Open main menu

Commons:Javaslatok kiemelt képekre

Javaslatok kiemelt képekre más nyelveken:

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

Ha úgy gondolod, hogy egy Commonson található fotó/kép eléggé vonzó ahhoz, szerepeljen a Commons:Kiemelt képek lapon, akkor tegyél új javaslatot ez a szöveg alján levő listán. Ha kialakult egy általános konszenzus 15 napon belül, a képet feltüntetik: a Commons:Kiemelt képek lapon.

Contents

JavaslatokEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Holi at Basantapur-0272.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2018 at 12:48:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Heterocentrotus mamillatus MHNT.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2018 at 09:26:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:High cliff in Lyse with climbers 5.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 21:32:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Sweden
  •   Info All by me, -- Cart (talk) 21:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 21:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral It's difficult to say what's the subject about. The rock with the trees are not exceptional, and the climbers are so small they seem a bit insignificant -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:49, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I think their smallness in comparison to the rock face is the point of the composition, and it's a good one to me, but I haven't decided if it's an FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:25, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, it reminds me this picture where we realize afterwards there are people on it. They're not so small, but the landscape is not as breathtaking either -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:47, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  • It's not, but the view of them going up the sheer rock face is starker. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:19, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Interesting discussion. I was going for minimalism here (sort of an upright of this) and, just like Ikan said, how small the climbers are compaired to the rock. Even though they are still clearly visible. --Cart (talk) 09:12, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Saguaro silouettes in bñack and white in Sonora.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 20:35:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Saguaro silouettes in Sonora.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 19:48:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Red-tailed bumblebee (Bombus lapidarius) male on cornflower ed.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 13:32:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alternative image with original background.


File:80-391-1247 Kyiv Khmelnytsky Monument RB 18.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 12:00:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Ukraine
  •   Info created by Rbrechko (talk) 12:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC) - uploaded by Rbrechko (talk) 12:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC) - nominated by Rbrechko -- Rbrechko (talk) 12:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Rbrechko (talk) 12:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:54, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - In a case in which I might ordinarily support, with this subject matter, I feel that I am unable to decide whether to support and am therefore leaving the judging to others. The reason for this is that to me, a monument to this man is tantamount to honoring a Nazi war criminal. See w:Khmelnytsky Uprising#Massacres and w:Khmelnytsky Uprising#Jews if you want to understand why. None of this history means that if this merits a feature, it should not be featured, but it does mean that whereas I have found myself emotionally able to oppose photos of this monument or support them for QI, I do not feel emotionally able to support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - And to take this one step further, if a photo of this monument is featured, are we going to feature it as a monument to a Ukrainian nationalist hero or a bestial mass murderer? Fairness would probably dictate a neutral tone and a link to the Wikipedia article about the uprising he led. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:23, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  • It seems that you judge this picture on moral matters, and I can understand your embarrassment because I felt the same last month when a picture of a racist politician was nominated here. So I have to say I didn't based my vote on historical events, but on aesthetic aspects, and on the previous works by the same photographer (1, 2, 3 for example). Now this statue is in Ukraine, so probably this guy riding his horse is judged differently by the local citizens. As we have a featured picture of Stalin, Lenin and Kalinin here, and one of a nuclear explosion, it doesn't mean the nominators support war and weapon of mass destruction, neither the community -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:02, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  • If this photo is featured, it's going to be featured for what it is: "(Name), a bronze statue of a man on a horse, placed on a stone podium covered with creepers, all within a fenced area". No other comments about what he did or might have done. --Cart (talk) 12:56, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:2018 - Château fort de Lourdes.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 09:23:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 31.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 07:07:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Close up of Maitreya Buddha at Thiksey Monastery DSCN6617 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 06:55:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Ice planet and antarctic jellyfish.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 00:29:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals#Class_:_Scyphozoa
  •   Info Diplulmaris antarctica jellyfish in Antarctica. One of the finalists in the Wiki Science Competition 2017. Created and uploaded by AMICE - nominated by Rhododendrites. — Rhododendrites talk |  00:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The detail on the jellyfish itself is nice, and I like the way the light field frames it. The filename should probably be moved away from "ice planet" since it's, well, technically inaccurate :) but that's sort of what it looks like. — Rhododendrites talk |  00:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Nice animal, but distracting blue light in the background, and I find the crop too large. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Rhododendrites. I can see his point about changing the name but ... it would make a good sci-fi paperback cover. Daniel Case (talk) 23:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Physocarpus opulifolius.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 00:16:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Rialto Bridge at night2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 17:11:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support - Quite good. "Rialto bridge at night" is a sufficient description. As for geotagging, someone could do that, but we know where the Rialto Bridge is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too soft (aggressive noise reduction), poor lighting on the bridge (clipped whites on portals and reflections). The quality of this picture is obviously below COM:QI requirements, hence also not meeting FP standards. --A.Savin 12:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per A.Savin. Additionally: A blue hour shot could work here but instead everything is black around the bridge. Neither is the quality there (excessive noise reduction, oversharpened, blurry off-center parts and so on), nor is this an outstanding composition in any way. I'm very surprised that we've got so many support votes nonetheless. --Code (talk) 19:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per other opposes. Daniel Case (talk) 20:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per opposers. --Basotxerri (talk) 09:13, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Buste Hervé de Portzmoguer.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 16:50:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info Bust of the Breton sailor Hervé de Portzmoguer. He is known under the name of Primauget for having commanded the fleet during the battle of Saint-Mathieu. created by S. DÉNIEL - uploaded by S. DÉNIEL - nominated by S. DÉNIEL -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Technically 3200 ISO is far too noisy for this kind of static shot. The picture is not sharp. In low light a tripod is necessary -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
    • The tripod is forbidden in most museums. With these principles you limit diversity. What is the ISO limit number for a photo to be acceptable? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 06:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Most photos simply can't be FPs. FPs are supposed to be among the very best photos on the site. Have you looked at COM:VIC? Even museum photos that are not great can be valuable, and if they're best in a particular scope that's deemed sufficiently notable (such as this sculpture probably would be), they can get the Valued Image designation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for these tips. What is the ISO limit number for a photo to be acceptable for you? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 08:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I think it completely depends on the subject and the type of photography. Here some people will find your picture noisy at 125 ISO only because of their lack of enthusiasm for your subject, and sometimes they will forgive 1600 ISO or more since the situation is special, justified by some features (moving subject in a dark place, telephoto, etc.) -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile, might not be a QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose just too soft, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. --Basotxerri (talk) 06:51, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Teddy-Express.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 15:25:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Absolutely charming :), but is there any chance of getting just a little bit more frame at the top? Just enough to get the top left little train signal not cut. I think that would also balance the photo better because of the empty space at the bottom between the tracks. Thoughts? --Cart (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
    •   Done --Llez (talk) 22:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great, thanks. With the amount of guys here on this forum, I'm surprised we don't have any FP's of model trains (AFAICS). Think of the challenge to make it appear like a real train in a Kabelleger-esque photo. --Cart (talk) 22:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:29, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Reluctant oppose Yes, it would be very nice to have more model-train pics, and all the stuffed animals make this one irresistibly cute, but ... there's so many discordant diagonals in the image that it takes FP out of consideration for me. Daniel Case (talk) 18:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 10:18, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:45, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Not sure about the copyright status of this picture. --A.Savin 13:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:De Lelie and De Ster view from Island.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 14:26:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:ISS-43 Deploying of CubeSats.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 13:50:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration#Spacecraft in orbit
  •   Info created by NASA - uploaded by Ras67 - nominated by Msaynevirta -- Msaynevirta (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Msaynevirta (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It's a 'no' from me for two reasons: firstly, I'm not really wowed by what I'm looking at; the subject is not very clear, certainly nowhere near some of the other impressive shots from NASA; shots of planets, stars and such. Secondly, the image quality is not FP level - there's a glare coming from the highlights, the sharpness is sub-par and the resolution is not very high either.--Peulle (talk) 16:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 22:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition is a bit empty and I'm not impressed by the quality at full size -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. --Basotxerri (talk) 06:57, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:WLE - 2018 - Parc national des Pyrenees - Cirque de Gavarnie - 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 13:30:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France
  •   Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Moahim -- Moahim (talk) 13:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Moahim (talk) 13:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support very nice mood --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Martin. Not easy to get a stream centered and still get the "accent subject" at 1/3. --Cart (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  16:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Yes, this is quite beautiful. Is this the full-sized photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC) - It is crop from the larger pano (there were a bit of superfluous information), so it has such size --Moahim (talk) 05:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - OK, thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:PushkinGory asv2018-07 img05 Mikhailovskoe.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 12:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Javier shows part of the grape harvest in his Lysekil vineyard 1 - cropped.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 00:39:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  •   Info No, I haven't been out travelling I'm sorry to say. This is from the harvest in a vineyard/winery right up here in the cold north. After having documented the harvest at the vineyard, this photo stuck with me as a more vivid way of presenting the grapes-soon-to-be-wine, in the hands of the farmer himself instead of arranged on a plate or something. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Now for something completely different. :) --Peulle (talk) 07:01, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition. Charles (talk) 08:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. IMO nothing wrong with the composition--A.Savin 12:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes, different. I like the different shades of green. Are the Solaris grapes he's holding similar to Chardonnay? They look similar. Daniel Case (talk) 14:40, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I'm rather ignorant when it comes to grapes, other than that they and their products are tasty. I only learned that Javier chose Solaris since they are hardy and can survive in this climate. --Cart (talk) 15:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
@W.carter: Yes, that's what the article says, but not its Swedish counterpart yet unfortunately. But both of them do explain how it was bred, and it appears the dark spots are really just a coincidence as there is absolutely no Chardonnay in their ancestry. Daniel Case (talk) 02:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Composition! How long did it take you to move the farmers fingers to the right direction that they started to make a pleasing form? Also, any other colour of the farmer's T-shirt would spoil it but it seems like he was carefully choosing the right green gradient until he found the right fit for the color of the grass and the grapes. --Podzemnik (talk) 14:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You are right on both accounts. :) I did manhandle the poor guy a bit to get the photo as good as I could. The hardest part was getting him in position so that the angle of the light became just right for the grapes. At first he was a bit annoyed with me taking up time from the harvest, but he brightened considerably when he realized he was also getting free photos of his vineyard to use. I was extremely lucky that he had such a fashion sense, any other shirt and the photo would have been ruined. But that is what photography so often is about: luck, the color of a shirt, a cloud or a ray of light in the right place. Things you can't control, only do your darnedest to capture when you see them. --Cart (talk) 15:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  16:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:07, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Green shirt (and green background), and something different, per Peulle and Podzemnik -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A photo report is good for diversity here. --S. DÉNIEL
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 09:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great composition in all ways. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:45, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 11:31, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lužice, zatáčka.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 19:45:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info created by Aktron - uploaded by Aktron - nominated by T.Bednarz -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question - T.Bednarz, would you like to give an explanation of how you find this one of the best photos on Commons? I'm not seeing it, but I'd like to see an argument, if possible, before I vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm not satisfied that the technical quality here is high enough to reach featured status. Also, while the composition is nice enough, I'm not really blown away - there's no big "wow" factor.--Peulle (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not bad as thumbnail but disappointing at full size. Not sharp and there's also chromatic aberration. It would be okay with a better quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Under the right circumstances this could make a great roadscape. These aren't them. Daniel Case (talk) 14:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile and Peulle, not Daniel, as I don't see how this roadscape could have been an FP, except with truly unusual light or something, and the partly hidden bales on the left don't help matters. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:33, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Félix, Torralba de Ribota, Zaragoza, España, 2018-04-04, DD 51-53 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 18:06:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Juvenile Nubian ibex (50822).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 09:20:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • @Ikan Kekek: It's small because as soon as I got closer, they ran off (I'm clumsier than they are in a rocky desert), and that's the longest focal length I had/have available to me (150mm, equivalent to 300mm full frame). — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yes, very small and the lighting not so good. A bit soft. 1/1600 sec/F5.6 not a good choice for a static scene. Charles (talk) 11:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • If it were a situation when I could've used a tripod vs. freehandling at 150mm (equivalent to 300mm full frame) on rocky ground, I'd agree re: shutter. Perhaps I could've brought it down a little bit from 1/1600 and still be safe, but it was just shortly before I left the desert and the only time I saw kids together like this, nevermind close enough to photograph, so wanted to be safe because there was no shortage of light and they were just so cute :). Maybe a noob move, meh. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not all all 'Noob'. But only a few images aspire to FP! Charles (talk) 16:46, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For me there's no to ways about it; it's not an FP for the reasons stated above.--Peulle (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support overall I was happy with the result of this one, though I understand why some would oppose given the size of it. I do wish I could've gotten closer without scaring them or for different conditions. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Maybe I'm too much of a softy, but although this photo is small, it's well composed and I find it touching. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support, lighting isn't all that special and a little bokeh would be good, but I guess under the circumstances presented above this was the best shot possible. Good composition as well. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Moderate support It's not the greatest it could be. But it doesn't have too many too obvious shortcomings for a picture by someone who doesn't usually take wildlife photos and just tried to make the best of a shot that presented itself and was unlikely to last. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 17:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:47, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Streitberg Freibad 7023683.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 06:27:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • User:Ermell, what do you think? Is it oversaturated? I figured that that's how it actually looked, because of the light at that time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Ikan and Cart are right, saturation was not added. I just changed the profile to Adobe strong. After bathing and just before sunset, the light and colours were essentially the same as they are shown here. Thanks for nominating Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 20:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You're welcome. I think it's an interesting shot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't know, only a bad perception. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Looking at a lawn in a photo is usually a good way of judging if it is oversaturated. The grass here is almost dull (compaired to the church nom below) so I don't see any signs of oversaturation. --Cart (talk) 09:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You have seen this church: so, you know, saturation (in general) is not necessarily a problem for me. it's just a comment. What is your opinion, you voting for?--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • On this forum. we can make observations and comments without voting. --Cart (talk) 13:20, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. :) The combination of strong red and blue colours with intermittent whites, the composition with the mirror effect and the general curves of the subject are enough for me to overlook any smaller issues with depth, noise or saturation. I also think it's quite cool how the divider in the water is also red and white.--Peulle (talk) 14:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support I like it, but I think it would be even stronger cropped to the slides. However, that might make it too small for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Ermell (talk) 20:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:21, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - The colors make me think of a real-life David Hockney painting — Rhododendrites talk |  16:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:31, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:55, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 11:32, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lincoln Cathedral Chapter House.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 12:22:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Dülmen, Privatrösterei Schröer, Kaffeebehälter -- 2018 -- 0529.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 10:31:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others_2
  •   Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I know it's an effect, but I feel like the DoF is a bit too shallow here; even the closest container is not entirely in focus.--Peulle (talk) 11:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Current DoF works for me. --Rbrechko (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Works for me too. --Cart (talk) 07:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice colors and composition, and per Rbrechko. It reminds me this -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Works well. --Basotxerri (talk) 07:03, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Musée L during civil twilight (Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, DSCF4200).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 23:32:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Belgium
  •   Info "It has so many pretty lines everywhere! And I feel like it evokes a story with the lights and the things poking through the windows. :)" - User:Bubblenymph, by User:Trougnouf
  •   Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 23:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose lighting does not appeal. Charles (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles --Milseburg (talk) 13:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles; just doesn't stand out for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Cool lines and soft light :) - Benh (talk) 21:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The lighting in this picture appeals. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - The sky is very flat to me and the composition in general is good but not great, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too dark, although I'm sure the same image could be featured with a more appealing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Info new version processed, hopefully it has a more appealing light now. --Trougnouf (talk) 10:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Better yes, though the sky is still flat. I was more thinking about shooting the same building at another time of the day. Still, the new processing has improved -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:08, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 22:58:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

I chose it because it is used in a important number of articles and pages. Ezarateesteban 16:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That might make it a VI, but what's the argument for FP? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Good photo without scratches, artifacts and another issues Ezarateesteban 19:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That reads like an argument for QI, if the photographer were a Commons user. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know it but I like if anyone evaluate the quality of this picture Ezarateesteban 22:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak suppoert I took some time deciding this one. On the one hand, Bertha von Suttner is a very important historical figure, so the legitimacy of the nomination is beyond question. It's also a photo from 1906 (read that again, nineteen oh-freakin' six, it's over 100 years old!), so I think we can forgive the overall lack of sharpness. I just wish the resolution was higher, and I'm also not sure about the quality of the restoration. It looks OK compared to the original, but.. hmmmm..... Well, it's borderline, and I may be a bit taken with it since I basically live and breathe history. If anyone else out there want to have something to compare it to, in order to find the standard set for historical FPs, here they are.--Peulle (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment there's part of the border left at the bottom. I think the border should be either removed completely or not removed at all … --El Grafo (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  Done borderline removed Ezarateesteban 11:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Certainly VI and useful, not good enough for FP, even for a picture from 1906. --Yann (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Basilica Santa Maria della Salute Dorsoduro Venezia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 14:54:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support and 7.--Peulle (talk) 11:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Really good at full size, and I'm sure you'll work on the perspective thing Peulle mentions. I might prefer for the building on the far right to be included in full, but that's hardly an important criterion for voting on this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Such fine detail, and relaxing cool colors. Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I do not really like the shift to the left --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 07:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The resolution is outstanding, but the perspective isn't.It´s too close to the building and the viewing angle is too steep upwards to be favorable enough fo a FP. --Milseburg (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support Very high quality, but it really feels like the subject wants to be more centered or less centered.. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:27, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Aerial photographs of The Fullerton Hotel of Singapore at night.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:04:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very attractive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for a tripod shoot with ISO 125 surprising noisy (look e.g. at the white fassade). Overall a good fotography that doesn't thrill me. Beside of this: this image was obviously not taken from a public approachable place so we have no panorama of freedom here and I question the rightfulness of this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Freedom of panorama in Singapore is  OK for 3D objects and all the buildings, see this category. The noise is normal for a night shot and the resolution is high enough, compare for example with this FP shot from the same roof -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    • I didn't say s.th. against the resolution. But the noise is not good, especially for such a camera like the 5D Mark IV. Read the definition of FoP carefully and you will see that this image doesn't fit in. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This is not a definition for FoP, but an explanation. The location where this picture was taken from the observation deck of the Marina Bay Sands Hotel. The access to this point causes costs, is private ground of the hotel and therefore not a public place in the common definition. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • The existance of a category in Commons is not a valid proof. FoP means in many countries that your place, where you have taken the image, hast to be public. For sure you're able to show me the law of Singapure where this point is not relevant. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Singapore Copyright Act says in its Section 64 : "The copyright in a building or a model of a building is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the building or model or by the inclusion of the building or model in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast". You may read Wikipedia to learn more about the freedom of panorama, or ask the Village pump. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Taxiarchos228: I think you are premising German FoP law here, which is indeed very restrictive. The relevant one, however, is COM:FOP#Singapore: there is no such limitation, that the camera location has to be as publicly accessible as the photographed building. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
      Comment It is no aerial photo (not taken from an aircraft), I'm going to remove these categories now. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan. And i don't see any problem with noise. Nice quality IMO. -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good composition, noise is OK, and light is very well managed (that's the most important issue). Yann (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A lack of noise --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:51, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I find no reason to hold back. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 07:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:33, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Sweet mangosteen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Concerning these raspberries and these blueberries I see a will for arrangement. This peaches are as boring as this candidate picture. I'm sorry, the image is a solide factual photography. But not outstanding in arrangement and has not an outstanding impact for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Aesthetically pleasing. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:22, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Good quality, nice arraignment but light could be better, it is a bit dull and makes the fruit look unattractive. --Cart (talk) 07:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support OK for me; more light would probably cause overexposed parts in the whites --Llez (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support - Good image; I like the contrast with the background. Something doesn't quite pop, or maybe I'm just jealous because I've long wanted to try fresh mangosteen, but they're just unavailable in the US. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  16:14, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - They are sometimes available in Chinatown, though they are smaller than Malaysian mangosteens and not as good. But even a mediocre mangosteen, as long as it's ripe, is delicious. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I read a while back that, at least at one point, it operated as kind of a black market in NYC's Chinatown, because they're illegal to import for some agricultural/pest reasons. Or at least illegal to import from the main places that grow them. There was a NYT or New Yorker article years ago about how locals could make a special request and some grocers would have a secret stash in the back. Possibly that ban has been lifted or enough other countries grow them and can send them over since then, though... — Rhododendrites talk |  17:11, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Read w:Purple mangosteen: "Without fumigation or irradiation (in order to kill the Asian fruit fly) fresh mangosteens were illegal to import into the United States until 2007." Now they're legal, but like I said, the ones you can get here are nowhere near as good as fresh Malaysian ones. But get a couple anyway when you can. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Rhododendrites: If mangosteens are difficult to find in the US, you really have to go to Asia or or any country where they're cultivated to taste them, it's going to be worth the trip :-) Honestly, they're very unique with delicious flavor, and easy to eat when they are ripe like that. Thanks for your vote and comment -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de la Virgen María, Breslavia, Polonia, 2017-12-20, DD 17-19 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 21:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  •   Info Main nave of the Virgin Mary church, Wrocław, Poland. Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral IMO it could be FP, but there are two issues. At the left is more space than at the right. May it is correct. The other is the gap at the tile at the bottom. IMO the gap should horizontal. --XRay talk 10:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    XRay: I haven't undrestood your second comment but just uploaded a new version with a tilt correction and perspective/crop adjustments to improve symmetry Poco2 19:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    I just added a note. (In deutsch: Die Fuge der Fliesen am unteren Rand ist schief. In den Kirchen ist diese aber in der Regel gerade. Naja, von Ausnahmen abgesehen.) --XRay talk 04:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild   Oppose - This is surely a good photo, but it doesn't feel quite like an FP to me in this rich category, partly because it lacks the pinpoint sharpness of some of the greatest FPs in this class and also partly because this interior itself is not as lovely as others, what with the not so interesting windows in the apse and also the grayish feel of the light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 13:26, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Brooms on an open market in Macedonia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 19:06:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Yolanda - uploaded by Kiril Simeonovski - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Interesting idea, and good for you for nominating something different, but for a couple of reasons it doesn't work. First, even given the fast shutter speed and slow ISO, the highlights at the top are still almost searing, and second, there are more broomheads than the image needs. Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose more or less per Daniel: Good idea, but not quite an FP in composition, nor in execution, as there is noise and CA in some of the shadows. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Nürnberg St. Lorenz Sakramentshaus 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 04:13:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  Info @Daniel Case: Well, it is a so-called sacrament house, a tower-like tabernacle of more than 20m height, fitted to the pillar of the church. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
It's not so much that I don't know what it's a picture of, it's that there's so many competing verticals in the image as to sufficiently distract from the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 20:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very special work. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. High enzyclopedic value, very good technical work and nice to look at. What do you need more for a FP? The special ratio isn't a problem for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support as per Wladyslaw. Yann (talk) 03:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Is it just me or is it a bit distorted, especially visible at the top? — Rhododendrites talk |  16:17, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  Info @Rhododendrites: I suspect the curved shape of the very top of the sacrament house deceives you. Indeed, it almost touches the vaults of the church, then bends forward and down, like a spiral. If you mean something else, please give me a hint. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Hannover, die Marktkirche vanaf de Osterstrasse Dm IMG 4453 2018-07-01 09.56.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 17:36:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Thanks, yes I have already denoised the photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Please look at the pedestrian zone near to the person. There you can see a very noisy area. For me to noisy to be a FP. Very pitty because I like this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I see what Wladyslaw is talking about, but I think it's a relatively minor issue in context and also like the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Dark and the composition doesn't work well for me. I'm maybe too classical in my tastes, but the combination of a shoe shop with a church looks a bit awkward to start with. I don't like the white building on the right because it has no charm and the harsh contrasts are not aesthetic. Also the signs on the left are not very elegant, so this shop is not attractive. But the main problem remains this street which is the way where the eyes want to go, while it is too dark -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile Morin. --The NMI User (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Like Basile, I have problems with the composition. My issue is not so much the darkness as that the signs up front conflict with the steeple in the back for recognition as the subject of this image. Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support even there are a few technical issues I like this view very much. The contrast between classical and modern (and maybe not so successful) architecture on both sides of the street is interessting. Also the contrast between the neon signs and the church is not a conflict but exciting and good in photographically sense. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support interessting composition --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 08:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Amrumer Windmühle (2018).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 14:28:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:2018L0765 - Saint-Malo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 07:50:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment - I haven't, I do either color version or b&w. I haven't both version for any photo. --Myroslav Vydrak (talk) 07:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very well, then. I might like a brighter sky, but really, per Christian. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2018 at 15:46:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:02, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Laitche (talk) 21:36, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Peulle (talk) 21:48, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:44, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:20, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 23:23, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:23, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 06:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:01, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support nice shot. Charles (talk) 19:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 03:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- -donald- (talk) 05:18, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --The NMI User (talk) 09:47, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Asymmetrical cut, obstructing signal traversed in the middle bottom, extreme distortion and blurred on the left bottom border --Photographer 01:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This photo, as with many I took that day, was taken with my Samyang 10mm ultra wide-angle lens. It has an angle-of-view of 109.6° which is as far as you can reasonably take a rectilinear lens. This photo was taken with the camera pointing slightly up, to bring in more ceiling and less boring concrete floor, and then corrected afterwards in Lightroom. Unlike with my stitched photos, I'm far more restricted about where to crop and the sharpness is not as good, though I think still quite acceptable. I tried to position the camera in the middle to get pleasing symmetrical results, but it isn't perfect. One problem is the sign, which you can see in File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 5.jpg (middle-left) and is bright red, white and yellow and very distracting if you saw that in the middle of the scene. I tried to position so it was edge-on and not catch the eye. It isn't the sort of sign I can just lift up and move out of the way, without getting arrested by the transport police :-). You can also see from that photo how the top of the ceiling in the photo has curved over towards me and is quite close. This will cause the wide-angle perspective distortion by magnifying, but I think here the straight lines of the roof don't look unpleasantly distorted. Other things like round windows and people tend to illustrate that distortion in a more uncomfortable manner. I agree it isn't a perfect photo and I'd have liked to have had the time to make a stitched panorama. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your rich explanation and, I understand what is your intention here, however, I think that this photo is not up to your previous work. I hope you can take my negative feedback as a stimulation to do better job (maybe in a combination of nodal ninja photos). Sincerely this place deserves a perfectionist work that you have accustomed us to appreciate and taste, with enormous size and majestic quality. Obviously my opinion about this photo is little shared, or simply people vote positively because we love you --Photographer 23:57, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
The Photographer, ha ha, I'm not sure about "love". I hope I've ruffled enough feathers with oppose votes and criticism that nobody should feel bad about giving me an oppose if warranted. I guess this is more similar to my fisheye photos than my stitched panorama photos. Or as a good photo of a great subject, rather than a great photo of a great subject, which would be ideal. I would love to go back and take a better shot but that's quite unlikely any time soon. I live 400 miles away, the weather is not always as good as this, and stations can be busy. -- Colin (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support a very strong symmetrical view may be classic but looks over time boring. A little bit asymmety brings the image alive. The other reasons for this picture are self-evident. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)