Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

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:Morro do Pai Inácio 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2018 at 23:54:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created and uploaded by Gustavo Couto - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Measured   Support - Not the sharpest photo, and the rock face on the left is a little dark, but the photo is beautiful and pleasant to look at at full screen (i.e., without pixel-peeping) and deserves a feature for that reason. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:10, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak   Oppose per Ikan, it isn't really sharp and that should have been possible, that's a big weakness for FP Poco2 06:16, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The sky is nice, but the light is in other respects not very impressive and the lack of detail results in this not being one of the best images on Commons, IMO. --Peulle (talk) 07:49, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak   Oppose Per Poco and Peulle --Llez (talk) 11:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 14:57, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Pipe couplings on a pressure tank under construction.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2018 at 20:55:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • That's ok Charles, but would you please leave a reson for your oppose per the rules. --Cart (talk) 11:19, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I just cannot see anything special; no 'wow' at all. An image like this with no encyclopaedic value, but submitted as an 'artistic' image has to be pretty special to fulfil the FP criteria highly skilled photographers/highest quality. I can't see a demonstration of technical skill (composition/sharpness etc) and I personally don't find the dalek comparison convincing - they look nothing like your shot. Of course humour (and do feel free to oppose my next FP nomination with its light-hearted commentary) is never going to cross all cultures/borders. Many members of our community are happy to vote for your inventive shots, but not this time. Sorry. Charles (talk) 11:42, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your thorough explanation. Yes, I experiment a lot, testing the boundaries and I take all votes given to such photos in good humor. Of course I don't expect a nom like this to just sail through without opposition, but that's not a reason for not trying/testing. ;) As for "and do feel free to oppose my next FP", you know me better than that, I never "revenge vote" or anything like that. I always vote on just the photo. --Cart (talk) 12:08, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I know you do, that's why I was offering you the opportunity to reject my 'humour'. Charles (talk) 13:45, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • We'll see. ;) So far I think you have produced some rather humorous photos. --Cart (talk) 13:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:58, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:10, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Mild support It is now impossible to not unsee that Daleks comparison ... Daniel Case (talk) 04:53, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Good quality, but the composition isn't really working for me; sorry to party-poop, as I like your whimsy on this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Ikan, sorry, I cannot see anything here that I'd categorize as FP-worthy Poco2 06:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:28, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Funny after reading the info-text on this page, but at first sight the illusion is not strong enough. A more explicit ambiguity of this kind File:Faces_in_places_(3205402229).jpg would have worked better with the same quality. Given the description, it's hard to figure out the purpose here -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:04, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Image:Edelweiss Elsighorn.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2018 at 10:19:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  •   Info created by [[User:--Chme82 (talk) 10:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)]] - uploaded by [[User:--Chme82 (talk) 10:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)]] - nominated by Chme82 -- Chme82 (talk) 10:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Chme82 (talk) 10:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Not sharp enough, IMO, and the flower in the background looks almost like it's coming out of this flower. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan.--Peulle (talk) 10:44, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 15:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Feldkirchen Klein St Veit Pfarrkirche hl Veit NO-Ansicht 20042016 1582.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2018 at 05:36:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • My art installations are on a world tour.   --Cart (talk) 08:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Anfiteatro de Pula, Croacia, 2017-04-16, DD 01-06 PAN.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2018 at 18:30:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info Panoramic view of the interior of the Pula Arena, an amphitheatre located in Pula, Croatia. This Roman edifice was constructed between 27 BC and 68 AD and is among the largest surviving Roman arenas in the world. At the same time, is the best preserved ancient monument in Croatia and the only remaining amphitheater having all four side towers with all three Roman architectural orders entirely preserved. Note: there is another FP of the interior of the arena. All by me, Poco2 18:30, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 18:30, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support well done. --Ralf Roleček 18:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Significantly different composition and a very deserving candidate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:59, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Wow, very nice --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:41, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 21:42, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks like the viewpoint has been really well chosen. (I'd love you to obliterate the two tourists!) Charles (talk) 21:57, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Now now, so destructive! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 04:34, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support To scroll across it is to feel like I'm there, whipping my head around. Great work. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support great picture! Speaking of obliterating tourists, it appears there's also the same person twice - due to stitching. See note. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Probably her identical twin! Charles (talk) 09:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Sorry, if I hurt somebody's feelings, the twin is gone :) --Poco2 20:34, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Balearica regulorum - Karlsruhe Zoo 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2018 at 13:33:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 13:33, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 13:33, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Better as a head shot I think; the head is very detailed, the body isn't good. Charles (talk) 14:59, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral per Charles's suggestion. Daniel Case (talk) 16:39, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Don't see what is wrong with the body. There's a nice pattern of shades of grey and is sharp all the way down the neck. That provides a good contrast and mirror for the head and crown. -- Colin (talk) 17:01, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Colin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support also per Colin --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:35, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Colin -- P999 (talk) 18:24, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice job! Poco2 18:36, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A fine shot.--Peulle (talk) 21:44, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Strong support Excellent -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:31, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 09:29, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support wow Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:54, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Yellow insects on yellow marigold.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2018 at 01:26:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • When they're busy at work, these small animals are not so fearful. Then one can approach them quite close. I was manually shooting this yellow butterfly when a wasp arrived on my flower. Immediately I tried to focus on it, and among three shots, one got sharp (and that was enough). The butterfly is a montage from three shots. Once I had those both, I could take all my time to focus on the front of the flower (three more useful shots), even if the insects moved, the most difficult was won. Thanks ! -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very good.--Ermell (talk) 07:11, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Nice work. Will support if you reduce highlights/overexposure on the butterfly. Wet season form? Good to specify for an FP. Charles (talk) 07:59, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Here it's the peak of the dry season. Now specified in the description. This picture may have weaknesses yes and I agree the legs of the butterfly are parts of those. I gave a try to reduce the light on the clearest parts of the body but didn't really get any significant change, and I don't want to create an artificial image that would look overprocessed. By the way, I got inspiration from one of your previous nomination, Charles : Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Large_white_(Pieris_brassicae)_underside.jpg. But it's difficult to be fully satisfied by a photo :-) Way to improve -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Thanks. Surprised that it is dry season as most of the images I can find online indicate that dry season form has brown mark on forewing. Charles (talk) 07:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 08:51, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good thinking with the stacking process and a very good result. --Cart (talk) 10:46, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:54, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support very good! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Solid. Daniel Case (talk) 14:49, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Colin (talk) 17:04, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cart -- P999 (talk) 18:28, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Beautiful! I was wondering what is up with the left antenna. It looks shorter and a bit fuzzy at the tip. -- B2Belgium (talk) 21:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Perspective. This indicates how short the DoF of one single photograph is -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
    • Ah, I see. Thank you! I'll be happy to   Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 09:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

File:San Sebastian Donostia Panoramic 1190583.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2018 at 20:43:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  •   Info View of San Sebastian with Zurriola Beach and the mouth of the river Urumea. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ezarateesteban 00:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice dynamics, something interesting to see in every part of the frame. Daniel Case (talk) 03:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great shot and super detail. Charles (talk) 09:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:51, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not sure why the far right hand side is included, which is just a tree and hard to see what is behind it. Although the image had detail and is useful, the composition isn't working for me. -- Colin (talk) 17:12, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:55, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment The sea level is not horizontal, furthermore I agree that the picture looks better without the tree on the right, or at least cropping half of it Poco2 06:15, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - I'd support an even more radical crop, to the left of the church. The parts of the picture I like best are the beach and breakwater, the green hill in the middleground and the sea. The city isn't all that interesting to me in this hazy light, and I also agree that the part of the photo obstructed by the tree isn't really worth including. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:15, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I won't change my vote, but I agree with some cropping. Charles (talk) 11:20, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I wouldn´t remove the branches completely, because they are giving the panorama an obvious frame on the right side. The view as it´s whole is very interesting and presented very well. The tilt of the horizon is marginal. --Milseburg (talk) 13:34, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • @Colin: @Ikan Kekek: @Milseburg: I have cut something off on the right but I don't want to go any further because otherwise the part of the city on the picture is too small and I also find the part behind the church interesting.--Ermell (talk) 16:13, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - It's better. I now mildly oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:38, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

File:African buffalo (Syncerus caffer caffer) male with cattle egret.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2018 at 09:10:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  •   Info As many of us know, our hair thins when we get older. There are several reasons why this buffalo has rolled in mud: for cooling; to acquire a sunscreen; and to keep parasites off his skin. Mud is his mineral-rich face pack - and when it dries it will fall off taking embedded ticks with it. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 09:10, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Charles (talk) 09:10, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Wow -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:01, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good light, good compo and an excellent -"Monday, this must be Monday..." photo. Getting rid of a few pixels up top for balance and cleaner background would make it even greater. See note. --Cart (talk) 13:16, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Done Good idea. Charles (talk) 13:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Andoin - Cascadas de la Tobería -BT- 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2018 at 20:08:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Thank you, Daniel! The image is only a small part of a series of cascades and the incredible thing is that this waterfall is quite unknown even to the people living in the province here. And it's an absolute magic location! --Basotxerri (talk) 17:56, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Very true, and I have a couple of other favorites that I'll be waiting for. :) --Cart (talk) 21:51, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Malachite kingfisher (Corythornis cristatus cristatus) Namibia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2018 at 16:09:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • I'm afraid not. Size is around 13cm, so I'm actually about 6m away. Charles (talk) 07:30, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:05, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:35, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:57, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 19:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:48, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 12:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Maybe nice, but the tip of the beak and the legs are not sharp. Using 560 mm f8 should work. I wonder why not here. Also the lower area of the picture is noisy. --Hockei (talk) 15:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Did you check the Canon APS-C DoF chart Hockei? DoF is 3cm and kingfishers 'lean forward' when perching, so feet will unfortunately not be in focus at 6m. I see no significant noise. Charles (talk) 16:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Kingfishers are soooo hard to shoot, and this is a pretty good one. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

File:ET Afar asv2018-01 img100 Ertale.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2018 at 09:25:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   I don't think it is possible to get such a photo tack sharp. I got blurry heat haze on a summer's day, just imagine what this place must generate. --Cart (talk) 10:26, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Pirogue and tiny wooded island reflecting in the water.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2018 at 01:24:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Kranhäuser Cologne, April 2018 -01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2018 at 20:20:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Słonecznik (Mittagstein, Polední kámen) in the winter 2018 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2018 at 16:46:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Śnieżka (Sněžka, Schneekoppe) - view from Słonecznik (Mittagstein, Polední kámen).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2018 at 13:26:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 13:26, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Pudelek (talk) 13:26, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Poor composition and small size --The Photographer 13:52, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support yes, the size is rather small - but the compo isn't poor at all, imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:20, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Not perfect, but makes up for it with great winter atmosphere. Daniel Case (talk) 22:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Martin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:32, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The motif is well chosen and the composition is very good. The little size is a very small drop of bitterness. --Milseburg (talk) 12:00, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:07, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:34, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:05, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ralf Roleček 22:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Looks grey. Dull colors. Sad and uninteresting -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

File:McClures Beach, Point Reyes National Seashore.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2018 at 11:30:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

those rocks are impassable, usually birds stay sleeping in the same positon or jump directly to fly --The Photographer 17:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak   Oppose. To me the left crop is at an awkward place, and the large rock formation in the middle is too centered. -- King of ♠ 17:52, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 19:31, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, but it looks oversharpened --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:04, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes, it looks a little oversharpened but I'm forgiving that as a byproduct of the long exposure. Otherwise, I love it ... reminds me of a Roger Dean album cover, perhaps Drama, with rocks hitting the same angle as the ice on that one. Daniel Case (talk) 22:47, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Sure, there's some randomness to the left and right crops, but I love what's there - the tall rocks with a pair of gulls on them and the profusion of mussels, in particular. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:43, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:07, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:44, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak   Oppose, in full size looks much better than in thumbnail size but still I think that the composition would be much better cropping a portion on the right so that the focus moves to the mussels in the front Poco2 18:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basile Morin (talk) 01:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Cinque dita 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2018 at 06:22:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:22, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 06:22, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:10, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A good but also a quite common mountain portrait. The mast on the right side is leaning in. --Milseburg (talk) 11:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
    •   Done The mast is vertical now --Llez (talk) 13:10, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
      • Yes, the tilt of the mast is gone but the problem is retouched badly. This becomes clearer while comparing the mountain station in the current version with the former one. Sorry. --Milseburg (talk) 12:14, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
        • You are right, there was a mistake in the correction. I uploaded a new version, please have again a look on it and compare with the previous (bad) correction --Llez (talk) 15:19, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
          • The problems around the mast and mountain station has been resolved now in my eyes. But now Ikan has drawn attention to another problem. --Milseburg (talk) 13:25, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A bit soft but it looks like this was the best that could be done. Lovely colors and light. Daniel Case (talk) 18:02, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nicely composed and an interesting subject. Technically it's all you can get out of the 500D as far as I know from my own experience. --Code (talk) 19:20, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:37, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Striking, but the sky is a bit blotchy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:24, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Ikan, there are artifacts in the sky Poco2 18:59, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 04:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Blotches and posterization in the sky - not an FP to me, sorry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:39, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose the sky as Ikan Charles (talk) 07:35, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Entzia - Paisaje -BT- 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2018 at 17:09:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Spain
  •   Info All by me. -- Basotxerri (talk) 17:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I've chosen B&W for this because lack of interesting colours, the sun was already quite high and it was hazy. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 17:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very nice atmosphere. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 19:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Quite good, very nice undulating landscape. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I understand the situation, but nonetheless: B&W for this kind of landscape doesn't work for me, sorry. --A.Savin 23:22, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • No problem, that's a matter of tastes. Thank you for your opinion! --Basotxerri (talk) 16:04, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support It could be stronger if you lost that cloud from the upper left. Daniel Case (talk) 02:39, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per A.Savin --Milseburg (talk) 11:55, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Excellent!!, please try remode the upper left cloud --The Photographer 13:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Onça do Pantanal.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2018 at 21:26:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • I've got this lens and know how better it can be at 400mm, handheld with the stabilization. But the subject is interesting enough to strike my vote -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:56, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support a great, possibly iconic shot that just shouldn't be overly pixelpeeped... honestly, I don't know what could have been done better. Equipment and exif look perfectly fine to me. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I've seen jaguars in the Pantanal and they are not that colour. Charles (talk) 07:47, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I disagree the sharpness is an issue. The technical quality seems fine for a 400mm telephoto. At 6MP it looks completely sharp and would print A4 just fine. Charles, what specifically is wrong with the colour? Do you think the white balance is wrong? Surely the colour will change somewhat depending on ambient light. -- Colin (talk) 09:02, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Colour is too orange - check out the colour of the eyes - no other images on Google show this colour. Charles (talk) 12:56, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • If you take away the ambient soft yellow light and make the WB totally neutral (I did that in PS), you can see that there is something orange reflected in the jaguar's eyes. Orange is a preferred color to wear among some game keepers (and hunters) since many animals are color blind and they perceive it as grey while we humans can see each other even in dense foliage. This might be something like that reflecting. --Cart (talk) 15:02, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • No it's not a reflection. 400mm lens. It's a false colour. Charles (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support, along similar lines as Martin. This reminds me of an illustration from "Where the Wild Things Are", except that it's a real wild thing and a real photo. Also reminds me of paintings by Le Douanier Rousseau. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:10, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support This is a picture more than a photo (and those are rare here at FPC) so composition and wow overrules technical pixel-peep-perfection. The overall light in the pic is warm, creating an ambiance, so it's normal that the jaguar gets a hint of that tone too. --Cart (talk) 11:26, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per above. -- Colin (talk) 11:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per others. --El Grafo (talk) 12:02, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 12:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:04, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cart -- P999 (talk) 18:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cart. Mood makes me think of the cover of Fleetwood Mac's Tango in the Night. It has imperfections, yes, but those imperfections are what gives it its impact. Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Not perfect, yet close to it --A.Savin 23:18, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 10:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Granada (talk) 18:43, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:14, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 07:59, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support IMO wow factor there is. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 07:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:42, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Paisaje cerca de la mina de Collahuasi, Chile, 2016-02-10, DD 16-21 PAN.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2018 at 18:41:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

@Poco a poco: Which makes this image all the more extraordinary ... Daniel Case (talk) 16:08, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question - How many degrees is this panorama? It would be good to include that in the file description, too, I think. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:22, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
    Ikan, it is aprox. 200 degrees (the road on left and right side is the same), I added it to the file description, along with the geodata (middle of nowhere) Poco2 07:50, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:17, 19 April 2018 (UTC)