! --DXR (talk) 20:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 16:28, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not retracting my !vote for the above image, but I do like this one too. Daniel Case (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better. --King of ♠ 05:27, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great silhouette but the detail in the lower area is almost nonexistent. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 08:32, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very nice capture but the quality is just not at FP level, the lower part of he picture looks like painted. Poco2 17:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Tamme-Lauri_tamm_suvep%C3%A4eval.jpg

File:Erysimum 'Bowles Mauve' 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2014 at 15:53:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Erysimum 'Bowles Mauve'

✓ Done Something lighter. --Famberhorst (talk) 19:41, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Yes ,but I was talking about the general lighting of the moment when you took the picture. Not fixable, sorry. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Kegon Taki.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2014 at 15:14:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Kegon Waterfall in Japan.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JordyMeow - uploaded by JordyMeow - nominated by JordyMeow -- Jordy Meow (talk) 15:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jordy Meow (talk) 15:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could you add geocoding please? Yann (talk) 16:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I have read about the location template but is there a way I can add this in the summary of the image? I am not sure how to do it. Maybe you could edit it to show me the way? The location is 36.738012, 139.502345. - Jordy Meow (talk) 00:04, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
      • ✓ Done; check for accuracy. Jee 03:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 07:02, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dark area in the background really annoying (you should have got rid of it with higher focal distance or getting closer to the waterfall), both sides are pretty blurry, too significant CA, sharpness overall not convincing. Furthermore, IMHO the view looks more spectacular from a higher POV (like here) Poco2 12:52, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the foreground is to dark, very pity + per Poco. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:02, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great color elsewhere is ruined by the foreground shadow. Daniel Case (talk) 00:17, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- -donald- (talk) 18:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Flumserberg (Schweiz) -- 2011 -- 7.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2014 at 15:08:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cattle at Flumserberg (near Walensee, Switzerland)

File:Lausanne Sport vs FC Sion - Avril 2014 - Vincent Rüfli & Yoric Ravet.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2014 at 12:02:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:USO-CAB - 20131130 - Lucas Amorosino 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Apr 2014 at 11:36:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by, nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 11:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lucas Amorosino is an Argentine rugby player, currently playing for the USO, a club of the french Top 14. This picture was taken during the match opposing USO to CA Brive, which was attended by two accredited photographers, thanks to Wikimedia CH. The ISO rating is quite high, due to the late hour (the sunset was at 16h52 in Oyonnax on this date) and to the necessity to freeze the action (ie. to have a shutter speed of 1/1,250 sec or more), but I think that this doesn't harm much. The player is going to try a coup de pied à suivre (kick for himself) in order to outrun the defensive players on his left. -- Pleclown (talk) 11:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great action shot. Yann (talk) 11:47, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good moment; but the framing failed. And I see many compelling frames there. Jee 12:15, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by "the framing failed". And for the "many compelling frames", those pictures can be proposed for FP later, right ? :) Pleclown (talk) 12:24, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    It needs more lead room as the subjects are running to the right. You can crop the "cut" man on left; but difficult to add more space on right. Other picture by you I mentioned seems better in composition. But face of the man in red shirt is not sharp there. I withdrawn other choices as they seem poor in full resolution. Jee 13:10, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    I see. I will see tonight if I can do something (as the image is cropped). Pleclown (talk) 13:23, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    I would definetly support File:US Oyonnax vs. CA Brive, 30th November 2013 (7).jpg. The current nomination has no wow for me (just a matter of taste I believe). --PierreSelim (talk) 16:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    PierreSelim, but it is rather noisy and unsharp in full size. Any possibility to repair it? Jee 17:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    Jee, I would do something like File:US Oyonnax vs. CA Brive, 30th November 2013 (7)-2.jpg: darken the dark tones, reduce a bit noise and sharpen a bit, however noise will still be there and details are a bit lost. However I believe we are generally too harsh on noise for sports photography, when professional photos are generally full of noise and downsized. --PierreSelim (talk) 17:52, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    Thanks for your re-work. It is an action pumped moment. :) Jee 17:59, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    I've thightened the crop. Pleclown (talk) 20:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 02:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 11:35, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good shot with lots of action. Ball is a little hard to find and highlights on sleeve are a bit blown, but those are trifles. This is one of the best rugby shots we've got ... should be used as a lede image in more articles. Daniel Case (talk) 00:23, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:37, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 07:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

File:IMG 4414 - Flickr - philmofresh.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Apr 2014 at 20:37:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial photo of Kabul River
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by philmofresh (probably a U. S. Army helicopter pilot actually Crew Chief) - uploaded by Slick-o-bot (at my request) - nominated by ain92Ain92 (talk) 20:37, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportAin92 (talk) 20:37, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looks nice, but useless without a description. Yann (talk) 11:49, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    • What kind of description do you want? I'm not sure, but probably this as an aerial photo of Kabul River flood-plain east of Kabul, Afghanistan. Ain92 (talk) 18:20, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I've received a comment from the author of the photo on my TP and started a conversation there. I think anyone may join in. Ain92 (talk) 22:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I added that. If you can get more details, please add them. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:02, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
        • I've added a rename template because I think "IMG 4414" is a nondescriptive title for a featured picture candidate. Can you get any more information from philmofresh? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 19:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Chuck Sketch, a Wounded Warrior with the veteran swim team, swims laps during a practice session 120214-M-YO938-177.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Apr 2014 at 19:05:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Wounded Warrior in swimming practice before the annual competition
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mark Fayloga - uploaded by
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator. This was a technically challenging shot, taken from below into sunlight, apparently with a colour filter to reduce glare overwhelming the composition. The composition chosen emphasises that Sketch is swimming with no legs, both making this an immediate and slightly discomforting feature of the shot, while providing interesting contrasts of seeing the sky and clouds from underneath the disrupted and coloured water surface. In the people category for FPs, I do not believe there have been any disabled sportsmen or women featured yet, so if this does not pass, it may be worth reviewing the Paralympics and Wounded Warrior categories for other candidates. -- (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hard to judge the technical, but it is a very striking and emotive image. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 21:55, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support on EV grounds. And yes; we featured disabled sportsmen earlier. Jee 02:47, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for pointing this out, good to know. I had only looked through the People category. -- (talk) 21:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:10, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pleclown (talk) 21:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Emotive image and good resolution given the tricky conditions, on the other hand the composition, sharpness are not FP to me, sorry Poco2 12:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Poco. Emotional but not to be FP. Sorry, but author can't challenge this shot.--Kikos (talk) 19:09, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Clockery Fairfeld who, me? 17:41, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Poco and Kikos.--Jebulon (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot --EveryPicture (talk) 17:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Poco, sorry --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Vaxholms kastell November 2013.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2014 at 13:20:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Vaxholm Fortress. The fortress was originally constructed by Gustav Vasa in 1544 to defend Stockholm against shipborne attacks from the east, but most of the current structure dates from 1833-1863. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 13:20, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arild Vågen (talk) 13:20, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:49, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sanyambahga (talk) 16:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:45, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:39, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:22, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 19:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:44, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice but shame it doesn't show clearly it is an island. -- Colin (talk) 10:38, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice subject and colors, brilliant execution Poco2 12:38, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 14:21, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:35, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Great image. But I find the motion blur of the Swedish flag disturbing (although there's nothing we can do about it due to the need for long shutter speed) and there is obvious border around parts of the building from sharpening. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joydeep Talk 08:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 21:19, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice, but white sharpening thin line all along the roof.--Jebulon (talk) 16:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I find the sharpening line and the blurred flag necessary tradeoffs for getting an otherwise excellent blue-hour photo of a non-modern building, something which nicely balances out our many blue-hour photos of modern buildings (i.e., buildings that are illuminated at least in part from within and thus easier to photograph under those circumstances). If the photographer had chosen otherwise, we might well have an image with a clear flag and no line ... but blown highlights all over the castle walls, which would have been a dealbreaker for me. Daniel Case (talk) 17:24, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Apart from the white line, I'm not far to agree with you, Daniel Case --Jebulon (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 05:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)Edit

Mon 14 Apr → Sat 19 Apr
Tue 15 Apr → Sun 20 Apr
Wed 16 Apr → Mon 21 Apr
Thu 17 Apr → Tue 22 Apr
Fri 18 Apr → Wed 23 Apr
Sat 19 Apr → Thu 24 Apr

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)Edit

Thu 10 Apr → Sat 19 Apr
Fri 11 Apr → Sun 20 Apr
Sat 12 Apr → Mon 21 Apr
Sun 13 Apr → Tue 22 Apr
Mon 14 Apr → Wed 23 Apr
Tue 15 Apr → Thu 24 Apr
Wed 16 Apr → Fri 25 Apr
Thu 17 Apr → Sat 26 Apr
Fri 18 Apr → Sun 27 Apr
Sat 19 Apr → Mon 28 Apr

Closing a featured picture promotion requestEdit

The botEdit

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedureEdit

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Featured picture}} or {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessements template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
    • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==

{{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.

  1. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/April 2014), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting requestEdit

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/April 2014.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
Last modified on 23 November 2013, at 03:38