Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder

Shortcut
COM:KEB
Diese Projektseite in anderen Sprachen:
Springe zu den aktuellen Kandidaten Springe zu den aktuellen Kandidaten

Dies sind die Kandidaten für die exzellenten Bilder. Beachte, dass es sich hierbei nicht um das Bild des Tages handelt.

FormalienEdit

NominierungEdit

Leitsätze für die NominierungEdit

Bitte lies alle Leitsätze (Englisch) vor der Nominierung.

Dies ist eine Zusammenfassung von Kriterien, auf die du bei der Einreichung und Bewertung von Exzellenz-Kandidaten achten solltest:

  • AuflösungFotografien mit einer Auflösung unter 2 Millionen Pixel werden in der Regel abgelehnt, außer unter „stark mildernden Umständen“. Beachte, dass ein 1600 x 1200 großes Foto 1,92 Megapixel hat und damit weniger als 2 Millionen.
Grafiken auf Commons können auch in anderen Weisen als zur Anzeige auf einen herkömmlichen Computerbildschirm verwendet werden. Sie können auch als Ausdruck oder zur Anzeige auf hochauflösenden Bildschirmen verwendet werden. Man kann nicht vorhersagen, welche Geräte in Zukunft Anwendung finden, deshalb ist es wichtig, dass die nominierten Bilder die höchstmögliche Auflösung haben.
  • Eingescannte Bilder – solange es keine offizielle Richtlinie gibt, findet man unter Help:Scannen für verschiedene Typen von Bildern Hinweise für die Vorbereitung, die hilfreich sein können.
  • Fokus – jedes wichtige Objekt im Bild sollte normalerweise scharf sein.
  • Vordergrund und Hintergrund – Objekte im Vorder- und Hintergrund können stören. Kontrolliere, ob etwas vor dem Motiv des Bildes wichtige Elemente verdeckt. Auch soll nichts im Hintergrund die Komposition verderben, zum Beispiel eine Straßenlampe, die über dem Kopf einer abgebildeten Person „steht“.
  • Allgemeine Qualität – nominierte Bilder sollten von hoher technischer Qualität sein.
  • Digitale Manipulationen betrügen nicht in jedem Fall den Betrachter. Digitale Nachbearbeitungen, um Fehler von Fotografien zu korrigieren, sind allgemein akzeptiert, vorausgesetzt, sie sind begrenzt und gut gemacht, ohne dabei betrügen zu wollen. Akzeptiert werden normalerweise Beschneiden, perspektivische Korrekturen, Schärfen und Verwischen sowie Farb- und Belichtungskorrekturen. Umfangreichere Korrekturen wie das Entfernen von störenden Hintergrundobjekten sollten in der Bildbeschreibung mit Hilfe der Vorlage {{Retouched picture}} klar beschrieben werden. Nicht oder falsch beschriebenen Manipulationen, die dazu führen, dass das Hauptmotiv falsch dargestellt wird, sind unter keinen Umständen akzeptabel.
  • Wertunser Hauptziel ist das Hervorheben der wertvollsten Bilder von allen anderen. Bilder sollten irgendwie etwas Besonderes sein. Darum sei dir bewusst, dass:
    • nahezu jeder Sonnenuntergang ästhetisch ansprechend ist und die meisten keinen wesentlichen Unterschied aufweisen zu anderen,
    • Nachtaufnahmen hübsch sind, aber dass man normalerweise mit Aufnahmen bei Tag mehr Details zeigen kann,
    • schön nicht immer wertvoll bedeuten muss.

Auf der fachlichen Seite gibt es die Belichtung, die Komposition, die Bewegungskontrolle und die Fokustiefe zu beachten.

  • Belichtung bezieht sich auf die Verschluss-Blende-Kombination, die ein Bild mit einer Tonkurve wiedergibt. Idealerweise bildet diese Tonkurve in akzeptabler Genauigkeit Schatten- und Spitzlichtbereiche im Bild ab. Dies nennt man „Belichtungsspielraum“. Bilder können im niedrigen Teil der Tonkurve (unterer Bereich), im mittleren (mittlerer Bereich) oder hohen Teil (oberer Bereich) liegen. Digitale Kameras (oder Bilder) haben einen engeren Belichtungsspielraum als Fotofilme. Fehlende Genauigkeit im Schattenbereich ist nicht unbedingt ein Nachteil. Tatsächlich kann dies ein gewünschter Effekt sein. Eingebrannte Spitzenlichter sind dagegen ein störendes Element.
  • Komposition bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der Elemente im Bild selbst. Die „Drittel-Regel“ ist ein guter Grundsatz für die Komposition und ein Erbe der Gemäldemalerei. Die Idee ist, das Bild mit jeweils zwei horizontalen und zwei vertikalen Linien zu teilen. Dadurch wird das Bild in horizontale und vertikale Drittel geteilt. Das Motiv im Zentrum des Bildes zu platzieren, ist oft weniger interessant, als es auf einem der vier Schnittpunkte der horizontalen und vertikalen Schnittlinien zu platzieren. Der Horizont sollte eigentlich niemals in der Mitte des Bildes liegen, wo er das Bild in zwei Hälften „teilt“. Die obere oder untere horizontale Linie ist oft eine gute Wahl. Der Hauptgedanke ist, den Raum zu nutzen, um ein dynamisches Bild zu schaffen.
  • Bewegungskontrolle bezieht sich auf die Weise, wie die Bewegung im Bild abgebildet wird. Die Bewegung kann stillstehend oder verschwommen sein. Weder das eine noch das andere ist besser; es kommt auf den Zweck der Aufnahme an. Bewegung ist relativ innerhalb der Objekte des Bildes. Zum Beispiel vermittelt uns das Fotografieren eines relativ zum Hintergrund stillstehenden Rennwagens kein Gefühl für das Tempo oder die Bewegung. Also zwingt uns die Fototechnik, das Motiv stillstehend vor verschwommenem Hintergrund abzubilden, wodurch ein Gefühl für die Bewegung entsteht. Dies nennt man „Schwenken“. Andererseits kann eine Aufnahme eines im Vergleich zur Umgebung stillstehenden Basketballspielers während eines hohen Sprunges das „Unnatürliche“ der Natur dieser Pose sichtbar machen.
  • Fokustiefe (DOF – Depth Of Field) bezieht sich auf den Fokusbereich vor und hinter dem Hauptmotiv. Die Fokustiefe wird abhängig von den spezifischen Erfordernissen jedes Bildes gewählt. Große oder kleine Fokustiefe kann auf die eine oder andere Weise die Qualität der Aufnahme vergrößern oder schmälern. Geringe Fokustiefe kann die Aufmerksamkeit auf das Hauptmotiv des Bildes lenken, das Hauptmotiv erscheint dadurch von seiner Umgebung gelöst. Hohe Fokustiefe bringt Abstände zwischen Motiven zur Geltung. Objektive mit kurzer Brennweite (Weitwinkel) ergeben eine hohe Fokustiefe, umgekehrt haben Objektive mit langer Brennweite (Teleobjektive) eine flache Fokustiefe. Kleine Blendenöffnungen bringen große Fokustiefe, und umgekehrt große Blendenöffnungen bringen flache Fokustiefen.

Bei den grafischen Elementen gibt es Form, Volumen, Farbe, Struktur, Perspektive, Balance, Proportion, usw.

  • Form bezieht sich auf den Umriss des Hauptmotivs.
  • Volumen bezieht sich die dreidimensionale Qualität des Motivs. Diese wird durch Seitenlicht herausgebildet. Im Gegenteil zum allgemeinen Glauben ist Frontbeleuchtung nicht die beste Wahl. Frontbeleuchtung lässt das Motiv abflachen. Das beste Tageslicht hat man am frühen Morgen oder nachmittags.
  • Farbe ist wichtig. Übersättigte Farben sind nicht gut.
  • Struktur bezieht sich auf die Oberflächenqualität des Motivs. Diese wird durch Seitenbeleuchtung verbessert.
  • Perspektive bezieht sich auf den „Grad“ zusammen mit Linien, die in einen Fluchtpunkt innerhalb oder außerhalb des Bildes enden.
  • Balance bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der Motive innerhalb des Bildes, die entweder das scheinbar gleiche Gewicht haben oder schwerer auf einer Seite erscheinen.
  • Proportion bezieht sich auf die Größenunterschiede der Objekte im Bild. Normalerweise tendieren wir dazu, kleine Gegenstände klein im Vergleich zu anderen darzustellen. Eine gute Methode kann aber sein, kleine Objekte groß im Gegensatz zu wirklichen Größenverhältnissen abzubilden. Zum Beispiel: Eine kleine Blume überwiegt gegenüber einem großen Berg. Dies nennt man Maßstabsinversion.
Nicht alle Elemente müssen berücksichtigt werden. Einige Fotografien können anhand individueller Eigenschaften beurteilt werden. Für ein Bild kann die Farbe oder die Struktur wichtig sein, oder Farbe und Strukur, usw.
  • Symbolische Aussage oder Relevanz…. Der Meinungskrieg kann hier beginnen…. Ein schlechtes Bild von einem sehr schwierigen Motiv ist ein besseres Bild als ein gutes Bild von einem gewöhnlichen Motiv. Ein gutes Bild von einem schwierigen Motiv ist ein außergewöhnliches Foto.
Bilder können kulturell beeinflusst sein durch den Fotografen und/oder den Betrachter. Die Bedeutung des Bildes sollte vor dem kulturellen Hintergrund des Bildes beurteilt werden, nicht durch den kulturellen Hintergrund des Betrachters. Ein Bild „spricht“ zu Menschen und hat die Möglichkeit, Emotionen auszulösen, wie zum Beispiel Zärtlichkeit, Zorn, Ablehnung, Heiterkeit, Traurigkeit usw. Gute Fotografen sind nicht darauf beschränkt, gefällige Emotionen zu provozieren.

Um die Chancen für einen Erfolg deiner Nominierung zu erhöhen, lies vor der Nominierung alle Leitsätze.

Eine neue Nominierung aufstellenEdit

Wenn du glaubst, ein Bild mit passender Bildbeschreibung und Lizenz gefunden oder geschaffen zu haben, das als wertvoll erachtet werden könnte, folge der anschließenden Anleitung.

Schritt 1: Kopiere den Bildnamen in dieses Textfeld (einschließlich des Zusatzes Image:), hinter den schon im Feld stehenden Text, zum Beispiel „Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DEIN-BILD-DATEINAME.JPG“. Danach klicke auf die Schaltfäche mit der Aufschrift „neue Nominierung aufstellen“.


Schritt 2: Folge den Anweisungen der geöffneten Seite, und sichere sie.

Schritt 3: Füge manuell einen Link zu der erstellten Seite oben auf der Seite mit der Kandidatenliste ein: Hier klicken, und füge folgende Zeile OBEN bei der Nominierungslist ein:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DEIN-BILD-DATEINAME.JPG}}

AbstimmungEdit

Du kannst folgende Vorlagen benutzen:

  • {{Support}} (  Support) (Stimme zur Unterstützung des Exzellenz-Status'),
  • {{Oppose}} (  Oppose) (Stimme gegen den Exzellenz-Status),
  • {{Neutral}} (  Neutral) (neutrale Meinung, keine Stimme),
  • {{Comment}} (  Comment) (es folgt ein Kommentar, keine Stimme),
  • {{Info}} (  Info) (es folgen Informationen, keine Stimme),
  • {{Question}} (  Question) (es folgt eine Frage, keine Stimme)

Du kannst angeben, dass das Bild keine Chance für eine erfogreiche Kandidatur hat. Benutze die Vorlage {{FPX|reason}}, wobei reason angibt, warum das nominierte Bild klar unakzeptabel für die exzellenten Bilder ist.

Weitere Vorlagen gibt es hier.

Bitte füge ein paar Worte an, warum dir das Bild gefällt oder nicht gefällt, insbesondere wenn du dagegen stimmst. Bitte denke auch daran, zu unterschreiben (~~~~). Anonyme Stimmen sind nicht zugelassen.

Abwahlkandidaten der exzellenten Bilder aufstellenEdit

Mit der Zeit ändern sich die Standards für die Exzellenten Bilder. Es kann entschieden werden, dass Bilder, die vorher „gut genug“ für die Exzellenten waren, es nicht mehr sind. Dies ist zum Aufstellen eines Bildes, welches deiner Meinung nach es nicht mehr verdient, exzellent zu sein. Dazu wähle mit

  • {{Keep}}   Keep (das Bild verdient es immer noch, als exzellent zu gelten) oder mit
  • {{Delist}}   Delist (das Bild verdient es nicht mehr, als exzellent zu gelten).

Wenn du denkst, dass ein Bild nicht mehr den Exzellenz-Kriterien entspricht, kannst du es für die Abwahl nominieren, indem du den Bildnamen in dieses Textfeld (einschließlich des Zusatzes Image:) hinter den bereits stehenden Text im Feld kopierst:


In der eben erstellten neuen Seite für die Nomination des Abwahlkandidaten solltest du einfügen:

  • Informationen über den Ursprung des Bildes (Ersteller, Uploader),
  • Einen Link zur originalen Exzellenz-Kandidatur-Seite (es erscheint unter „Links“ auf der Beschreibungsseite),
  • Deine Begründung für die Nominierung und dein Benutzername.

Danach musst du einen Link zu der erstellten Seite oben auf der Seite mit der Liste der Abwahlkandidaten manuell einfügen.

Richtlinien für Exzellenz-KandidatenEdit

Allgemeine RegelnEdit

  1. Nach dem Ende des Abstimmungs-Zeitraumes wird das Ergebnis am Tag 10 nach der Nominierung festgestellt (im Zeitplan weiter unten gezeigt). Also dauert der Abstimmungs-Zeitraum 9 Tage, plus die Stunden bis zum Ende von Tag 9. Stimmen, die an Tag 10 oder danach abgeben wurden, werden nicht gezählt.
  2. Nominierungen von anonymen Mitwirkenden sind erwünscht.
  3. Mitwirken bei Diskussionen von anonymen Mitwirkenden sind erwünscht.
  4. Nur Nutzer mit einem commons-account, der mindestens 10 Tage alt ist und 50 Beiträge hat, können wählen. Ausnahme: Die eigene Nominierung kann gewählt werden, unabhängig von Alter und Beiträge.
  5. Die Nominierung zählt nicht als Stimme. Unterstützung muss explizit angegeben werden.
  6. Nominierungen können vom Einsteller jederzeit zurückgezogen werden. Dies geschieht einfach durch das Schreiben von „I withdraw my nomination“ (eng. Ich ziehe meine Nominierung zurück)
    oder durch Hinzufügen von {{withdraw}} ~~~~.
  7. Denke daran, das Ziel von Wikimedia Commons ist es, einen zentralen Speicher für freie Bilder, genutzt von allen Wikimedia-Projekten, bereitzustellen, einschließlich für mögliche zukünftige Projekte. Dies ist nicht einfach ein Speicher für Wikipedia-Bilder, deshalb sollten hier die Bilder nicht danach beurteilt werden, ob sie zu diesem Projekt passen.
  8. Bilder können vorzeitig am Tag 5 (fünfter Tag nach der Nominierung) von der Abstimmungsliste genommen werden („Regel des 5. Tages“):
    1. Wenn sie keine Unterstützung erhalten, die Einsteller nicht mitgezählt.
    2. Wenn sie 10 oder mehr Pro und kein Kontra erhalten haben.
  9. Bilder, welche durch die Vorlage {{FPX}} markiert wurden, können 48 Stunden, nachdem die Vorlage gesetzt wurde, von der Liste entfernt werden, vorausgesetzt, das Bild hat außer von den Einstellern keine positiven Stimmen (Unterstützung) erhalten.
  10. Bilder, welche durch die Vorlage {{FPD}} (FP denied) markiert wurden, können 48 Stunden, nachdem die Vorlage gesetzt wurde, von der Liste entfernt werden.
  11. Es dürfen von einem Benutzer maximal 2 Nominierungen gleichzeitig platziert werden.

Regeln zur Wahl und AbwahlEdit

Ein Kandidat wird in die Galerie der exzellenten Bilder aufgenommen, wenn folgende Bedingungen erfüllt sind:

  1. Passende Lizenz (selbstverständlich)
  2. Mindestens 7 positive Stimmen (Pro-Stimmen)
  3. Das Verhältnis von unterstützenden zu ablehnenden Stimmen ist mindestens 2/1 (eine Zwei-Drittel-Mehrheit)
  4. Zwei verschiedene Versionen desselben Bildes können nicht beide exzellent werden, sondern nur das mit der höheren Zahl an Stimmen.

Die Abwahl-Regeln sind dieselben wie zur Wahl der exzellenten Bilder bei gleichbleibenden Abstimmungs-Zeitraum. Die Regel des 5. Tages gilt für Abwahlkandidaten, die keine Stimme für die Aberkennung des Exzellenz-Status' bis zum Tag 5 erhalten haben, außer die des Antragstellers.

Ein erfahrener Nutzer kann die Anfrage beenden. Wie man eine Anfrage beendet, siehe unter Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder/Was tun, wenn der Abstimmungszeitraum zu Ende ist.

Vor allem sei freundlichEdit

Bitte bedenke, dass das Bild, das du beurteilst, das wohlüberlegte Werk von jemandem ist. Vermeide Phrasen wie „it looks terrible“ (eng. sieht schrecklich aus) oder „I hate it“ (eng. Ich hasse es). Wenn du dagegen Stellung nehmen musst, tu dies bitte mit Rücksichtnahme. Bedenke außerdem, dass deine Englischkenntnisse nicht die gleichen sein müssen wie die eines anderen. Wähle deine Worte sorgfältig.

Viel Spaß beim Bewerten …, und denke daran: Alle Regeln können gebrochen werden.

Siehe auchEdit


InhaltsübersichtEdit

Exzellenz-KandidatenEdit

Seite erneut laden für neue Nominierungen: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Iglesia de San José, Ponta Delgada, isla de San Miguel, Azores, Portugal, 2020-07-30, DD 52-54 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 21:15:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Portugal
  •   Info Little chapel in the church of St Joseph, Ponta Delgada, São Miguel Island, Azores, Portugal. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 21:15, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:15, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The standard for religious interiors is very high. I don't see a compelling reason for pointing the camera up, like thousands of other photos on Commons, with the sloping verticals and cropped doorway that results. The angle-of-view leads the eye towards the ugly skylight, which was not really worth capturing. (the photo is tilted -- the chain should be a plumb vertical) -- Colin (talk) 21:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Very weak oppose I went back and forward on this one but I think Colin's reasoning is compelling. As I mentioned on a nomination below, there's nothing wrong per sé with uncrrected perspective distortion, but only when it serves an artistic purpose, and here I don't think it does. Regrettably the distorted walls are IMO just a bit too odd and they distract from the beauty of the motif. You do have an image of this motif without the perspective distortion, and if you nominated it I would vote for that one without hesitation. Colin, would be interested to hear your opinions on the linked photo. Cmao20 (talk) 00:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Mohiniyattam at Kannur district school kalothsavam 2019 3.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 18:08:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •   Info-Mohiniyattam is one of the famous classical dances of India that developed and remained popular in the state of Kerala. (Kindly ignore the white curtain at background as this was taken from a live stage performance)

All by Shagil Kannur -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 18:08, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

  •   Support -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 18:08, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Background line distracting. Horizontal aspect not appropriate -- vertical would have captured the whole dancer. -- Colin (talk) 21:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Oregrund (92909).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 17:30:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Ceiling of a room at Borujerdi House, Kashan, Iran.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 17:16:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

I captured bracketing mode 5 picture with 5 level of exposure. but the sky was empty and a little dirty with dust. I preferred white sky instead of that sky.--Amir Pashaei (talk) 22:13, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support White sky doesnt bother me too much, especially with this immense resolution. Cmao20 (talk) 23:59, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Anna's hummingbird (41124).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 16:52:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Plagiotremus rhinorhynchos (30873062447) (cropped).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 13:14:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Not taken in aquarium, this image, though indeed not anymore availble, was coming from one of their wonderful diving albums, this one, I improved a bit the description. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The unsharp coral takes up way too much of the image --StellarHalo (talk) 20:16, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Platanthera chlorantha - Keila.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 13:11:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Bruderwald Bamberg-20200106-RM-095212.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 07:38:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Water Palace, Jaipur.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 07:28:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#India
  •   Info created by Dey.sandip - uploaded by Dey.sandip - nominated by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:28, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:28, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose on technical grounds. How this made it through QIC I have no idea, but there's no way this is an FP with this extreme perspective warp. Both sides are leaning in heavily.--Peulle (talk) 12:41, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
    • I usually don't comment on my nomination, but felt I needed to state what I think. Heard this familiar boring argument about perspective many times now in FPC. Is it a rule that images need to have a certain kind of perspective to be acceptable here? In fact, this is the natural perspective that a wide angle lens like the one used will produce. Correcting that is rather an anamoly if you care to think differently. At the end of the day, this is a picture as seen and captured by camera and not your eyes. Hence the argument about perspective is very debatable. It seems that this FPC has long become a rule driven (and these are perceived too by some) place where anything much deviating is always opposed. What you do this way is you not only kill the nomination (now, a bunch of others will follow suite and just say "per blah blah" and get done) but also the spirit. Partly, the reason I had stopped nominating images here. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 14:06, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Please take a look at the Guidelines to see what I'm referring to. Under distortions, it says: "Perspective distortion should either have a purpose or be insignificant." That is not the case here.--Peulle (talk) 19:38, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Nice atmosphere, but per Peulle. --Cayambe (talk) 13:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Perspective distortion is OK for me if it's for a specific purpose - in the past I have supported obviously distorted pictures of, say, a building looking upwards. The trouble here is that there is no particular reason why wide-angle lens distortion adds anything to the photograph. Cmao20 (talk) 16:17, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Oberthür's Grizzled Skipper (Pyrgus armoricanus), Le Collet-de-Dèze, Lozère, France - Flickr - Frank.Vassen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 01:47:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Dry-sand Zen garden made of beige stripes a sunny day at Higashiyama Jisho-ji Buddhist temple Ginkaku-ji Kyoto Japan.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 01:16:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Piz Kesch Panorama beschriftet.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2020 at 22:29:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  •   Info created by Capricorn4049 & Staublex - uploaded by Capricorn4049 - nominated by Capricorn4049 -- Capricorn4049 (talk) 22:29, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Capricorn4049 (talk) 22:29, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Valuable document, but not FP quality in my opinion. Baseline and leading problems in the layout of the text, making uneasy the legibility (examples "Piz.Arina" and "Hairlacher Seekopf" overlapping). Several black caption lines are also either jerky, blurry, or of different thickness -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:07, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment Basile has a good point. The letters are pretty large at full size. Why don't you decrease the pitch of the letters, so as to leave a little space between each name? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Very useful and effective, but not a diagram of FP level to me. The overlapping of some of black labels makes it less than perfect. The image quality is not quite perfect, though that is not the reason for my oppose. Cmao20 (talk) 16:13, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for the labels per others. Besides, the Arial font is not at all considered one of the best when it comes to easy readability which is demanded here (nor in any other respect IMHO but that’s mainly a matter of taste). I’d give the Gill Sans or Futura a try, which have thicker strokes and characteristic glyphs. Letters touching or even covering each other is a no-no. --Kreuzschnabel 18:34, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Heino Elleri Muusikakool 005-rytmimuusika pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2020 at 21:23:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
  •   Info created by Lauri Veerde - uploaded & nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 21:23, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 21:23, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support No stitching error on the objects that are so near. That's not an easy task at all - great work --Capricorn4049 (talk) 22:37, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment A bit of purple fringing on the window. -- King of ♥ 00:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support per Capricorn4049. Cmao20 (talk) 01:20, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I see what KoH is talking about, but a good idea, otherwise quite well done, and I like the expressions on the musicians' faces. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Basile is right. I am removing my supporting vote until the name of the uploader is clarified and the personality rights template is added. Fixes of the fringing would also be preferable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:29, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose No source, {{PR}} missing, no description in English. Purple fringing and blown highlights through the window -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
I added the PR template. Eng desc was on the Captions section. I also copied that do the template. I don't understand this "No source" comment. Please clarify. Kruusamägi (talk) 18:22, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Are your the photographer? It doesn't seem so, then where does the picture come from? Can you provide a link with the license, or specify the file page? Concerning {{PR}}, as it seems to become the norm, please try to include the template in all your uploads with people (there's a bunch of portraits that don't have one in your imports). Your other nomination with people still doesn't have one either now -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Question Is there any chance to get some additional information about the equipment used here along with the number of frames before the stitching with PTGui? Poco a poco (talk) 19:42, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:3 Broadgate.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2020 at 20:10:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United_Kingdom
  •   Info all by Bobulous -- Bobulous (talk) 20:10, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I think this is suitably sharp and striking, but let's see what the Commoners think. -- Bobulous (talk) 20:10, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Very pretty building. However, the whites on the building at the top right are overexposed, and the blue channel is clipped everywhere including the sky. Also, the bottom left corner is slightly distracting. -- King of ♥ 00:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Neutral for now. The building certainly has the 'wow-factor' and the image quality is fairly good. I also like the people because they give a sense of scale. But could you perhaps go back to the RAW and darken the sky? The blown highlights in the sky on the left at the moment are easily fixable from RAW and they make it sub-FP to me. (there are blown highlights on the building at the right too) Cmao20 (talk) 01:13, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment Very nice composition and a beautiful building per KoH. If you dial the sliders back on the overexposure on the right and fix some CA on edges on that building, I would support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:58, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment I've switched from DPP to RawTherapee and produced a second version with reconstructed highlights, but the Wikimedia Commons "Upload file" page keeps giving an error (but only after four minutes, which is the amount of time it takes my connection to upload a 36MiB file). So I'm trying to get the new version in place, but it's proving difficult. --Bobulous (talk) 15:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Purpurreiher beim Nestbau, NSG Wagbachniederung.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2020 at 19:55:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Spiti River Kaza Himachal Jun18 D72 7232.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2020 at 06:05:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Archangel Raphael Coptic Orthodox Church -- Houston Clear Lake City, Texas.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2020 at 18:20:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Oppose per KoH. Jim Evans, it is not really stated explictly, but the rules for FP state that 'Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer' i.e. alterations are only acceptable to fix flaws in an image, remove distracting elements etc. I think altering the sky would count as 'cheating' a little - I'm not saying there is any deceptive intent, but I still think it's a bit too much of a change from reality as captured. Cmao20 (talk) 21:13, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yes, it is certainly discouraged. We had quite a stir about a fake sky back in October of last year. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 21:15, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   I withdraw my nomination Thanks for your clarification. I haven't been following here but, in my opinion, enhancing the sky is more to create a pleasing image without altering the primary content. It's hard to see how this 'deceives' the viewer. That said, I withdraw my nomination. Jim Evans (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Not sure the shadows of the clouds match the light of the building. Please in the template, mention all the modifications made, not only the poles but also the sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:34, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Gebarsten bolster van een paardenkastanje (Aesculus) 20-09-2020 (d.j.b.) 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2020 at 17:44:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Sapindaceae
  •   Info Cracked skin of a Aesculus . Focus stack of 22 photos.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Beautiful image, to my eye. The rough, spiky shell is a little blurred on its nearest side, but this works for me because it actually gives more focus to the shiny conker hiding inside, which does look immaculately sharp. The blend of colours is beautiful, the texture is fascinating, and image as a whole feels natural and informative. --Bobulous (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Disagree the blurred part works (explanation below) -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:28, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 19:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support per Bobulous' thoughtful review. Cmao20 (talk) 21:10, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   SupportSeven Pandas (talk) 01:37, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 08:16, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Great picture! I would have gotten around to nominating it if you hadn't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:44, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support To avoid blurred frames, I recommend to shoot at least two different series from same spot. --Ivar (talk) 10:23, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak support At first sight an impression of déjà-vu, but I think this picture is different enough, and above all better. Only "weak" support due to the focus stacking issue. I really don't find this blurred foreground successful, because the spines in front are sharp, the conker is sharp, only the middle is a weird out-of-focus area. Why?? A continuity of sharpness with enough details would have been more than welcome here. Fortunately the problem is not too big, but still noticeable. 22 pictures should have been far enough to cover the subject, thus I suppose a technical problem here, either some frames missing, or a few bad shots within the batch. Apart from that, good light and adequate bokeh -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:28, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:09, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:57, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support You have to put the focus point manually in front of the object to get everything in focus. If you take the AF, there is usually something missing in the front.--Ermell (talk) 22:13, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:24, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Schwäbisch Hall - Altstadt - Am Markt 9 - Ansicht.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2020 at 17:29:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
  •   Info I thought this was a really good example of architectural photography - taking a motif that doesn't immediately seem to have FP potential and turning it into a beautiful photo. created by Aristeas - uploaded by Aristeas - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:29, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:29, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♥ 18:55, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 19:53, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support What a pity that there is a bicycle rack. --Llez (talk) 04:23, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose a good picture, but no wow recognizable. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:46, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice colors, I like the plants and find the bicycles add something to the mood 🚲 Basile Morin (talk) 10:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks Basile, I thought so too. If it had been a car, it would detract from it, but the bicycles are in keeping with the setting and I see them as 'a feature not a bug'. Cmao20 (talk) 13:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Like canoes and paragliders, bikes are environmentally friendly -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:07, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Thank you very much, Cmao20, for nominating this photo and all of you for your support! --Aristeas (talk) 11:08, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Nice but not inspirational to me. The close crops of the buildings to the left and right don't work compositionally for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:09, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Per Ikan Kekek. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:38, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Recollects Church of Saint-Cere 06.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2020 at 15:14:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Stambecchi nel Parco Nazionale del Gran Paradiso.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2020 at 09:29:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)
  •   Info created & uploaded by Luca Casale - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:29, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support resolution is a bit small, but very nice picture which I think worths the star. -- Tomer T (talk) 09:29, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Wilfredor (talk) 12:05, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support A bit small indeed, but a nice composition, the two bucks are very sharp. However, an exact description of the animals is missing. --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:59, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:16, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment The photographer captured a special moment and the composition is spot on. However, I don't like the postprocessing: the heavy-handed selective sharpening and blurring makes the image look overprocessed; upon closer inspection, the animals have a woodcut-like quality. All of this could be easily fixed, though. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:28, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Agree, it's a shame this photographer over-processes (example) -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:52, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak support per Frank Schulenburg. Cmao20 (talk) 17:31, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Per Frank Schulenburg and due to the image size. I also have the impression that there could be more editing here as I'd expect but cannot prove it. Poco a poco (talk) 17:42, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♥ 18:57, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support But the description could be better --Llez (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support per others: Irresistible composition but poor description. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:01, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:38, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support wow --Fischer.H (talk) 09:41, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Quite small but the animals are sharp enough --StellarHalo (talk) 10:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support even if I would prefer less postprocessing, per Frank. --Aristeas (talk) 16:43, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Amir Pashaei (talk) 18:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 22:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 22:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:26, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:24th Annual Holocaust Remembrance Program at the Lincoln Theatre (34291491795).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2020 at 21:58:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Hasan Ashtiani's Tomb at Fatima Masumeh Shrine3, qom, iran.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2020 at 20:35:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Harris & Ewing - Helena Hill Weed.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2020 at 17:34:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Ayuntamiento, Poznan, Polonia, 2019-12-18, DD 07-09 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2020 at 16:35:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Poland
  •   Info Blue hour HDR shot of the Poznań Town Hall (known in Polish as Ratusz), a historic building in the city of Poznań, in Greater Poland in the west of the country. The building is located at the Poznań Old Town in the centre of Old Market Square (in Polish Stary Rynek). It used to be the seat of local government until 1939, but it houses now a museum. The town hall was originally built in the late 13th century following the founding of the medieval city in 1253, and was rebuilt in roughly its present-day form, in mannerist style by Giovanni Battista di Quadro in 1550–1560. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 16:35, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 16:35, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Lovely colours. Cmao20 (talk) 00:56, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice Christmas atmosphere --StellarHalo (talk) 01:57, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I have never seen clouds like that (pushing with brush too much ?), stars seem like drawn. Correct me. I miss more contrast on building. --Mile (talk) 09:12, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:17, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment I hate to mention it again (as in QI review) but I'm spotting odd pure black corruption in areas near the big illuminated Christmas presents (in particular in the lighting at the bottom right of the Christmas tree next to those presents) and also in the bottom-right corner of the illuminated gateway at the bottom-right corner of the image. To be fair, I am looking extra closely this time for the FP review. Is there any way to reprocess the image to avoid those odd patches of corruption? Also, I agree that the sky looks a touch over-processed, and I believe this image would look just as striking with a somewhat darker sky, possibly even more striking and festive. --Bobulous (talk) 18:37, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
    Bobulous: I've improved those areas and darkened the sky a bit Poco a poco (talk) 20:20, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
      Support Okay, I can't spot any signs of corruption now. Given the extensive adjustments made, can I ask you to add a "Retouched picture" template to the image page to describe the work that has been done between capture and display? --Bobulous (talk) 20:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♥ 18:59, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Very very Xmas ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 11:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Qarah mountain in the -hofuf -saudi arabia. The entrance to the caves.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2020 at 14:22:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Apologies, mine is an Alpha 58. Still, I can't imagine it's that much different. Cmao20 (talk) 17:32, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Schloss Johannisburg (Aschaffenburg).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2020 at 14:35:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
  •   Info Johannisburg Castle in Aschaffenburg, seen from the northwest, in the near of the Pompejanum. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 14:35, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Milseburg (talk) 14:35, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Good composition. Cmao20 (talk) 00:53, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cmao20. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:17, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Beautifully exposed, but the composition keeps snagging for me because of the bright green/yellow plant which appears on the left, and because of the hard line of the wall which acts as a header for nothing but a patch of grass. --Bobulous (talk) 18:19, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Coast - São Vicente - Madeira.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2020 at 16:42:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Although I notice a difference, overall it doesn't change that much, probably because the light was not so convincing at the beginning (compare with that splash for example). Jeffrey's Image Metadata Viewer indicates a very heavy post-treatment (whites -100, blacks +100, shadows +75, highlights -77), which certainly affects the overall impression -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:07, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment Great scene but I would expect the foam glow more. But it looks pale, especially in the back. --Milseburg (talk) 14:41, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
    •   Done I brightened the picture. --15:16, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Sorry Llez but I'm not sure I see what you are seeing in terms of composition. Cmao20 (talk) 00:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I agree that the composition feels a little unexciting, and also that the sea spray feels too grey. Pure clean spray in direct sunlight should be dazzling, but this feels muted. (Just to confirm, I am looking at the newest version of this image.) --Bobulous (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Good composition. Works for me. Also, the water looks realistic to me, and if it were dazzling and blown, people would complain about that, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:41, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above (light) -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:St Martin church in Portet-sur-Garonne 07.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2020 at 15:03:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

OK, it definitely depends on my astigmatism, the more I look at it the more it seems to me that it hangs from right to left.PROPOLI87 (talk) 19:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 19:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cmao. --A.Savin 17:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 19:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:17, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:47, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Some of the detail looks a little soft at 100%, but it's still sufficiently sharp and looks good when filling the screen. The exposure is well handled, the composition pleasing, and the scene is strikingly colourful and patterned. --Bobulous (talk) 18:29, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cmao and Bobulous. --Aristeas (talk) 11:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Amir Pashaei (talk) 18:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Alcedo atthis - Riserve naturali e aree contigue della fascia fluviale del Po.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 23:07:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:London - Wimbledon - 3065.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 21:08:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Sports#Individual_sports
  •   Info created by Jorgeroyan - uploaded by Jorgeroyan - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 21:08, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Andrei (talk) 21:08, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 06:34, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Wilfredor (talk) 12:54, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cmao20 (talk) 14:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Yes, it's fun but the edited areas (everything around the guy and his shadow) is too obvious and I'm not really convinced about the compo/crop, specially at the bottom, sorry. This pictures is based on photoshop editing, please, add the Retouched template, too. --Poco a poco (talk) 16:15, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Poco. Funny idea but the photoshopping is too obvious IMHO, there are blurry areas around the guy in some of his incarnations. Surely not an easy task to do. I also strongly suggest to add the "Retouched picture" template, and put it into the description. Too much foreground, try to cut the bottom quarter off. --Kreuzschnabel 18:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry. The composition does not work for me. Too much disturbing foreground. --XRay talk 19:16, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm not at all keen on manipulation of a scene even if it is exaggerated like this. I also agree with Poco a Poco that several of the super-impositions have a blurry/smeared look that suggests the clone tool and its deceptive brethren. On the other hand, I think the composition and exposure are excellent. I just don't like the artifice. (Is there a version of this photo which has just one lawnmower man in it?) --Bobulous (talk) 20:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes photoshopping is obvious but well done and produced a very consequent concept of strong and repeated lines made by repeatedly cloned workers.--Augustgeyler (talk) 22:21, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose I actually like the idea and have no problem with clones but the foreground is distracting and should be cropped out --StellarHalo (talk) 04:16, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:04, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Eggs in basket 2020 G1.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 20:10:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I totally agree with King. However, I also want to say that I like the arrangement of eggs in the basket very much. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:37, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 06:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support per above. +1 for a centered square --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:35, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  • +1 = 4. Maybe after speedy promotion? -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:39, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  • but per KoH and others. I like these baskets made by you in Category:Wicker baskets, although the tomatoes work better in my view, with a square crop and slightly a better light. The eggs here are very carefully arranged, it makes the subject a bit unnatural, but I respect that choice -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:39, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:08, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Food

File:The Brown Trout (Salmo trutta).pdf, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 18:27:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Oppose I would consider that the same as a watermark and therefore oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. Cmao20 (talk) 14:04, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Rejecting because PDF is not an ideal format for conveying a single image, and because the image guidelines say "No advertisements, signatures, or other watermarks in image. Copyright/authorship information of all images should be located on the image's description page and should not interfere with content of the image." --Bobulous (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Supermarket in recife, pernambuco, Brazil.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 17:43:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

I think that it`s Canned fish :) --Wilfredor (talk) 17:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:03, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 06:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Colours are everything. Cmao20 (talk) 14:04, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 14:07, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 16:29, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, IMO not sharp enough. The writing on the cans of the upper shelf and partly of the middle shelf is not readable. --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Palauenc. It’s really a nice idea but then, an FPC of a static, well-lit subject with no great difficulties should be crisp sharp, and this is less than 10 megapixels. --Kreuzschnabel 17:00, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Palauenc. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:06, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others --Isiwal (talk) 09:07, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  Done @Palauenc05, Kreuzschnabel, Fischer.H, Isiwal: Please give it a new look and confirm if this meets your expectations (remembering that it was a D300) --Wilfredor (talk) 16:16, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support While I see the softness (and I am normally a sharpness fan), I still loves this image for its great colour impression and the overall idea and do not miss more sharpness at all. --Aristeas (talk) 11:22, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Korovai 2020 G1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 16:47:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Bread
  •   Info created, uploaded, nominated by George Chernilevsky -- George Chernilevsky talk 16:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 16:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Looks appetising. The highlights are a little bit blown but still, good photo. Cmao20 (talk) 17:07, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Poor composition, lots of distracting elements on the sides. -- King of ♥ 17:11, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For a food photo, I prefer a composition that is much closer from a better angle and shows more of the food itself --StellarHalo (talk) 18:50, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I'm disappointed in the voting so far. I really like this photo and saw it as an FP in QIC. I consider the composition very good at full-page size. The cake and decorations are festive and pretty and I think the DoF is good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Lacks wow, blown highlights (even the red ribbon), table seems to lean to the left. Merits a QI surely but nothing extraordinary IMHO. --Kreuzschnabel 18:26, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Kreuzschnabel. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:10, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose per insufficient focus in some areas; I also think it would have worked better cropped in more tightly on the cake. Daniel Case (talk) 20:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Basílica, Ottobeuren, Alemania, 2019-06-21, DD 126-128 HDR.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 16:27:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Germany

File:WLM - 2020 - Пам'ятник Володимиру Великому увечері.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 14:03:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Ukraine
  •   Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Augustgeyler -- Augustgeyler (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I found that picture at quality image nomination and got really impressed by its exposure and composition -- Augustgeyler (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 16:51, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I think this is a very long-exposure photo and it has introduced some weird blurriness in the leaves and the clouds. The light is exceptional, but I think the long-exposure nature of the pic has made it look a little unnatural. Cmao20 (talk) 17:04, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♥ 17:11, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Long exposure with wind seldom makes for a great combination. Blurry leaves at the top, blurry at the left, and blurry at the right. Heavy halos around the street lights and lack of details in the blown areas. I don't see a main subject in this composition, and I want to step over the fence -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Nice mood but too unclear on the subject. Supposed the monument is the subject (considering the file name), then it’s too small and soft. I’d try a tighter crop (take another exposure for that, don’t crop this image) as suggested. --Kreuzschnabel 18:21, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Basile. Too many blurry parts and since the subject is the monument judging from the description, the prominent trees ruin the composition. --StellarHalo (talk) 02:07, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too much blurred image parts. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:18, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Cmao. Even without the blur there is a weirdly compressed look to the top. Daniel Case (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Le Château-Musée départemental de Sceaux, Journées du Patrimoine 2020.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2020 at 07:14:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
  •   Info created by Jean-Pierre Dalbéra (Flickr) - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 07:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 07:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Kreuzschnabel 08:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose sorry, but the composition is not good at all as the entire building is leaning to the right. --Andrei (talk) 10:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 16:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose All those tourists spoil it, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 16:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Good QI but I would prefer a more centred photo and the tourists do spoil it a bit. Cmao20 (talk) 17:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per others --StellarHalo (talk) 18:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:06, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:42, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:25, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Good image. But I think the building should be more or much less centered. --Augustgeyler (talk) 10:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I'm not bothered by the tourists ... there aren't really enough to distract from the building. I also like that in closeup we can see many of them are (as they should be) wearing masks. And that makes me like this picture even more ... this diverse group of people are not letting a global pandemic stop them from appreciating high culture. Daniel Case (talk) 16:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Austria Bundesadler.svg (delist)Edit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2020 at 23:14:14
 

  •   Info This version is actually pretty close to how the Austrian government depicts the the coat of arm of Austria in official setting. But, that does not change the fact that this digital version is a rather low-quality and cheap interpretation of the original created in 1984. In fact, this ones looks much worse compared to the original with a lot of the details on the wings and the hammer/sickle missing. Then there is the fact that this is nothing special compared to other coats of arms of other countries around the world. As far as coats of arms and armorials of republics go, the graphic quality of the coats of arms of United States, Poland, Chile, Latvia, Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago, and Dominica each easily blows this one out of the water. (Original nomination)
  •   Delist Failure to stand out means that it is not one of the finest images on here. The Great Seal of the US is just much better and more worthy of FP status. -- StellarHalo (talk) 23:14, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delist per nomination. Cmao20 (talk) 01:57, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delist per nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delist per nomination. --Milseburg (talk) 14:42, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delist per nom Buidhe (talk) 17:41, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delist per above. --Kreuzschnabel 06:27, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delist per nom. Daniel Case (talk) 03:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Sunflower and a bee.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2020 at 19:17:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  •   Info All by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Gnosis (talk) 19:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice capture Cmao20 (talk) 01:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Great! But could the category for the species of bee please be added? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Lovely! --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:12, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The bee is not very clear given the size of the flower. [Category:Bees on flowers] has much better images. --Tagooty (talk) 15:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment Please add geocode or shooting place. --Ivar (talk) 15:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support - Nice shot; and it also reminds me of the logo of MediaWiki! Ahmadtalk 15:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 16:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:27, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:51, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose because location not added, this should not be very hard thing to do. --Ivar (talk) 17:09, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Image:Kanadagans auf dem Raakmoorteich im Naturschutzgebiet Raakmoor.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2020 at 08:40:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Yes, saturated colors and the blacks are too intense -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:00, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak   Support, pending any edits per Aristeas' point above. I really like how the goose is framed by that filigree of foliage, a growing trunk or two, a fallen trunk and the reflections. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:48, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Blown highlights (chest) -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:56, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile. A lovely scene and i like the composition but the blacks are too intense, plus the whites are blown out and the colours are too saturated. Cmao20 (talk) 01:49, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per MB-one. Without even getting into the colors, the composition is just way too busy and the background too distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 04:40, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Mode Gakuen Cocoon Tower in the evening with blue sky Tokyo Japan.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2020 at 06:21:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment It's not Basile's fault; I just feel like the buildings to the left and right damage the composition. I'm not surprised no-one else agrees so far, though, and this is certainly a very high-quality depiction of the featured building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice picture. I might have wished for slightly more interesting light, but still, really good quality. Cmao20 (talk) 01:46, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Your review might be in agreement with StellarHalo's and Daniel's, below. What's special with this light in my view is the blue and turquoise gradient reflection on the glass facade, at the end of the day. I can't find such shades of colors when the light is stronger. Still I agree the sun doesn't directly hit the building. And thus the architecture might be very interesting also under other light conditions. Thanks everyone for the feedbacks -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:09, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Special lines game for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:55, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Beautiful building! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 16:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak support not really bothered by the other buildings but a bit dark for my taste --StellarHalo (talk) 02:22, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak support per Stellar above. I'd really like to see this complemented by something from the same angle but in full daylight, like this (I wouldn't support that image for FP because of the distracting foreground elements, but I see the potential for an FP in that lighting). Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:26, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Collina presso Nagasaki, bozzetto di Alexandre Bailly, Marcel Jambon per Madama Butterfly (1906) - Archivio Storico Ricordi ICON000079 - Restoration.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2020 at 03:41:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Entertainment
  •   Info created by Alexandre Bailly and Marcel Jambon - restored and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Info One of the first restorations - I think - from the recent collaboration with the Archivo Storico Ricordi. One issue: I'm pretty sure - and have sources to confirm - that it's actually Marcel Jambon - at least in modern spelling: back in the early 1900s it as a lot more common to change name spellings for different countries. I'm checking with the Wikimedian in Residence about that. It shouldn't matter at all, but would mean that this page and the file page will move to reflect that if it checks out. I'm listing by initials in the meantime. Edit:Yep. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support That's quite nice. I'm kind of astonished that someone would do such a nice watercolor of a stage design. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:18, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cmao20 (talk) 01:43, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Buidhe (talk) 13:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:06, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 16:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:46, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Kehtna Kutsehariduskeskus 005-kokad pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2020 at 22:06:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
  •   Info created by Lauri Veerde - uploaded & nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 22:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 22:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Awesome. High educational value. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:40, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Wilfredor (talk) 23:34, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Amazing to look at with the 360° viewer. Technically the weak side is a high level of noise in the 2D version, but considering the huge resolution (18,384 × 9,192 pixels), for an interior shot where the moving subjects are rather sharp and the DoF generous, I think 1600 ISO is forgivable. Very interesting document -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:12, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Perfect. -- -donald- (talk) 06:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♥ 06:31, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- I wish I could create such a spectacular panoramic! MartinD (talk) 07:49, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Really impressive, also really good image quality. --Aristeas (talk) 09:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 15:20, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Absolutely brilliant. A fascinating scene which takes several minutes to fully explore. It's well exposed, and has nice bursts of colour in amongst the chrome. The image is surprisingly noisy at 100%, but by the time the image is stretched to 100% it would be absolutely huge (nearly seven [4K 34-inch] monitors high and more than seven wide) so I see no real problem there. I can easily imagine seeing this in the Picture Of The Day box on the main page. --Bobulous (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support High encyclopedic value --StellarHalo (talk) 23:59, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 00:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support On the weak side technically, but great fun to view in the 360 viewer. Cmao20 (talk) 01:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:24, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Interesting scene but the quality is low below FP IMHO in comparison to other shots of this kind, sorry Ivo Poco a poco (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Ermell (talk) 22:06, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:07, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:10, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Capricorn4049 (talk) 23:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File:SOB Re 456 Weissenbachviadukt Degersheim.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2020 at 13:58:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Reichstagsgebäude, Berlin-Mitte, 170402, ako.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2020 at 17:58:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Understandable, but my argument would be we already have good FPs where you can see the dome. I nominated this picture because it's something a little different. Cmao20 (talk) 16:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Moshe Ganbash - Shiviti - Google Art Project.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2020 at 16:45:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Garzweiler surface mine Bucket-wheel excavator 2019 1.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2020 at 19:58:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Machines
  •   Info created & uploaded by Arne Müseler - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment I'm not sure how I feel about the photo, overall, but I'm definitely feeling like I want a wider crop on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:44, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Dramatic photo although there is a bit of barrel distortion. Cmao20 (talk) 01:25, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Fischer.H (talk) 08:07, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose The subject is original and the composition good but the quality is clearly below FP level. It's too grainy (visiblem above all in the sky), lacks some sharpness and needs some perspective adjustments to get verticals vertical. I'd change my vote if the issues are successfully addressed Poco a poco (talk) 10:24, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment Looks like a top-down view to me. Doesn't make sense to fix the verticals in that case (I got the same remark in this nomination). Looking at the machine at full size, it's really tack sharp. Shot with an Hasselblad at 100 ISO. Apart from a very very little noise in the sky, I really don't see why the quality would be "clearly below FP" -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Indeed, the image quality looks fine to me. The grain is pretty minimal and not a big deal. And the excavator itself is really sharp. Cmao20 (talk) 17:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I was confused by this comment, thought it looked rather crappy for a high-class medium format camera – until I realized that that "Hasselblad" is the 1″ sensor on-board camera of the Mavic 2 Pro. Now it makes sense. Actually looks pretty good for a drone shot. --El Grafo (talk) 15:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I didn't like this shot the first several times I looked at its thumbnail. But on filling the screen with it, it does keep drawing the eye to the dozens of nested structures hidden within. And to my eye the detail on the main body of the machine is crispy even at 100%. The ancillary body to the right is softer but still offers enough detail to show off yet more structures within this beast of a machine. I like the parallel bands of colour, and the textures in the sandy layer. So I've changed my mind: this does feel like a striking image. --Bobulous (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- MartinD (talk) 07:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support due to the detail visible, although I agree with Ikan's comment. Daniel Case (talk) 14:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Tight crop at the right, but impressive excavator at full size. Agree with Daniel -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:34, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Machines

File:Bridge at Makhtesh Ramon (40582).jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2020 at 16:54:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#Israel
  •   Info A bridge along a cliff path, looking out to Makhtesh Ramon in the Mitzpe Ramon desert. all by — Rhododendrites talk |  16:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  16:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Gnosis (talk) 21:41, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♥ 21:52, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Really nice light. Cmao20 (talk) 01:24, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Fischer.H (talk) 08:08, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Andrei (talk) 08:24, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Not the nicest bridge I've ever seen but the scene, compo and light are nice Poco a poco (talk) 10:20, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support it looks like a apocalyptic scene --Wilfredor (talk) 17:11, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I keep coming back to this image, but I just can't get it to work for me. The bridge and walkway invite the question: what are they there for, where do they go? And the image doesn't answer that. The shot is sharp and well exposed, but the scene just doesn't fit together for me. --Bobulous (talk) 20:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I understand that you're looking for an answer from the image, but I'll add an answer in text form anyway: this is along the Israel National Trail at the edge of Makhtesh Ramon. Basically a cliffside path. The bridge, if I recall correctly, only serves to take you to the little lookout area on the other side of it (the little area pictured). It was entirely optional, which I was glad for because it was old and missing planks and bowing in the middle and kind of scary. So the answers to "what is it there for" and "where does it go" are there... they're just not very interesting. :) Mainly I just liked the scene/composition. — Rhododendrites talk |  20:37, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Neutral What a pity that the first pole is cut off (if the bridge is the main theme as the title says) --Llez (talk) 15:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Bobulous. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:02, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#Israel

File:Squirrel watching over the coast in La Jolla (70350).jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2020 at 14:41:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Only because I distracted him. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  22:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support We can see the squirrel's eye, so I think it's OK. Nice idea for a picture. Cmao20 (talk) 01:23, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:15, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --StellarHalo (talk) 23:37, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:51, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:01, 27 September 2020 (UTC)


Zeitplan (Tag 5 nach der Nominierung)Edit

Wed 23 Sep → Mon 28 Sep
Thu 24 Sep → Tue 29 Sep
Fri 25 Sep → Wed 30 Sep
Sat 26 Sep → Thu 01 Oct
Sun 27 Sep → Fri 02 Oct
Mon 28 Sep → Sat 03 Oct

Zeitplan (Tag 10 nach der Nominierung)Edit

Fri 18 Sep → Mon 28 Sep
Sat 19 Sep → Tue 29 Sep
Sun 20 Sep → Wed 30 Sep
Mon 21 Sep → Thu 01 Oct
Tue 22 Sep → Fri 02 Oct
Wed 23 Sep → Sat 03 Oct
Thu 24 Sep → Sun 04 Oct
Fri 25 Sep → Mon 05 Oct
Sat 26 Sep → Tue 06 Oct
Sun 27 Sep → Wed 07 Oct
Mon 28 Sep → Thu 08 Oct