Last modified on 18 July 2007, at 21:31

Commons:Kandidatët për fotografi të shkëlqyeshme

Në gjuhë tjera : 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)‎ | +/−




Në këtë faqe gjeni fotografit të cilat përdoruesit e projektit i vlerësojnë si të shkëlqyeshme dhe për këtë arsye i kanë propozuar që ato të futen në Galerinë Fotografi të Shkëlqyeshme.


VOTO!

Vini Re!: Votimi nuk është për Figurën e ditës!

RrjedhaEdit

Fotografit e propozuaraEdit

Nëse ke hasur në jë fotografi që ty të pëlqen përdore këtë stampë për ta regjistruar atë! Për një gjë të tillë nuk nevojitet të kesh konto në Commons, propozimet nga kalimtarët janë të mirëseardhura.

Në rast suksesi, sigurohu që ajo fotografi ka edhe një përshkrim të shkëlqyeshëm dhe disponon Licencë


VotimiEdit

Rregullat e votimit:

- Kohë zgjatja e votimit është 9 ditë. Ditën e 10 vendoset për rezultatin
- Nëse një fotografi nuk merr asnjë votë "PRO" brenda 5 ditëve mund të tërhiqet brenda afatit 
- Propozimet nga Adresat IP janë të mirëseardhura
- Diskutimet dhe vërejtjet nga Adresat IP janë të mirëseardhura
- Votat e Adresat IP nuk numërohen
- Propozimi nuk numërohet si votë por propozuesi ka drejtë votimi
- Propozuesi mund të tërheq nga votimi fotografin e propozuar nga ai

Fotografia e propozuar mund të futet në Galerinë Fotografi të Shkëlqyeshme nëse plotëson këto kushte:

- Licencë të pa diskutueshme 
- Së paku 5 vota "PËR" ("Support") 
- Proporcioni PËR/KUNDËR i votave duhet të jetë së paku 2/1 (d.m.th së paku 67% apo 2/3 e votuesve të jen PËR)

KandidatëtEdit

Votimi bëhet me "{{Pro}}" ose "{{Kontra}}", abstenimi "{{Neutral}}". Këtu vendosë një kandidatë

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:1635 Blaeu Map Guiana, Venezuela, and El Dorado - Geographicus - Guiana-blaeu-1635.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 16:39:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

This is G. Blaeu's remarkable c. 1635 map of the northwestern parts of South America , Lake Parima (Parime Lacus), and the route to El Dorado.

File:Danaus genutia 06847.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 14:29:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Basilica of San Vitale - Lamb of God mosaic.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 12:29:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lamb of God mosaic in presbytery of Basilica of San Vitale (built A.D. 547) Ravenna, Italy. UNESCO World heritage site.

File:Lower Manhattan from Staten Island Ferry Jan 2006.jpg (delist)Edit

Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 05:04:01
Version 1 Version 2

File:Lower Manhattan from Staten Island Ferry Jan 2006.jpg (left)Edit

File:Lower Manhattan from Staten Island Ferry Corrected Jan 2006.jpg (right)Edit

File:Esquisse d'une carte géologique d'Italie.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 21:20:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Geological map of Italy, 1844

File:Puerto de Cotefablo, Huesca, España, 2015-01-07, DD 02-04 HDR.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 19:18:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The tunnel of Cotefablo is a public traffic tunnel located between Broto and Biescas, in Aragon, not far from the Pyrenees, Spain. The tunnel is 683 m long and was constructed in 1935. It was the scenario of a famous tragic accident during the 1989 Vuelta a España, causing that the brilliant 30-year-old german cyclist, Reimund Dietzen, retired from active sport due to the crash.

File:Admiralty Arch at Dusk, London, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 09:41:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Admiralty Arch at dusk

File:St Raphael's Interior 1, Kingston, Surrey, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 09:37:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St Raphael's, Kingston

File:Hasht Behesht, Detail of the dome by Pascal Coste.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 09:15:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Komargorod pond 2013 G3.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 05:30:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dawn. A pond on the Tomashpilka river

File:Palo Alto Baylands January 2013 004.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 02:43:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lucy Evans Baylands Nature Interpretive Center
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♠ 02:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 02:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Nice time indeed, but rather boring landscape. No wow. -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice light and composition. --Code (talk) 05:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Honestly composition don't enthusiastic me, but the quality is very good--LivioAndronico talk 08:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Please dont use this kind of template, it is not allowed by the guidelines (corrected). Thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 17:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality is great, but the composition doesn't really satisfies me. There are lots of examples when imperfect objects looks great, but this one simply isn't one of these. -- Pofka (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per others, sorry. --Tremonist (talk) 12:47, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment too much sky at least about 600px IMO -- Christian Ferrer 04:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Both versions, as compositionally wanting. Might be a little better if cropped in on the building and reflection, but still not sure ... Daniel Case (talk) 15:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

AltEdit

Palo Alto Baylands January 2013 004 edit.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cropped per Christian Ferrer's suggestion. -- King of ♠ 05:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 05:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'll cut some more (or add some water) to try to make an horizontal symmetry however the subject attracts more and enough attention for me, thanks -- Christian Ferrer 11:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Composition is not bad and nice light, nice reflection but almost half of the houses are in the dark shadows and the shadows of the pillars and reflection on the door glasses? are a bit distracting. --Laitche (talk) 11:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Baltyk-1-8.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 20:25:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rewal beach during sunset. Special Area of Conservation "Trzebiatowsko-Kołobrzeski Pas Nadmorski".
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by TomLight Police - nominated by Yarl -- Yarl 20:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yarl 20:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 20:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated. --King of ♠ 00:49, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment dust spot (see note). Photo look nice but color curve is set a bit too far. --Mile (talk) 05:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 05:55, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now - per King --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:53, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice colors and nice mood but overprocessed. --Laitche (talk) 09:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. The sea looks like a fog. -- Pofka (talk) 10:49, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, sorry. --Tremonist (talk) 12:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great idea but overprocessed. Daniel Case (talk) 02:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Päikesetõus Pärnu jõel..jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 20:20:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise in Pärnu river

File:2012 Olbrachcice, Kościół Świętych Apostołów Piotra i Pawła 05.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 20:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of Saints Peter and Paul. Albrechtice, Moravian-Silesian Region, Czech Republic.
✓ Done New, better version uploaded. Please take a look again. --Halavar (talk) 23:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorry. Look at the upper left. Looks grey. There is undersaturation too. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done --Halavar (talk) 23:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Better, but no much wow and quality isn't the best. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:50, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Impressive sky -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Church tower still not straigth, maybe crop from left - some person there. --Mile (talk) 18:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done Bot things fixed. Please take a look again. --Halavar (talk) 09:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 09:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but per ArionEstar. --Laitche (talk) 09:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 10:50, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per ArionEstar. --Tremonist (talk) 12:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While it has been improved, it has not been improved enough. I still see some unnatural tones in the sky and clouds. The church could also stand to be perspective-corrected. Daniel Case (talk) 23:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Wikimedia Conference 2015 photo by Pine - 12.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 19:17:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior courtyard of a palace in Germany

File:Wessel Couzijn (1980).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 15:44:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wessel Couzijn (1980)

File:Santa Maria in Monticelli (Rome) - interior.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 12:43:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santa Maria in Monticelli (Rome) - interior

Santa Maria in Monticelli. A church was founded at the site in the 12th century and reconsecrated by Innocent II in 1143. It was known as Sancta Maria in Monticellis Arenulae de Urbe, in a bull by Urban IV in 1264. Little remains of the medieval church, except for the bell-tower. The church was entirely reconstructed in 1716 by Matteo Sassi, on a commission by Clement XI, and in 1860 by Francesco Azzurri. The church is the home to the Curia Generalizia dei Padri Dottrinari.All by -- LivioAndronico talk 12:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:경주 구황동 금제여래좌상.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 13:11:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Seated Golden Buddha from Guhwang-dong, Gyeongju
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by National Museum of Korea, uploaded by Eggmoon, nominated by -- Yann (talk) 13:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 13:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 20:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent quality. --King of ♠ 00:50, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Technical quality is great. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:22, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 09:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Many dust spots and dusts, better to remove. --Laitche (talk) 09:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 10:53, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support Yes, there are dust spots but I've seen a lot worse, God knows, in my own images; I trust the uploader can remove them. In any event they do not detract enough from the image for me to oppose it as an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 23:26, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version uploaded, some dust spots removed. Yann (talk) 16:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I was just commenting... but thanks. --Laitche (talk) 16:59, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 16:59, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Bromo-Tengger-Semeru-National-Park Indonesia Horses-02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 08:59:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Java Pony (Equus ferus caballus) at Bromo Tengger Semeru National Park, East Java, Indonesia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A Java Pony (Equus ferus caballus) at Bromo Tengger Semeru National Park, East Java, Indonesia. The Java pony is a breed of pony developed on the island of Java. It is a descendant from wild forebears of Mongolian Wild Horse ancestry.
    All by -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 08:59, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 08:59, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Is the background fog? --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, it is fog. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition --The Photographer (talk) 11:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tigth crop. --Mile (talk) 12:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Background too greyish. --Tremonist (talk) 13:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Karrenseilbahn Bergstation-Restaurant Dornbirn 1.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 06:18:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cable-car: Karrenseilbahn in Dornbirn, Austria. Restaurant in the mountain station. c/u/n by -- Böhringer (talk) 06:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Böhringer (talk) 06:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice blue hour lighting and very detailed. However, I find the composition a bit unsettling; the dining room is cropped at an awkward place at the top right, and as for the fence below, I feel like it should serve more of a compositional purpose or should be omitted altogether. --King of ♠ 06:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Thank you, you're right, but without a fence, the restaurant would be too much press. Thus, the image has a frame and acts more balanced. --Böhringer (talk) 08:48, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support totally works for me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:42, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Totally per Martin Falbisoner. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 08:48, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 09:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dark but pleasantly looking. -- Pofka (talk) 09:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My critical comment: the bottom of the restaurant is almost in line with the horizon. --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • {o} Sorry to disagree about the fence. I find it too disturbing, and not helping to the composition at all. A no go for me, I'm afraid--Jebulon (talk) 11:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support After thinking again, and re-review, I have to change my vote, my first review was not careful enough. I support now. "Il n'y a que les imbéciles qui ne changent pas d'avis".--Jebulon (talk) 11:24, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
@Jebulon: You removed others votes... --Laitche (talk) 11:56, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Its something original, good IQ, but compo could be better, without the fence. --Mile (talk) 12:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't think the fence is disturbing the pictures composition at all. Also I can follow Böhringer's explanation regarding this topic above. --Plani (talk) 13:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice creative photo but agree with negative opinions of the fence, I am not happy with crop the bottom part but I want just without the fence composition... --Laitche (talk) 17:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. It's slightly off symmetrical which is the most significant compositional issue for me. I agree the fence isn't ideal, but I don't think cropping it is a better solution. Diliff (talk) 20:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment These should be all the votes Jebulon removed. Laitche, would you please check? --Tremonist (talk) 12:24, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
@Tremonist: I think it's reverted. --Laitche (talk) 12:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok, thank you! --Tremonist (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
My mistake, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 17:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Slussen Stan May 2015.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 05:14:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from Slussen.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info South view from Slussen towards Riddarholmen, Stockholm. Created by ArildV (additional editing by User:MagentaGreen), uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 05:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 05:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Everything comes together so nicely in this picture. Normally I would complain about rule of thirds, but somehow the composition works here. --King of ♠ 06:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition doesnt work for me, i would crop some from above. Choped bus in bottom and bus which turns left dont help much. --Mile (talk) 06:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the special light lasted only a few minutes before it started raining again, it was no time to run home and pick up a tripod and no opportunity to come back another day. I was lucky that I had the camera in my bag. I used a railing as tripod and was unable to include more of the foreground (pointing the camera down had also given more distortion, its taken with extreme wide angle). I like the triangular shaped composition with Riddarholmen and the historic Riddarholm Church in the center. I think the sky is to beutiful to crop.--ArildV (talk) 06:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question I dont get it, why tripod, is this a stitch ? --Mile (talk) 07:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • No, but long exposure 1/5 sec.--ArildV (talk) 08:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well 1/6 - 1/5 could be handheld shot, depend on f. You could put ISO to 800 not losing anything, benefiting in compostion. Camera is good FF. --Mile (talk) 11:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Higher ISO would affect the quality, even with the D600. Especially if you consider that this image has large contrasts between light and dark areas. It requires post-processing of the dark areas (shadows), a higher ISO had given a lot more noise in the dark areas. The lens has not particularly good corner sharpness at larger aperture, therefore f/8.--ArildV (talk) 11:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Furthermore, I believe that it would have been a bad idea to pointing the camera down more. It would disturb other parts of the composition and provide more distortion, and the bus is not an essential part of the composition.--ArildV (talk) 12:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe you are rigth, lens are often a problem, i dont know which you used, i checked now sky, it gave you banding and posterization (see notes). --Mile (talk) 12:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Even when I stare at the images in full resolution (22 MP uncompressed wide-angle) its very difficult to see, I'm not even sure I can even see what you're talking about. Anyway, I do not think it is a big problem and the overall quality (especially if one takes into account the resolution) is above average for wide-angle-FP.--ArildV (talk) 14:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per King --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 08:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 09:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per King. --LB 16:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 16:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Even in 1280px I can see the posterizations in the sky otherwise it is a excellent shot. --Laitche (talk) 17:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 19:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Fine capture of a beautiful sunset at 8pm between Stockholm showers. --Pugilist (talk) 19:37, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support I don't mind the posterization since it's not the worst ever, far from it. But it does tend to point out how this might be better with more of the top cropped off. Stunning image otherwise. Daniel Case (talk) 22:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 04:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 09:11, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. I agree with Mile, the composition doesn't work for me. Although the sky is pretty, there's too much of it and it unbalances the composition. Better to use the rule of thirds I think. Diliff (talk) 09:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 15:01, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:47, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Parelstuifzwam (Lycoperdon perlatum). Locatie, Hortus (Haren, Groningen) 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 05:03:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lycoperdon perlatum
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/ Fungi
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Lycoperdon perlatum (Lycoperdon perlatum). Location, Hortus (Haren, Groningen) created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a great image, probably valuable for WikiSpecies. --Tremonist (talk) 13:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me, great quality though. --LB 16:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great quality --LivioAndronico talk 19:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:13, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI for sure, but it's lacking something special to make me go WOW. The cut grass at the bottom and the little mushroom at the left are a bit distracting from the main subject. I suspect that a lower camera position might have worked better for me. --El Grafo (talk) 09:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per El Grafo. --Laitche (talk) 10:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 11:47, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

File:2015 Góry Złote z Borówkowej 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 21:25:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden Mountains (Sudetes), Poland, exposure from Borówkowa
@Jacek Halicki: Double vote? or something wrong with your pc? --Laitche (talk) 12:26, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
It's my mistake. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Uoaei1 --Karelj (talk) 20:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Church of Santi Nereo e Achilleo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 18:29:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of Santi Nereo e Achilleo
King of : The current Cardinal Priest of the Titulus Ss. Nerei et Achillei is Theodore Edgar McCarrick that came from your zone --LivioAndronico talk 19:37, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

*Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but strong magenta flare around the right pillar of the baldachin, close to the altar. Even visible at thumbnail. Not correctible I'm afraid--Jebulon (talk) 20:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Nice correction, I strike my oppose, of course.--Jebulon (talk) 21:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too soft in focus for me in the background at the top. I think you should have set the exposure time to 30 sec, and have chosen a suitable smaller aperture to get more DOF. Does not reach the current very high church interior bar. Do you have the new version 6 of Lightroom? I can recommend it as it has a builtin HDR merge, from which you can combine several exposures and get a "super-raw" with much more dynamic range (you can find a few of these in my recent uploads). I think it works very well and convenient with single frames (I still use PTGui for HDR panos) and would be suitable for these kinds of church interiors to get better results. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • With HDR of Photoshop or Lightroom is a disgusting, also do not have time, because you see these empty churches are full of tourists and also expect also two hours to find the time that there isn't people, and are usually a few moments --LivioAndronico talk 20:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Araucárias ao fundo Parque Nacional da Serra da Bocaina..jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 18:07:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Serra da Bocaina National Park
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good! --Ralf Roleček 20:48, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Amazing light! Excellent mood but too noisy, so pity! --Laitche (talk) 23:50, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ArionEstar: I am supporting that one before this, this photo's noise is too heavy... --Laitche (talk) 00:13, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 09:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Horses make it. --Mile (talk) 12:28, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am guessing when you removed vignetting worked with wrong color space since this image's color space is uncalibrated so I've changed the color space to sRGB with derivative work (alternative). --Laitche (talk) 14:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @ArionEstar: I guess there are several causes that occurs as vignetting so I'm not sure. You maybe ask the photographer :) --Laitche (talk) 17:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

AlternativeEdit

Serra da Bocaina National Park

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Denoised, reverted decreased saturation, removed dust spots. Processed from the first version. --Laitche (talk) 13:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as editor. --Laitche (talk) 13:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Laitche: Yes, it's better, but vignette at the right and left uppers. It's necessary to zoom much for see it. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ Fixed --Laitche (talk) 13:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I Symbol support vote.svg Support now. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Roosa hommikuudu Tolkuse rabas.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 17:41:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tolkuse bog in Estonia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by MKose - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 17:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 17:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support @Kruusamägi: Wow! Nice time! Almost like here. S2 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:47, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 17:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment English description please. --Laitche (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Kruusamägi (talk) 22:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question @Kruusamägi: Natural place or Natural phenomena? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a morning fog + sunrise and therefor it could just as well be classified as natural phenomena. I don't know what is more suitable category. Kruusamägi (talk) 22:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
    • If you like crepuscular rays, I think natural phenomena is suitable. (but not sure) --Laitche (talk) 00:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
      • If the subject of the photo is the bog, then it's better in Natural places, but if it's the sunrise, then it's better in Natural phenomena. As the subject of my photo above is the national park, it's better in Natural places. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:50, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--LivioAndronico talk 18:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ślimaczek (talk) 19:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Paeonia rockii 2015 G1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 17:26:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rock's tree peony (Paeonia rockii)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is the flower revealing from a bud. The middle is still hidden partially by petals. The nature lives not according to a drawings for the sake of symmetry. I wanted to show freshness and awakening of this flower. This plant blossoms only few days, so new photos will be at next year. Anyway, thanks for the review. Smile -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality but no wow and busy background, many flowers show the best timing a few days in a year thus that is not the featured factor, imho. --Laitche (talk) 22:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per others. --Tremonist (talk) 13:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others, no wow. --LB 16:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 11:50, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow. Kruusamägi (talk) 11:11, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically well done and probably a good candidate for VI as well, but it doesn't really stand out against all the other high-quality close-ups of flowers we have. --El Grafo (talk) 15:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Harbour snowy mountains Rethymno Crete Greece.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 16:54:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Jebulon (talk) 16:54, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sunny mediterranean harbour and snowy mountains in Rethymno, Crete, Greece.-- Jebulon (talk) 16:54, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Underexposed --The Photographer (talk) 17:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not too impressed with the lighting, and in terms of composition, I think the pier on the right is awkwardly placed. --King of ♠ 17:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per King of Hearts. --Tremonist (talk) 12:59, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI definitely, but no wow. Daniel Case (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Seal of Florida.svgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 13:19:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Seal of Florida

File:Neue Wache, Unter den Linden, Berlin-Mitte, Nacht (HDR).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 13:15:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Neue Wache (New Guardhouse) in Berlin-Mitte at night.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Neue Wache (New Guardhouse) in Berlin-Mitte at night. It was built from 1816 and 1818 according to plans of Karl Friedrich Schinkel. It is one of the main works of German classicism. HDR made of three exposures (1s; 2s; 4s; 8s; 15s at f/7,1 and ISO 250). As some of you know I'm obsessed with this building. I made hundreds of photographs of it and uploaded some of them to Commons. Now I think this one could be FP. What do you think? All by -- Code (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Code (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 13:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the WB might be a little too blue. --King of ♠ 17:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done @King of Hearts: Thank you, I adjusted the white balance a little bit. --Code (talk) 19:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 19:25, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 17:26, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A bit fuzzy all over the image and this is HDR so it's a strange comment but too high dynamic range then I get kind of artificial feeling. --Laitche (talk) 19:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Laitche: Do you really think it looks artificial? I worked on this for hours to get a natural look, but maybe I looked at it for too long. You should come here and visit Berlin to see what it really looks like ;-) --Code (talk) 05:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Code: Yeah, I have never been Berlin, it's a night view but when I see around the bikes on the right side and the benches on the left side, it's just like the daytime of a sunny day. They say "More than enough is too much." but I won't oppose this :) --Laitche (talk) 11:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Laitche: It's not that I want to convince you but the brightness behind the building on the right side comes from some very bright street lamps and from the illumination of the other building on the right ("Zeughaus"). Thanks to HDR I could reduce the brightness there to an acceptable level, normally this part would have been completely blown. --Code (talk) 11:37, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I am understanding it's a normal because of HDR but I want (and I hope) HDR should be like a this kind of light :) --Laitche (talk) 17:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Heldervue Somerset West.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 08:38:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Heldervue (meaning "clear view") is suburb in Somerset West which is a town in the Western Cape, South Africa. It is situated in the Helderberg area (formerly called Hottentots Holland), about 50 kilometres east of Cape Town central city area, and 10 kilometres from Strand. The town is overlooked by the Helderberg (meaning "clear mountain").
Thanks for pointing that out, mistakenly put the phenomena cat instead of the places one. Still not 100% sure which cat would be best. Cityscapes or mountains?--Discott (talk) 11:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Cityscapes is IMO ok, D kuba (talk) 16:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Oversaturated. --Kadellar (talk) 12:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice view but oversaturated, overexposed or over-processing. Sorry. --Laitche (talk) 20:38, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose übersättigt, zu stark bearbeitet. --Ralf Roleček 20:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @SkyPixels: Could you see if you can reprocess the file with less saturation, and add it as an alt below? --King of ♠ 21:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overprocessed --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, sorry. --Tremonist (talk) 12:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @ King of Hearts - I have added the original, before any post edit. is it better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SkyPixels (talk • contribs) 08:03, 26 May 2015‎ (UTC)
    Better. But see Daniel's comment below - if you shot this in raw, you might be able to recover the highlights. --King of ♠ 00:55, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Striking composition, but overprocessing left blown highlights not only on clouds but houses below. Daniel Case (talk) 16:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Strand Beach Road at Dusk.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 08:31:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Strand Beach Road, Cape Town at Dusk, is a popular beach front walking area in the northern part of Cape Town.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SkyPixels - uploaded by SkyPixels - nominated by Discott -- Discott (talk) 08:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Discott (talk) 08:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I love the view in this one and actually was planning to support this nomination at first. Though, I doubt if the quality is high enough. Pixels are visible even on the closest buildings. Picture captured by Christian Ferrer (below this nomination) has MUCH better quality with similar cityscape. -- Pofka (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Pofka. --Tremonist (talk) 12:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Sète from Mount Saint-Clair by night 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 06:17:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sète from Mount Saint-Clair, France
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 12:40, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 17:22, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 17:25, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --George Chernilevsky talk 17:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice time! Clin 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very detailed nice view. --Laitche (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 20:52, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 05:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Scenery isn't that striking. But it was captured in fine detail from front to back with very minimal light posterization. Most of us know how difficult this can be with even larger, more photographically inviting night cityscapes. So the technical accomplishment more than makes up the difference. Daniel Case (talk) 15:37, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 20:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Kodak BW 2015-02-18 20-07-15.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 15:00:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The shadow goes inwards (bad positioned ligth ?), also camera could be tunred little bit to recth, to see front plane better. --Mile (talk) 15:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kodak of 1902.....good quality....for me is good. The shadow is not disturb for me --LivioAndronico talk 19:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the Shadow is ok. Maybe, right a bit crop? And a little bit more light? But its good for FP to me. --Ralf Roleček 21:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm missing an extra main front light, sorry. --Kadellar (talk) 11:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment [Edit conflict: per Kadellar, pretty much] I really think the front could be a little brighter, this should be relatively simple to correct. It's your choice of course. — Julian H. 11:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as a consequence. — Julian H. 06:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Front is too dark for me. Supporting surface could be better cleaned. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Tremonist (talk) 12:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 19:50, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lightning issues. Kruusamägi (talk) 11:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, lighting arrangement leaves room for improvement. Also, standing on the edge like that, the camera somehow seems to defy gravity – maybe a plain white background without shadows would've worked better in this case? --El Grafo (talk) 15:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Cervo do Pantano Perfil.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 14:42:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Close-up of a marsh deer (Blastocerus dichotomus) in Itirapina, São Paulo state, Brazil.
The marsh deer is the largest deer species from South America reaching a length of 2 m (6.6 ft) and a shoulder height of 1.2 m (3.9 ft). It is found in Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay. Formerly found in much of tropical and subtropical South America, it ranged east of the Andes, south from the Amazon rainforest, west of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest and north of the Argentinian Pampa. Today it is largely reduced to isolated populations at marsh and lagoon zones in the Paraná, Paraguay, Araguaia and Guapore river basins. Created and uploaded by Jonathan Wilkins - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Paneles solares en Cariñena, España, 2015-01-08, DD 09-12 PAN.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 14:16:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the photovoltaic power station of Cariñena, Zaragoza, Spain. The panels are mounted on dual axis trackers in order to maximise the intensity of incoming direct radiation. This solution enables the arrays to track the sun in its daily orbit.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of the photovoltaic power station of Cariñena, Zaragoza, Spain. The panels are mounted on dual axis trackers in order to maximise the intensity of incoming direct radiation. This solution enables the arrays to track the sun in its daily orbit. Poco2 14:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 14:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice composition. --Kadellar (talk) 14:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice composition, nice light, nice sky but bad news... stitching errors. --Laitche (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2015 (UTC) fixed. --Laitche (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I suggest litle +contrast and move curve a bit down, its better. Now too brigth. This would be Sci-Fi photo without that tree. --Mile (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good and as already mentioned very futuristic - looks more like artwork than a photovoltaic power station. I found a another stitching error (see note) but I am sure Diego will fix it soon. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ New version uploaded adressing all issues mentioned here (also yours Iifar) Poco2 17:32, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Stitching errors are fixed but moiré appear instead... --Laitche (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC) disappeared. --Laitche (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Moiré gone, thanks! Poco2 18:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I Love this original things,good quality too --LivioAndronico talk 19:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support though a bit hazier than I would have liked. --King of ♠ 04:42, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm not sure if there is a caching problem, but I see a very strong stitching problem with the fence post on the right side. — Julian H. 10:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes, the fences are disappearing or appearing. --Laitche (talk) 11:31, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Oops, how could I miss that? I tried some editing but finally came to the conclusion that the best I can do with the fence is getting rid of it, at least in the middle. Therefore I cropped it and did some minor editing Poco2 14:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Better. :) A weak Symbol support vote.svg Support from me then, because the place really is very cool but the clipping in the middle is quite large in area. — Julian H. 14:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great idea and composition, perfect lighting, reasonable quality. Pity for the CA on the fenceposts to the left. --Kreuzschnabel 17:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ CA gone, that was easy Poco2 17:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The image has huge wow. There is a CA on the fence poles to the left, but it is acceptable for me given the large resolution. I am a little confused about the horizontal angle of view. Could you please indicate that on the file page. A geolocation would also be helpful for understanding better the layout of the solar power plant.-- Slaunger (talk) 19:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    Slaunger: ✓ Done It looks like I uploaded the wrong version, the version uploaded now is free of CA. I also added the geodata Poco2 22:34, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks, and I double-checked; it really is gone nowSmile. One thing that puzzles me is why the center panel is horizontally aligned? Is it malfunctioning or under service? Do you know? It gives a striking effect and adds a lot to the wow for me. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:24, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 11:50, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 18:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:35, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:50, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 20:15, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:15-05-23-Berlin-Sachsendamm-Tesla-RalfR-N3S 7354.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 12:50:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tesla Roadster; Breakdown on the highway
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Ralf Roleček
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ralf Roleček 12:50, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice impression. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Please add an other license. Only the "GFDL 1.2 only" license isn't enough. New FPC rule. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, a good idea and a good capture! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice. Ich frage mich, warum du dort mit dem Stativ warst haha. --Kadellar (talk) 14:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Ohne Stativ, Brückengeländer und 4 unscharfe Versuche --Ralf Roleček 14:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interesting shot and composition but it looks a bit loss details, maybe with f/22? --Laitche (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 00:40, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. But I ask—what is the message being sent by this picture? That you shouldn't buy a Tesla because it will break down and you'll be stuck on the side of the road while traffic zooms by? Face-smile.svg Daniel Case (talk) 03:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very intriguing shot. --King of ♠ 04:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm slightly concerned regarding the legal situation of this photo. Based on which interpretation do you regard this as being ok? — Julian H. 10:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Was meinst du? Die Person ist Beiwerk, Nummernschilder brauchen nicht verpixelt werden. --Ralf Roleček 11:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Ich hätte hier stark bezweifelt, dass man sie als Beiwerk bezeichnen kann, aber ich bin natürlich diesbezüglich gar kein Experte. — Julian H. 11:25, 24 May 2015 (UTC) Edit: siehe z.B. hier. — Julian H. 11:29, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
        • "..daß sie auch entfallen könnten, ohne daß Inhalt und Charakter des Bildes sich veränderten.." ist schon lange gelebter Konsens bei deutschen Gerichten. --Ralf Roleček 12:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
          • @Ralf Roletschek: Hmmm. Ich würde meinen, dass sich der Inhalt und Charakter des Bildes sich ohne diese Person ganz erheblich verändern würde. Mit Person erzählt das Bild eine Geschichte: Sie ist offensichtlich liegengeblieben und ruft nun Hilfe. Das ist mMn genau das, was dieses Bild so gut macht, ohne die Person wäre die Aussage wesentlich schwächer. Ich persönlich hätte dieses Bild genau deswegen sicher nicht hochgeladen. Ist aber letztendlich Dein Risiko … --El Grafo (talk) 08:55, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 11:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A photograph that leaves the viewer slightly puzzled. I am still annoyed that I find it difficult to see the idea behind the composition - but I prefer "annoying" photos that are able to attract my interest. --Pugilist (talk) 11:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:42, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 11:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC) Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice idea and captured but sorry how many times I look at this, the details are lost I guess that with f/22 (this problem). --Laitche (talk) 21:37, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Code (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:25, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another very good idea, and achievement, for RR.--Jebulon (talk) 19:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good timing with the cars passing by and excellent idea. Eyecatching, and it can serve as an illustration for many kinds of subjects. The motion blur on the passing car naturally draws the attention to the red Tesla and the young lady. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good idea, nice capture. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good photo --Qian.Nivan (talk) 09:18, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For originality Poco2 13:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Poco a Poco. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 18:40, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Tuxyso.--ArildV (talk) 05:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gildir (talk) 13:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Not a good promotion for Tesla, though. I like the repetition of the wheels in the blurred cars. --Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 09:02, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Vehicles

File:Klensmedjan Horndal May 2015.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 07:43:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Horndal iron works.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The blacksmith shop ("klensmedja") of Horndals bruk, Avesta Municipality, Sweden. Tools used in the Lancashire forge of Horndals bruk or the foundry were probably repaired in this workshop. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 07:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arild Vågen (talk) 07:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 12:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Seems there is danger at the camera location. Your life is more important than FP! --Laitche (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is true but it is not a big house, it is possible to shoot from the doorpost.--ArildV (talk) 05:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting subject and very well done. --Code (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 19:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral In thumb I was pretty convinced it would end out with an oppose from me as I find the crop vertically unbalanced (too little below, too much above) and it seemed too dark. However, in full view it is a rather well done photo with many details, good light despite the many dark areas of an usual subject recalling us that "valuable is not always beautiful". -- Slaunger (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 10:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This composition is too smart for this subject. I hope you to get what this comment means. --Laitche (talk) 23:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Destruction never looked so good. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Xian China Cultural-Performance-02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 05:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Xian, China: Cultural show
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cccefalon - uploaded by Cccefalon - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer 05:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 05:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Bojars (talk) 06:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment WB is really off. --Mile (talk) 06:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I get the same impression. They must have used some really yellow stage lights. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Maire (talk) 09:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 10:08, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMHO it needs a WB correction. It's to me so yellowish, that it gets disturbing Poco2 12:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose White balance is off. It should have been corrected before nomination in FPC.--Jebulon (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Jebulon, you forgot to sign Poco2 17:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Indeed, thank you. Done now.--Jebulon (talk) 18:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jebulon, I'm aware the lighting was probably colored and it helps to preserve a bit of it but this is still too much. --King of ♠ 20:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I commented on the coloured light on my talk page --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:17, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I don't think anyone's looking for their white shirts to be pure white. But if the yellows were a little less overwhelming... — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I read explanation for ligths and WB, but i have my opinion. There is no camera which would handle WB correct at such "extreme" temperature. Especially when set on Auto white balance. Unless you made calibration with color cards (which doeasnt look like). This and choped hands of woman in rigth. --Mile (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC) P.S. I did try to lower T and it looks little better, i think from RAW could be even better.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, regarding the white balance. It doesn't have to be perfectly neutral in such a case, but too much of the actual variation in colour seems to have been lost here. — Julian H. 11:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The colours are too strange. --Tremonist (talk) 12:50, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Colours and WB are not a problem for me. Good photo! --Halavar (talk) 20:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Texelgruppe Hohe Wilde 2015.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 21:20:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View on Hochwilde (3480m), a mountain of the Ötztal Alps photographed from a trail near Lazinser Alm inside the Texelgruppe Nature Park
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View on Hochwilde (3480m), a mountain of the Ötztal Alps photographed from a trail near Lazinser Alm inside the Texelgruppe Nature Park
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Good composition, though lighting could be better. --King of ♠ 21:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What had been better light for you here, King of Hearts? The creek and mountain are in sunlight, the trees at the left are partly in shadow which is imho a good contrast to the bright and snowy mountain. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • It's a bit flat, an unavoidable consequence of shooting at noon. Granted, it might be the best possible light for this scene (as sunrise/sunset could create unwanted shadows) which is why I still supported, but not particularly inspiring in an absolute sense. The composition and contrasting colors are what I like about this image. --King of ♠ 05:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As already mentioned, the flat lighting. Personally, the image doesn't bring any wow for me, it's a pretty common sight. Sorry, but I can't see this as FP in any way. --LB 08:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment LB, I tried to capture the beauty of that place. I like the place and think I've chosen I good composition to transport that beauty. For me it is far from being a "common sight". I cannot say if a different shooting time had been better but the valley is quite narrow thus I think you will have distracting shadows, as King of Hearts has mentioned. BTW: A comment "does not bringing any wow for me" is not really appreciating. You should keep in mind that most of us spend a lot of time to produce nice photos. IMHO it is better to stay factual rather emphasizing two times that you cannot imagine why this [bad photo] should be an FP. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Tuxyso, what do you regard as a "factual" review? Dust spots and chroma noise pixel peeping? FP requires an emotional response to an image, "wow", and a failure to deliver that to a reviewer is just important a flaw as any other subjective opinion on composition or lighting. I think "I can't see this as FP in any way" is too strong/rude considering this is far from being FPX. -- Colin (talk) 10:48, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
        • Colin, I can say what is imho no deliberative (better word) review: Writing two times that an photo is no FP in any manner as LC did. It is absolutely OK to write: The images has no wow for me. Assessing FPCs is always subjective and not fully factual. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:56, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Tuxyso: I apologise for saying that I can't see this as FP in any way, I didn't mean to sound rude and I agree that it was too much. I do, however, stand to the statement that the image doesn't appeal to me. I do appreciate your work. --LB 11:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks, LB for the clarification. Everything is fine - the statement (mentioned once) is completely OK. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • {{o}}} Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral as I said during the QI process. For me not good enough with sharpness, therefore not FP-quality. --Hubertl (talk) 10:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hubertl - you've reviewed a different image :) For me the photo is sharp enough - a lot of details are visible on the trees, wood in the foreground and on the mountain itself. --10:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You are right, I am really sorry for my mistake. This one is better, even when I am not absolutely convinced for FP. Sorry. So I go to neutral. --Hubertl (talk) 10:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 12:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive composition. --Laitche (talk) 19:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another picture I wish I could say I had taken. Daniel Case (talk) 20:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm also not comfortable with the light. The very bright snow opposing the very dark shadows leave very little range for everything in-between, and the colours are very muted as a result. — Julian H. 11:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Julian--LivioAndronico talk 16:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me it has wow and I think a reasonable tradeoff has been made regarding the light, presence of shadows and time of day. I almost feel I can sense the fresh air and hear the stream of fresh water coming down. It is a little soft in focus in the upper right corner, but OK for me. I like the diagonal coming down from that corner. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The lighting is not the best, but acceptable in my opinion. The main issue I see here is the composition. The cropped fence is a minus and the square format is IMHO not helping to get into the picture. A protrait format from a bit further to the right (without fence) and closer to the river, could have worked better (not sure, because I don't know the spot). I mean something like this. Poco2 13:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Hehe, Poco_a_poco, photos are a very subjective matter. The composition is the aspect I like most (and most of the supporters) with this photo and was for me besides the beauty of the place the reason for nomination. Every element (also the cropped fence) is there on purpose. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:13, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I usually don't like this aspect ratio but I can feel the depth in this composition especially the combination of a creek and a path with this angle are excellent, seems very narrow valley so this sky is acceptable as well. --Laitche (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 20:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Mount Ida chain Messara plain from Phaistos Crete Greece.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 15:54:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Ida chain and Messara plain from Phaistos
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 15:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Messara plain and the Mount Ida Chain, where Zeus was born, as seen from the archaeological site of Phaistos, Crete, Greece, february 2015.-- Jebulon (talk) 15:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support The kind of landscape I'm always hoping to be able to take and upload myself. Daniel Case (talk) 21:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 06:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry very parts unsharps and don't understand what is the subject--LivioAndronico talk 09:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • The subject is a landscape. Sharp enough for me.--Jebulon (talk) 10:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For me the composition is unbalanced; some of the sky at the top can be cropped off. --King of ♠ 10:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, thanks. --King of ♠ 14:47, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 12:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice landscape and very nice clouds, a bit hazy but acceptable for me. --Laitche (talk) 18:50, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The landscape obviously has a lot of three-dimensional variation and depth, but the flat light hides all of that. There are still a few nice patterns, but I personally don't see a fp-level landscape, sorry. — Julian H. 10:59, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think it is sharp. Many other landscape and monument pictures get support here being much softer. I have suggested a crop, per King of Hearts. --Kadellar (talk) 11:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Nice -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:11, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Kadellar:, @King of Hearts:, I've followed your suggestion, and cropped out a part of the sky. I hope other voters will agree, I don't think it is an "alternative". Everybody disagreeing,(or agreeing now) can change their vote, of course.--Jebulon (talk) 14:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 15:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 06:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is indeed a nice view and those fields of aligned trees really do have potential to draw the eye ideally to the nice mountains in the back, but they don't. Colors and light are nice but as said the composition is not balanced IMHO and the detail is not the best, either, sorry Jebulon. Poco2 13:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
    • No need to be sorry neither hypocrite, Poco.--Jebulon (talk) 19:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks for presuming bad faith Jebulon, ...I used to have a good opinion of yours. Poco2 20:15, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is fine for me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:38, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:48, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wonderful landscape! --Halavar (talk) 20:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:2014 Picunda, Sobór św. Andrzeja (03).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 13:17:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Andrew the Apostle Cathedral in Pitsunda, Gagra District, Abkhazia.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just a QI for me, sorry. --King of ♠ 10:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For a "clean" exterior building shot, I would expect (probably per King) either great light or some other feature like unusually high resolution or a special composition to make it more than a good QI. — Julian H. 10:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian. --Laitche (talk) 11:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. Just QP. -- Pofka (talk) 15:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Tremonist (talk) 12:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Krause Glucke Sparassis crispa.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 10:55:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fungi Sparassis crispa, Family: Sparassidaceae, Location: Germany, Erbach

File:Viborg_Katedralskole_Symmetrical.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 06:43:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Morning panorama of the Eastern facade of Viborg Katedralskole, Viborg, Denmark
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Slaunger - uploaded by Slaunger - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 06:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent work, beautiful light. I like the silence of the photo - everything seems to be at the right place and rests in itself. -- Tuxyso (talk) 06:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The sky is too diffused. And what are the shadows in front? --Tremonist (talk) 12:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your review, Tremonist. The shadows in the front are from recently pruned trees in the low hanging morning sun, similar to what you see in the background at the sides. The school is surrounded with such trees. Personally, I think they help guide the eye towards the main subject, but that is of course a matter of taste. I do not quite understand your comment about the diffuse sky, I am afraid. I think it is rather visually attractive. -- Slaunger (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thank you for your comment and for the explanation. There are too many pixels visible in the clouds I think. --Tremonist (talk) 16:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for this nomination, Tuxyso! -- Slaunger (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the goemetry does it -- KlausFoehl (talk) 18:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Both sides are leaning in Poco2 19:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Poco a poco: Well spotted! I also noticed some dust spots, which are best removed from the source images in Lightroom prior to export to PTGui. I think I will rework the whole thing, and add some vertical control lines. Hold on, processing... -- Slaunger (talk) 19:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      • ✓ Done. Poco a poco: Perspective corrected, dust spot removed. Tremonist: Look again: I have remorked the sky a bit. -- Slaunger (talk) 06:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 12:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
          • Thanks, too! Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Splendid --LivioAndronico talk 09:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. I spotted a little moire, that should be simple to remove with your brush. -- Colin (talk) 10:35, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Colin: ✓ Done Well spotted and thanks for the advice. I have never tried to fix Moiré patterns before with the adjustment brush in Lightroom, but that worked like a charm. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:56, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose These black lines on the grass are way too distracting. The quality and resolution is great. But not the timing of the shot. Sorry. -- Pofka (talk) 15:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A little too dark for me. --King of ♠ 19:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per Pofka. Could be improved with a crop. Yann (talk) 12:40, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am using dual monitor, when I look at this with DELL U2412M the colors are good, but when I look at this with DELL U2413 (which is available sRGB 100%) the colors are faded. --Laitche (talk) 13:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Rotring Technical Pens by LucasboschEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2015 at 16:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Disassembled Rotring Isograph and Rapidograph technical pens, vector drawing.

Rotring Isograph 0.35mm technical pen
Rotring Rapidograph 0.35mm technical pen
ISO line widths and color codes, illustrated with Rotring Rapidograph technical pens

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is a set nomination consisting of four SVG vector image files. The first one shows the technical pens disassembled, image 2 and 3 show them being assembled and the last one shows the full range of line widths available, and their standardized color codes. The two pen versions shown (Isograph and Rapidograph) are the two main product lines by the Rotring brand. All by LB -- LB 16:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LB 16:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Don't you have a version with more resolution? Poco2 18:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Poco It's a SVG, a vector graphic :) --Laitche (talk) 19:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC) should not open it as PNG. --Laitche (talk) 20:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
    Oops, you are right. Actually I thought that it was for real! you got my Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 19:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small for me --LivioAndronico talk 19:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment LivioAndronico just open it normaly and press CTRL + how much you want to...it wont lose resolution since vector graphic. --Mile (talk) 19:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • CTRL + how much you want to works with every image,anyway i delete my oppose,but i'm not very sure --LivioAndronico talk 20:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The difference is, that with a vector graphic like this you can enlarge it infinitely without negative effects. The default display size really doesn't matter here. --El Grafo (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Infinitely? isn't true.--LivioAndronico talk 10:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
That infinitely means you can see the more details in larger images (loss details) but those are not smooth because you can see kinda path (like this) of vector graphics and Bézier curve in larger images, but it's actually infinite at times, that depends on the way of making. --Laitche (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
@LB If my comment is wrong, please remark. --Laitche (talk) 09:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, that looks extremely realistic to me. --El Grafo (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:56, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't understand the composition. Is it a set ? a picture ? Why the series ? Why individuals ? It lacks of clarification to me.--Jebulon (talk) 16:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Jebulon: It's a set nomination consisting of four SVG vector image files (your comment reads as if you think it's all one file). The first one shows the technical pens disassembled, image 2 and 3 show them being assembled and the last one shows the full range of line widths available, and their standardized color codes. The two pen versions shown (Isograph and Rapidograph) are the two main product lines by the Rotring brand. I hope you will reconsider your vote. --LB 20:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks for pinging me. I know and understand what I see, my concern is about the "set" nomination. It is a very impressive work, by the way. --Jebulon (talk) 21:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
        • @Jebulon: Set nominations are okay by the FP nomination rules, and this set can be seen as a "group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object." (see set nomination rules, category 4). The class of object is technical pens currently sold under the Rotring brand, all possible variations are both Rapidograph and Isograph pens and the extra images showing them disassembled and the color codes (and different nib sizes) are for illustrative purposes. --LB 21:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This clear explanation makes sense, I strike my oppose, and I think that such a quality job deserves a support. btw, I'm the proud owner of two FP sets...Smile--Jebulon (talk) 21:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice work. — Julian H. 10:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a great (and very nice) work! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 18:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:59, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Prospect Park New York May 2015 008.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 May 2015 at 00:49:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Prospect Park Lake

File:Bluebells ICM, Ashridge Estate, 2015.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 22:40:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bluebells at Ashridge Estate
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The bluebells with beech trees at Ashridge Estate. The image is the result of intentional camera movement (ICM), which creates an impressionistic effect. All by Colin.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's 16:9 so fill you screen. Or zoom to 100% to appreciate the slightly grainy streaks of colour. Educational imagery is more than sharp lenses and megapixel panoramas. Sometimes conveying the impression of a bluebell woodland is more important than a straight capture with all the distractions such a photograph may contain. -- Colin (talk) 22:40, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No explanation needed.--Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no FP, no wow to me. --Ralf Roleček 22:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't undestant this kind of images....I wait for give my vote --LivioAndronico talk 23:12, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Abstract, very nice. --King of ♠ 01:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support simply great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:37, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice fine art, but not FP for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. Great colours. Has both artistic and educational value. --Code (talk) 09:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice demonstration of a classic photographic technique – and pleasing to the eye as well. --El Grafo (talk) 10:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, I like it. In this case I don´t miss sharpness at all. ;-) --Hubertl (talk) 10:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressionism revisited. :) --Tremonist (talk) 12:13, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice and useful image and remarkable but not outstanding. I like this challenging shot. --Laitche (talk) 12:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see no possible usage for such pictures. -- Pofka (talk) 12:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I supported this File:Allébron September 2014.jpg and will also support this. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I knew this image would be controversial. We are geared towards considering images on Commons as source material for the direct illustrations of a concrete article subject in Wikipedia. But only a fraction of our vocabulary concerns nouns, and only a fraction of educational material deals with such concrete subjects one can see or touch. Outside of such direct and obvious illustrations, Commons is a weak repository of images. How does one illustrate educational material on emotions such as "peace", "stress", "calm", "depression", "joy"? Or how about more abstract health issues such as "pain" or "migraine" or "cancer"? Or general topics like "nature" or "urban" where one wants a general impression of the subject without the distractions of specific examples. If you look on Wikipedia, if the articles are illustrated well at all, then it is with free historical work of art. Many of WP's articles are not illustrated, or illustrated with naive and crude image choices. But in a commercial world, were a picture editor can pay for or commission suitable material, then the choice is much wider.
Pick up a New Scientist magazine and there's a good chance the front cover is (or some of the articles contain) an artistic illustration or a surreal photograph. For example, their article on migraine. You can't take a photograph of a migraine. An educational picture editor will choose an image that helps the reader engage with the material, process and store the information they are reading. Sometimes the image helps that process, rather than being the information itself.
If you are British, then bluebell woodland represents Spring, the local natural environment, protected wildflowers, family walks, natures bold colours. And the above image can illustrate those without being an image of the specific beech woodland at Ashridge Estate in Hertfordshire, 10 May 2015. Without going too "contemporary art bollocks", what you get out of an image like this, is partly what you bring to it yourself. -- Colin (talk) 13:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
+1 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wish this could go into category Physics. Since its about Optics. cat "Places" isnt so good chosen, you show us technique, place is of other importance. We have 3 "space" cats, and none of Physics. Well, till then... --Mile (talk) 15:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
    • While I feel this is a good example of intentional camera movement (ICM) (and currently illustrates the Wikipedia article on the subject), I hope it can be appreciated more than just as an example of a photographic technique. If Commons is to embrace its mission of being a comprehensive repository of educational media, then it needs to contain more than just perfectly exposed, sharply rendered photographers of some object. There are so many missing "featured" categories, it is hard to know where to begin. Go to iStockPhoto and click on a category like Nature or Lifestyle. You won't find a picture of a specific woodland or a picture of a specific person. You find images (mainly of people) that deliver an emotion. And most of our featured images deliver very little in the way of emotion. Take the images young woman standing in a field or bike at the summer meadow. These aren't photographed to illustrate "lens flare", or to illustrate an article on young women or on bikes. But there's an educational use for them for sure. -- Colin (talk) 15:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Tomascastelazo's image File:Falling rain in mexico.jpg - is classified under "Natural phenomena", but is all you see just heavy rain? How does it make you feel? I want more of this on Commons. -- Colin (talk) 15:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Let´s look at this from several perspectives. We feature pictures of different types of architecture, and there is no one right way to architecture. We feature paintings from different schools, abstract, classical, impressionism, etc., and there is no one correct way to painting... The medium to represent those and many other themes is through the camera, through photography. But it turns out that photography, besides being a medium, is also a legitimate art form, just as painting, as music, as architecture. So why not feature photography not just as a representation medium of other art forms but for the art of photography itself? Photography has its own language, capable of not just registering "reality" but also capable of having its own discourse. My support of this image springs from there, from the recognition of the art of photography. If we deny the art of photography, we may as well deny all art. Not that everyone has to like it, just as not everyone appreciates architecture, or types of architecture, but we cannot ignore its place in the world of art. Like it or not, know it or not, should or should not, it has its little corner there. Have a look #REDIRECT[[1]] --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is right on the Monet Face-wink.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Category Places is not useful. This doesn't show a place, but a technique. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
    • It doesn't show a photographic technique any more than Diliff's cathedral photographs show an HDR stitched megapixel technique. It may be an example of a technique, but that's a very secondary aspect, and not why I took the picture. But worrying about what classification to put it in, is really tomorrows problem, and quite irrelevant to whether or not this is a fine image. -- Colin (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
      • My HDR technique helps to see the cathedral more clearly and with more detail though, and is fairly invisible to the viewer. Your blur technique helps to show the scene less clearly and is fairly dominant in the photo... Your photo illustrates the location poorly, but the effect of the technique well. They're both 'techniques' but they have opposite effects on understanding the place you're viewing. Not saying that's a bad thing. I quite like the effect, and obviously you chose the 'place' to suit the effect but I think Yann is right that the image is more about the technique and the effect than about the place. It's just a category, but I think it has implications for how we view the image too. Out of interest, what are the orange streaks in the grass? Diliff (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
        • It isn't "my blur technique" and isn't even an original subject for the technique. The straight photo is here, which explains the colours. Saying the "photo illustrates the location poorly" is missing the point. The purpose isn't to illustrate the specific beech woodland at Ashridge Estate in Hertfordshire on 10 May 2015. Nor, I believe, is its only education function to illustrate a photographic technique. That's like looking at The Scream and thinking only of a painting using oil, tempera, pastel and crayon on cardboard, or complaining it is a poor likeness of a person compared to a studio photograph taken with the latest Canon L portrait lens. There is far more to educational imagery than this conservative approach. -- Colin (talk)
          • @Colin you have a nice fantasy :-) and sorry, but you are not Edvard Munch too ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
          • I wasn't saying 'your' technique in the sense that you invented it. It's simply yours because you're using it. Also, I agree with you that the purpose of the photo isn't to illustrate "specific beech woodland at Ashridge Estate etc", but we were discussing it in the context of what the suitable category is, and if it doesn't illustrate the place well, why is the category 'places'? That's the point I was making. Perhaps we need a new category: "artistic expression". I don't think it's a fair comparison though to think about it like The Scream. That is an established artistic work, and would be categorised as such. We don't need to break that work down to a technique in order to find an educational use for it because it is already notable and as such educational for that reason - it illustrates the work of a notable artist. I don't agree with Alchemist-HP's comments above at all though. I don't think it matters that you're not Edvard Munch. Anyone can create art, and your works don't become art only when others start respecting you as an 'artist'. But I'm not sure that Commons is intended to be a repository for non-notable art. It would have to serve an educational purpose beyond being merely art. I think this image does that though, by being a fairly clear example of the technique. Not all art could necessarily do that. Diliff (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
            • I agree that media on Commons has to have some educational purpose, whether direct photography, artistic photography, drawing, painting, or video. We already have featured pictures that take a non-direct non-documentary approach to photography. For example:
Now I don't want to compare directly with any specific examples above, but just talk generally. We have images where the subject is contrived or the lighting hides detail, where colours are removed or altered, where the subject is obscured through movement or rain. The effect is artistic at the expense of a straight documentary photograph of a regular unaltered subject. But something else is gained, we hope, and educational qualities are altered but not eliminated. Some of us like to (only) take straight photographs that maximize their encyclopaedic value in their opinion. That's fine but not the only way to create educational media. -- Colin (talk) 12:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support you are really crazy --The Photographer (talk) 17:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry per Laitche --LivioAndronico talk 18:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Pofka, D kuba (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 10:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Diliff (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I also supported File:Allébron September 2014.jpg, but this one is just too much. On the other side the colors look fine and I cannot say how it would look if I had shot it, therefore my vote is neutral Poco2 18:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposers. --Ivar (talk) 05:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alchemist --LC-de (talk) 09:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gildir (talk) 15:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Encyclopedic interest, very limited. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Archaeodontosaurus, there's no requirement for any image on Commons, nor any featured image on Commons, to have "Encyclopedic interest". That's not the definition of "educational" that we use here. And it is wrong anyway, since the image is in use on Wikipedia, which is more than can be said for many Featured Pictures. To be "educational", the image doesn't have to be a source of information itself, but may help one think about a subject while reading about it. -- Colin (talk) 16:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Please note I did not say she was no sense in what I said was little. I warned the community about promoting this kind of image can be produced in two clicks. We could have quickly large amounts of image such that it will judge in various competitions. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I find your reply very difficult to understand, but I'd like to say that I don't think it matters whether it was difficult to produce or not. What matters is whether it's a useful or educational and of good technical quality. Some great FPs are trivially easy to photograph, some are extremely difficult technical accomplishments. Also, as Colin said, when it comes to usefulness, whether you think it's interesting isn't really the point. I think we (as reviewers) need to think beyond our personal interests and consider whether it could be useful or interesting to others too. Of course our personal interests will factor into how we judge images and it is impossible to completely separate that, but the more objective we can be, the better reviewers we will be. Diliff (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Archaeodontosaurus, we don't care if "no" or "little" "Encyclopaedic interest". It is irrelevant to the question of FP on Commons, and that's not just my opinion, it's our whole ethos at Commons FP which you should know. Encyclopaedic matters on Wikipedia FP only. Some people take "specimen" photos, as you do, and they are valuable and encyclopaedic, but many many other featured pictures on Commons are never destined to appear on Wikipedia nor any other encyclopaedia. Please do not confuse "Encyclopaedic" with "Educational", and for the latter, Commons has an extremely broad interpretation, which includes exploding light bulbs, hazy bridges obscured by rain drops, and lovers caught in a storm.
I find your "two clicks" comment insulting and ignorant. This image was not the result of going out one morning and getting lucky when I dropped my camera; perhaps fortune smiles on you that way. This is the third Spring where I've experimented with ICM in bluebell woods, which are at their best for only about one or two weeks a year. It's a particularly low-success-rate endeavour, and one that requires tweaking the exposure, focal length and focus to get the best results, and trying a variety of locations, angles and lighting conditions. I've taken many dozens of photographs before reaching one I'm happy with. And I spent quality time post-processing this as I do for all my images on Commons. So on one measure, this photo has taken me three years, not "two clicks". Go ahead and mock that if you like; it seems others want to. -- Colin (talk) 19:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I am sad to be misspoke. I know your work I really admire. All what you told me, consernant your image, I believe without a doubt. My only message is to draw attention to the risk of seeing our contests invaded by images in two clicks. For cons, I continue to argue that we are primarily in the service of various encyclopedias --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. -- Colin (talk) 09:32, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I state that all my FP are used in various items of wikipedia and 90% my QI also. But I think your phrase was very unhappy. As said Oscar Wilde :"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."--LivioAndronico talk 09:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I thought a long time, creative work is a multimedia as useful as an other, I'm very favorable to explore different techniques of photography or edition. I strongly agree with Archaeodontosaurus on the fact we are in the service of various encyclopedias, this is why I give my support here. Explorations of the technical and artistic possibilities of our cameras or hardwares have a big encyclopedic value from my point of view, as well as programing languages or as other knowledges. I support the pleasant image, the technique and the gait... -- Christian Ferrer 20:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank-you for your considered response.-- Colin (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As other opponents. --Karelj (talk) 20:37, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Crocodylus acutus camouflage.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 21:06:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • If it is this you want to show, you are of course right. But I still find the reflections too disturbing. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 10:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support A lot of reflections. Interesting. --XRay talk 18:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Inevitable reflections. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's not a typical image that makes you say "wow," with anything distinctive in it - but that's precisely how the camouflage manages to work so well. --King of ♠ 06:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 10:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but noise and I don't like the composition --LivioAndronico talk 11:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Of course it is a very tough task to depict an example of camouflage as you might want to show the subject and how it merges with the background - two contradictory requirements. But frankly, the picture here is not an example of a camouflaged animal. The reason why you don't see the croc clearly is just a combination of disturbing reflections with a somewhat unhappy composition. --LC-de (talk) 12:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the camouflaged reflections and the fact he is approaching the viewer. -- Colin (talk) 19:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I generally try not to “explain” my photographs, but I think it is appropriate in this case. First of all, mangroves offer difficult light conditions. Most pictures of mangroves are taken from the outside looking in, but the view stops at the edge of the mangroves, and seldom ventures in. This is due to the thick foilage that makes it difficult to see far into it. Once inside the mangrove, depending on the day, light seeps in and gives a very spoty look inside, with patches of light next to patches of shadows with a great differential in exposure values, basically photographing small sunlit areas next to shadow areas, and thus making overal light conditions terrible. As just as light seeps in, the reflections of the canopy make a very confusing scene, visually speaking. Reflections everywhere, sunlight coming in small ray like patterns, etc. See here #REDIRECT[[2]] and here #REDIRECT[[3]] and here #REDIRECT[[4]]. When the water is still, it acts as a mirror to a very complex scene, and it is hard to distinguish the real thing from the reflection.
Now to the crocs… When taken in lazy mode, that is, the crocs sunbathing, it is very easy to distinguish them in their environment, and this type of picture give una a good idea of the physiognomy, but not necesarily of their adaptive characteristics or their ability to blend into a scene. See here #REDIRECT[[5]] and here #REDIRECT[[6]].
Now, if we take a close look at the “design” of the crock skin, we see a camouflage pattern on the Surface, and further out, the texture of the skin give the crocs a different type of taxture base camoflage. Se here #REDIRECT[[7]] and here #REDIRECT[[8]]
So between the skin pattern and the texture pattern added to the reflections and to the choppy waters, the crocs blend in beautifully giving them a survival advantage or a hunting advantage. See here #REDIRECT[[9]], and here #REDIRECT[[10]]
Interistingly, when waters are still, the crocs laying still, just beneath the water, resemble logs floating around. See here #REDIRECT[[11]] and here #REDIRECT[[12]]
So, with all that, this picture is not a picture of a croc only, it is a picture of an environment that shows the blending in of a croc in that environment.
--Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is an interesting, and possibly a useful photo. The visual appeal is very limited though, and I would expect more of that for a featured picture. — Julian H. 10:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian, sorry. Interesting and useful but no wow for me. --Kreuzschnabel 17:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For Julian --Σπάρτακος (talk) 11:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Royal Navy Sea King helicopter comes to the aid of French fishing vessel 'Alf' in the Irish Sea (8675799486).jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 13:40:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Sea King rescue helicopter of the UK Royal Navy assists French fishing vessel 'Alf' in the Irish Sea.
@LivioAndronico Double vote! --Laitche (talk) 22:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support per Pofka and I can accept the quality in this conditions. --Laitche (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Just a comment about the suggested lack of quality: the scenery shows the irish sea during a storm in late winter not the calm sunlit mediterranian sea in the summer. --Dirtsc (talk) 15:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gildir (talk) 15:42, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad quality. 1/200 f/13 ? --· Favalli ⟡ 00:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great scene, very questionable aperature choice and lost potential in editing. As a result, the quality is not at a featured picture level, even for an action shot in bad weather. — Julian H. 10:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting scene but too poor quality (chroma noise everywhere) --Kreuzschnabel 17:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:59, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Three women tiredly look at Antoin Sevruguin as he photographs them in the late 19th century..jpeg, not featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 12:22:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Three women tiredly look at Antoin Sevruguin as he photographs them in the late 19th century
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Yann. --Tremonist (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose Per others. The quality probably nowhere is near the QP standards, not even talking about the FP. Check the middle woman nose. The quality is so poor that it is pixeled. -- Pofka (talk) 17:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It appears that this image was up-sampled, which introduced strong pixelization. I've uploaded what appears to be the original from the given source → @Yann, Tremonist, Pofka: please have another look. --El Grafo (talk) 18:31, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Quality still is problematic. Pixels spots everywhere, especially on cheeks, but visible everywhere else as well. By featuring this we would put the lath way too low. -- Pofka (talk) 18:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Quality is better, but still not good enough. There is quite a lot of noise, and it needs restoration anyway. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment per Pofka and Yann. --Tremonist (talk) 12:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Btw, what’s the thing at the center of the bottom edge? Doesn’t look like part of the original photograph. --Kreuzschnabel 17:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Ana Ivanović - Masters de Madrid 2015 - 02.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 12:10:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ana Ivanović at the Madrid Open 2015, Madrid, Spain.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Ana Ivanović at the Madrid Open 2015, Madrid, Spain. The crop is not tighter to see the net and have better context and depth. Created, uploaded, nominated -- Kadellar (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think my primitive brain made me vote. --The Photographer (talk) 12:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral due to quality problems. --Tremonist (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Can you please be more specific? --Kadellar (talk) 16:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • That grey thing was quite difficult to figure out what it is due to the poor quality of it. Tennis ball seems quite blurred as well. There also are a lot of visible pixels all over the player, especially seen on her face, arms and legs. This is the major issue. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pofka (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Its sport shot, Ana is well in focus, ball at some 100 km/h made some distance in that milisecond. Sun would solve it, but also spoil it since i like there is no clear shadow of player on clay which often disturbs so much. Maybe i would crop the net so you concentrate solely on Ana ;) (yes, we dont have female voters here). Gray thing Pofka mentioned is microphone, sure is out of focus - no relevance. At 263 mm this is very well executed.--Mile (talk) 18:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great.--Soundwaweserb (talk) 19:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but not outstanding for me --LivioAndronico talk 23:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Not quite FP for me either, the action you've captured is good (better if the ball is closer to her racquet though), but the composition not so good. I'd prefer to see her take up much more of the frame, but I don't think you have enough detail to crop it that much. Diliff (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Actually I prefer the angle and moment to the other one you nominated some days ago. I'd probably get rid of the net, though. Poco2 18:54, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think the composition works well in a portrait orientation, with the action being horizontal and the upper background area having very strong contrast (and therefore drawing a lot of attention). — Julian H. 10:19, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ana is very attractive however I agree background (and bottom too) are disturbing. The cropped version is far much better from my point of view -- Christian Ferrer 21:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For Diliff --Σπάρτακος (talk) 11:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Jatra Posters and a Tram.JPG , not featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 May 2015 at 11:52:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jatra Posters and a Tram
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Previously nominated image, no deletion requests from anyone due to alleged FOP issue, hence re-nomination. c/u/n by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as I just said --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I never understood such pictures, but previously some of them actually passed, so maybe that's just me? But for me it simply looks like: "The more you blur, the better it looks" ? By going this way soon we will nominate a few random color pixels for the Featured Pictures. It is barely possible to see anything in this picture, excluding that strange poster which is not extraordinary. I absolutely have no clue where it would be possible to use such image. It has no encyclopedia value. It even hurts my eyes by simply looking at it and I want to scroll down as soon as possible. This reminds me of some "randomly thrown tables and chairs" art. Never understood it and never will. Sorry. -- Pofka (talk) 18:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
There's a whole range of potentially suitable articles for pictures like this one: 1, 2, 3... but besides: encyclopedic value in a narrow sense is (luckily!) no requirement for FP stars on Commons. You have - of course! - every right to dislike a picture though. Happens to all of us. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
A picture of Commons must not be useful for an encyclopedia and also needs no educational mission. Commons is a free pool of media and not the photo database of Wikipedia. And this picture can be used very good in Wikipedia. --Ralf Roleček 12:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Blurring isn't a problem for me. Some images looks quite impressive with blurred parts, but in this one I can barely see anything. I cannot like something which I cannot see. It's like tasting ice cream without taste receptors. -- Pofka (talk) 12:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 22:54, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 10:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noise is a bit high, and I find it compositionally lacking compared to the other "blurred train" pictures we've seen here. --King of ♠ 00:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. --Mile (talk) 20:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As before: Good capture: makes you want to investigate the image. -- Colin (talk) 19:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King. — Julian H. 10:15, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For King --Σπάρτακος (talk) 11:04, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)