Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

Commons:Javaslatok kiemelt képekre

Javaslatok kiemelt képekre más nyelveken:

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 | 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:Corvus splendens insolens @ Kuala Lumpur (2) alternate crop.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2018 at 12:13:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:2014-Cambodge Spean preah Toeûs (3).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2018 at 09:54:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Close-up photograph of an Iguana iguana.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2018 at 06:04:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Ucides cordatus ( Ucididae).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2018 at 20:11:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment @Filo gèn': Did you just take a 300px photo and pass it through several layers of sharpening and upscaling just to nominate it here? I find it as if you're trolling... ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 12:17, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
That's all right, let's assume good faith as much as we can, shall we... the nominator is not the most experienced of FP nominators. @Filo gèn': this image is very far away from the technical quality required to be called "one of the best images on Commons" - please take a look at some other Feature Pictures if you want to get an idea of what is required. --Peulle (talk) 15:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because the quality is not good - Basile Morin (talk) 05:58, 17 July 2018 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:The lighthouse on the promontory of Nyholmen by Bodø harbor.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2018 at 17:15:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Chipmunk (71669).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2018 at 16:30:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Oppose A bit small for the "new" FP standart not official, arbust distracting on foreground (note added) and composition problem (too hight angle shoot) --The Photographer 23:20, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I'm surprised to hear the opinion that a ~5 megapixel image of a small subject is too small. Nothing I can do about that (or the angle) now I suppose. I'd be happy to try cropping a bit if that's what this discussion yields, though. Maybe a bit less than the note says (such that the grass still kind of frames the subject, to the left/right and behind). Curious to get other thoughts. — Rhododendrites talk |  23:37, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Comparing your picture with images in the same FP subject, the smaller photos are at least 10 years older than this, of all the things that I told you that It's the only thing measurable, the rest is only a personal opinion humbly --The Photographer 23:46, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I also find the size a bit small (or just limit), especially considering the composition could be cut at the bottom and on the right -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:41, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support small but convincingly nice --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:36, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Mostly per The Photographer. The small size (and small subject within the frame) isn't an absolute fail for wildlife, but mainly that it gets no points for detail, resolution, when we're trying to work out what is exceptional here. If this was some rare species and the lens was already 400mm then I'd be more forgiving, but this is in a city garden. I don't think subject size is really a factor, just the appropriate choice of lens. Subject distance is generally more of a limitation, and our best wildlife photography often shows a good deal of effort to get close to the subject (and hours and hours of missed chances). The green shoots are also a bit distracting. And agree that getting down at the same height as the subject is often superior. -- Colin (talk) 07:31, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Tree swallow at Stroud Preserve.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2018 at 09:16:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • @Peulle, GerifalteDelSabana, Daniel Case: No, it's not an artificial background, just grass that's way out of focus because of the 600mm focal length. Here is the uncropped version which shows some of the variation in background, and here are some other unprocessed shots from the same day with similar backgrounds. --Iiii I I I (talk) 18:30, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  Support--Peulle (talk) 20:40, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Extremely regretful oppose because of that background. Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:15, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Gladly supported Well that's some noisy grass, but I really like the bird. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:13, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral pending resolution of questions about background. Daniel Case (talk) 16:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  Weak support I figured it was blurred grass. But I wonder if maybe you cropped in a bit too much. But ... it's your image and your call. Daniel Case (talk) 05:31, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too much noise and satured colors. --The Photographer 23:23, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:34, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per The Photographer, plus the unattractive light makes it look almost 2-dimensional compared to this. --Cart (talk) 09:51, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Coleus (71543).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2018 at 03:22:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Butorides striata @ KL, Malaysia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2018 at 12:14:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • @Cayambe: Check out the previous revision; I cropped some of the left side out because of a rock outcropping, heh. Would you prefer it? ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 09:39, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality, nice contrast between the subject and the background. I'd also prefer a tiny bit of space on the left but without stones :) Still great though, --Podzemnik (talk) 14:47, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I would likely support either way, but I, too, wished there was a little more on the side. I see what you mean regarding the rocks, though. I went ahead and tried to remove them and uploaded another version here. I then reverted to your most recent edit. I should say that I did so fairly quickly and it's not perfect -- it's mainly to show that it's possible -- and if you like the change you may want to make it on your end with the raw file (it's just Lightroom's spot removal tool). This will likely pass without it, though. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  19:40, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A bit Underexposed and please, try the next time a low angle shoot showing more contrasted background --The Photographer 23:26, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, Sir Photographer! I was on top of the small waterfall where it was, so I couldn't get much lower, but I'll try next time. :) ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 00:04, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:44, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:53, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Poco2 11:22, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Crno jezero.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2018 at 10:29:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

@Code:Unfortunately, I guess the uploader is no longer active here; I just stumbled upon the pic and noticed it fulfils the technical requirements for nomination, so I thought it was worth trying (in my opinion the photo really deserves it). --GeXeS (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too small. It looks like the kind of shot that could have been promoted in 2012 but then delisted in 2018 since standards have moved along and the photo is no longer good enough.--Peulle (talk) 15:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:11, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Code and Peulle -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose beautiful but too small, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 02:57, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support, I still think that it gets my wow and passes the minimum requirements, but a weak because per others, the resolution is not too good. Still an amazing photo overall though. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 06:54, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Regretful oppose; very very good picture but downsized. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 06:57, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

File:St Patrick's Cathedral Choir, Dublin, Ireland - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2018 at 09:27:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Attacus taprobanis-Kadavoor-2018-07-13-001.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2018 at 07:14:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:La Graciosa - Monaña Clara - Alegranza.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2018 at 07:14:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:North view in Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II from rotunda.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2018 at 20:48:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

@Peulle: I checked again and it's not. What may be giving you that impression is that I wasn't exactly on the center axis as I took the photo. Daniel Case (talk) 04:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
That might be it, yes. I'm checking the horizontals and that's when I see that things on the left aren't lining up with the right. I don't see any problems with the verticals, though.--Peulle (talk) 15:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Beautiful photo, especially the glass roof. Unfortunately three people in the front are disturbing the composition too much (especially the boy in the left corner) --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:04, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
@Michielverbeek: Usually I roll my eyes at "Ewww! People" opposes to things like this but I admit with this one you may have a point. I will see if Peulle's right about the tilt (I don't think so, but you never know) and probably crop the people mostly out so all you see is tops of heads. Would that work better? Daniel Case (talk) 22:10, 14 July 2018 (UTC) I don't think the people problem is repairable. I guess it would have been better if you would take this photo some seconds before or after --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - A mall with people. It's fine, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:37, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The composition brings to mind The School of Athens. --Cart (talk) 12:59, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose There are many similar pictures from the gallery. I don't think this is outstanding.--Ermell (talk) 19:50, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Cut feet and distracting head seen from behind in the foreground. Also I agree with Peulle there's a small tilt (fixable) visible on the left side with this part of the building being not perfectly vertical. The roof is wonderful, but unfortunately we can't cut the image over the crowd, so we really have to compose with these people walking. In this kind of situation, I usually use a tripod and wait quite long, until an interesting configuration occurs, neutral or special (extra value if someone creates something). But that's not easy, and subject to luck. Here I'm bothered by the crowded bottom. Not enough free space on the floor visually to breath and feel an elegant composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I have fixed the tilt (I think). Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Head mutilation in people is too distracting --The Photographer 23:35, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

File:2017.03.31.-08-Kaefertaler Wald-Mannheim--Gemeine Garten-Schwebfliege-Weibchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2018 at 17:40:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Vat Pa Phai temple with a Buddhist monk, orange marigold, clouds and blue sky, in Luang Prabang.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2018 at 11:58:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Glaciar Davidson, Haines, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-18, DD 55.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2018 at 08:36:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Smial -- Smial (talk) 08:36, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like this image because of the very special lighting. -- Smial (talk) 08:36, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:55, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Agree, a nice one! :) Thank you Smial for the nom! --Poco2 11:21, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 12:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support For once, an image with grey sky and dirty subject adds to the value.--Peulle (talk) 12:54, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Jee 13:32, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:57, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Agree, great lighting. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 19:45, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 20:18, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:08, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Would be great if brightened 2/3 stop or so but right now it's too dark for me. -- King of ♠ 01:24, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
    KoH I just checked it and 2/3 stop would be definitely too much, the atmosphere of the images would be essentially different. If Smial wants I can offer a alternative version. Poco2 07:11, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  Comment Simple brightening wouldn't work. Perhaps slight S-curving? I don't think it's really necessary, but I've tried a minor rework. --Smial (talk) 11:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:55, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good as it is--Ermell (talk) 19:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support We not should change the natural light of this scene --The Photographer 23:36, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:48, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Red Army monument in Mikolin (Nikoline) 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2018 at 07:16:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 07:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Pudelek (talk) 07:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Very well-taken photo, but partially obscured by shrubbery, not an outstanding composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:57, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Agree with Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:18, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 18:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support ... and for the reasons people oppose! It speaks of the times... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:55, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Not much obscured to me. So foliage around is quite natural. Jee 03:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weaky supporty per Tomas, but a closer angle wouold be much better :) ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 07:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Per Jkadavoor, although I'd prefer a closer angle --Llez (talk) 10:47, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Silesia Star, Katowice (Kattowitz).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2018 at 07:12:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Your opinion is noted, but I asked you why it's so relatively small. So why is that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:23, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Because this size is ok for me --Pudelek (talk) 09:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • That's just as unresponsive as "Because I said so". I will give this nomination moderate   Support, but I really don't appreciate your non-answers and don't think they will help you convince anyone. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It's a pretty good image, but the combination of the bridge and building doesn't quite work for me. If the bridge had been the subject I might have been convinced with that nice yellow steel construction on the left, but right now the buildings in the background are disturbing that impression. So the buildings and the bridge are disturbing each other. Perhaps a different angle might have worked.--Peulle (talk) 12:59, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support eye-catching Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:10, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 18:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in the evening.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2018 at 18:05:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Silent dialogue.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2018 at 11:15:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Cervidae (Deers)
  •   Info Deer (Cervus laphus L.) in Mizhrichynskyi Regional Landscape Park, the biggest regional landscape park in Ukraine. The large wild area provides a habitat to many animals. Created by Wildlife Ukraine - uploaded by Wildlife Ukraine - nominated by Anntinomy -- Anntinomy (talk) 11:15, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Anntinomy (talk) 11:15, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry it doesn't compare well with our existing FP's of deer (see updated FP category above), wrt composition, exposure or sharpness. The filename and categories could do with some changes. -- Colin (talk) 11:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Colin; it looks great as a thumbnail but when looking at it, the quality and crispness just isn't there. As far as the categories go, this is not an elk, it's a deer, so that needs tidying up.--Peulle (talk) 18:54, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 21:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The head and the body of the deer are not sharp. I think f/4 at 420mm here is not enough, and also 1/15s too long to avoid motion blur. Concerning the light, there are blown highlights. The composition may be interesting but the quality is not there -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I didn't even get to looking at the deer; the center of the picture looks like someone dropped an ice cube on it an hour before ... I mean, even Monet would have included more detail. The unsharp area is distracting even at thumbnail; at full size it is grotesque. Daniel Case (talk) 05:22, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others, especially Daniel. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:40, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per others --Llez (talk) 10:42, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Cypripedium acaule - Henvey Inlet3.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2018 at 04:30:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Orchidaceae
  •   Info - all by -- СССР (talk) 04:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- СССР (talk) 04:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The subject is sharp, but the composition much less interesting than the previous one. The light has nothing special and the background is distracting -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:53, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Agree with Basile. The other photo had graceful curves (though one can see why it is also called the scrotum flower) and this one a worse angle and distracting background. -- Colin (talk) 07:43, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 14:44, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Cool: Looks like a nose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

File :Pseudosphinx tetrio (Sphingidae).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2018 at 02:36:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • A further oppose based on what everyone has added. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:42, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I think, this is not the original background. The motif was cut out (visible at the borders) and placed on an even blue background. --Llez (talk) 04:56, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:44, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 07:39, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above. -- Colin (talk) 07:49, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--西安兵马俑 (talk) 10:25, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Llez, and even if it had the original background I find the composition awkward and cluttered. Daniel Case (talk) 14:43, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Yes, Llez is right. This is not the original background. We can see that using a software indicating the hexadecimal code of the color at various points. In this case, the color is always #7085C8. Whereas in a real blue sky (like this one for example), visually evenly spread, the subtle color and its associated hexadecimal code will always vary -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:13, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Poppies bouquet 2017 G1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2018 at 21:13:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Cochem, Cond, Moselufer -- 2018 -- 0118.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2018 at 18:06:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Germany
  •   Info created by and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 18:06, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 18:06, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Backlit dandelions are always irresistible, but in this case it competes too much with the identifiable background. Daniel Case (talk) 02:08, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I also would try shooting this more wide open. Really try to soften that background. At 2.8 or faster I doubt you could tell that was a building. You don't need a large DoF with these. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 09:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I think the choice of DoF is a feature here. I very much like this contre-jour photograph. --Code (talk) 14:54, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Code. Cool photo, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:42, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Münster, Graffiti im Hafen -- 2015 -- 5852.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2018 at 18:02:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Pelicans Kerkini 20111227 IMG 5165.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2018 at 17:19:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Great composition, great light, I really like the pose of the pelican in focus. I now it is a bit soft but I hope the rest can mitigate this.

  •   Info created by RoubinakiM - uploaded by RoubinakiM - nominated by C messier -- C messier (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- C messier (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Regretful oppose I very much like it but ... it suffers in sharpness from being so small. Daniel Case (talk) 20:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Regretful oppose Per Daniel. Great thumbnail, nice light and pattern, but not excellent quality at full size -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:40, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Daniel, and as a bird photographer myself, a shot from a lower angle would be much better, if permitted. :) -- Gerifalte Del Sabana 03:25, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Really good composition, IMO. I really like the rhythm, the way my eyes move around the picture frame. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Over-denoise filter applied, the animals pen look like a smooth plastic surface --The Photographer 23:38, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Cityscape of Blois 07.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2018 at 16:03:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  •   Info created by Tournasol7 - uploaded by Tournasol7 - nominated by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Tournasol7 (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A QI for sure but it just doesn't stand out enough for me. Daniel Case (talk) 17:36, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support I personally like it, but it seems a bit tilted visually, and is slightly overexposed at the lamps in the background, but it still looks good so... ;) I'd love it if the tilt could be fixed. -- Gerifalte Del Sabana 03:27, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 21:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak   Oppose. At 10 MP the level of detail isn't quite there, and some noise and overexposure as well. But it's a great scene. -- King of ♠ 01:28, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Rio di Santa Caterina ponte dei Gesuiti Cannaregio Venezia.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2018 at 12:01:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 13:10, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Sunrise in Kristianopel at Baltic sea 04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2018 at 16:17:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info created by GPSLeo - uploaded by GPSLeo - nominated by Basotxerri -- Basotxerri (talk) 16:17, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment As seen at QIC. It looks very pleasant to me. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:17, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 16:17, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too much has been cropped away for me to support this one. I'd rather it had been composed better from the start.--Peulle (talk) 17:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose No wow and main part is too dark for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 02:06, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Very pleasing light and wonderful mood. I'd love to support it but please undo the crop and clone out the blurry birds above the building on the left. --Code (talk) 19:33, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Code - very restful, pleasant light, good composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:37, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment As suggested I undid the crop and removed the birds.(Cropped Version us uploaded separately) --GPSLeo (talk) 12:43, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Glaciar Hubbard, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-20, DD 16-21 PAN.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2018 at 21:25:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info Hubbard Glacier, Alaska, United States. All by me, Poco2 21:25, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 21:25, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support WOW! -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:00, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ximonic (talk) 00:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not bad, but still not very impressive. Maybe other weather condition would have worked. And rather soft too --A.Savin 01:48, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per A.Savin. --Karelj (talk) 07:44, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Impressive to me! Yes, it's soft (and noisy) at humongous full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support An impressive photo! --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:49, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 23:12, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Only today I'm able to review this work. Large files are a pain for my computer. Jee 04:02, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:38, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Glaciar Johns Hopkins, Parque Nacional Bahía del Glaciar, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-19, DD 05-07 PAN.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2018 at 21:19:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 13:09, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Attacus taprobanis-Kadavoor-2018-07-07-001.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2018 at 05:43:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Today another female emerged and the male returned to mate with her. I captured the head profile of male too. Jee 15:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support If I had to do something it will be decrease vibrancy and increase saturation in the same proportion (e.g. vibrancy =-15 saturation =+15), result = the colours of the butterfly become more dynamic and more prominent compared to green foliage. If I well understood your question. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:01, 13 July 2018 (UTC) oh and quality is top for a 6000px macro shot with the subject in full frame. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:41, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks Christian Ferrer for the feedback. Jee 02:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 13:03, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Jill Tracy performing at the 2018 Flower Piano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Jul 2018 at 02:52:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alternative: different cropEdit

 

  •   Comment Just noticed this, @Frank Schulenburg:, could you change the filename to something a bit more informative? Thanks. :) ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 11:06, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Drill bits 2017 G1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2018 at 19:56:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created, uploaded, nominated by George Chernilevsky -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:56, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:56, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:47, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, nice motif but not full sharp Ezarateesteban 21:13, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:41, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 23:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:24, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose DoF too shallow per Ezarate, plus lighting too harsh (causing hard drop shadows). Nice idea but could have been taken better. --Kreuzschnabel 05:59, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 07:40, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 10:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 13:32, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Crop out the top, where it's unsharp, and this will work. Daniel Case (talk) 15:42, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:11, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Jee 12:34, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose If you take a closer look at the picture you can see that not much effort has been put into it. Flat illumination and insufficient depth of field.--Ermell (talk) 12:41, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Do you have any reason why you didn't use focus stacking? --Laitche (talk) 17:35, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • This is not a studio shot. Just a quick photo at my visit the workshop without a tripod --George Chernilevsky talk 18:00, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks George. --Laitche (talk) 18:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Stamper en meeldraden van een witte Agapanthus (d.j.b.).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Jul 2018 at 15:12:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Note: it was a deliberate choice to visualize the pistil and stamens. And not the entire flower. Dan was in my opinion lost the effect.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:52, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I like the colours and this soft light though I don't think the composition and angle are the best. --Laitche (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral - also going neutral. I've come back to it a couple times, and just not sure. I really like the stamens delicately rolling out, on the darker background, but the crop is really hard to get past. — Rhododendrites talk |  22:32, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose beautiful but in accordance with Karelj, very sorry Olivier LPB (talk) 14:44, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Trollius europaeus Spechtensee 02.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2018 at 19:26:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • I have added category Unidentified Brachycera. I do not have the knowledge to determine insects. --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)