Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017.10.15.-23-Kirschgartshaeuser Schlaege Mannheim--Blattwespe-Euura salicis-Larve.jpg

< Commons:Featured picture candidates

File:2017.10.15.-23-Kirschgartshaeuser Schlaege Mannheim--Blattwespe-Euura salicis-Larve.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2020 at 21:37:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Upscaled images have been a no-no at FPC as long as I've been here. There is nothing gained quality-wise by upscaling an image; the only thing that happens is that a too small image becomes technically eligible for FPC. --Cart (talk) 23:28, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's what I thought. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:36, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Indeed there is no rule that says that upscaling a picture is not allowed (Digital manipulations). If you want to introduce this rule, discuss it beforehand in the talk page. Before you technically assess the image, first compare it with the original version that still has 3.5 MP. It's not just scaled up. And what is bad, when a picture is upscaled a bit so that you can look at it better? The result is decisive. Last but not least, I didn't hide this "manipulation", so long as it is a manipulation at all. --Hockei (talk) 08:30, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even if the no to upscaling is more of a practice than a written rule, it serves no purpose for the image quality. There are plenty of things that we object to here that are not written in the rules. You don't need to write down everything if common sense is used. As for looking at the picture, with today's computers and monitors, you can crank up the magnification as far as you like. Better to keep the images in their original size. --Cart (talk) 10:34, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose For me upscaling should always be done client-side if wanted, because uploading an upscaled image to Commons is really just adding file size without adding any extra information or quality. This is a good photo and a good QI but I'm not sure it has enough real detail to be an FP, we have sharper photos at this resolution. This said, I do appreciate you were honest and open about the fact that it's upscaled. And no, it isn't a written rule, but I can't really think of a reason why it's ever worth it. Cmao20 (talk) 10:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose per upscaling and arguing "there is no rule". Please don't do that: you can't require all possible reasons for opposing be pre-codified in rules. -- Colin (talk) 11:14, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment I really cannot confirm what you say about the quality of the pictures in this category that are comparable with my picture. But anyway, thank you so much for changing of your reason for your vote against. --Hockei (talk) 13:27, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:2017.10.15.-23-Kirschgartshaeuser_Schlaege_Mannheim--Blattwespe-Euura_salicis-Larve.jpg&oldid=390812811"