Open main menu

Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder

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

Contents

Exzellenz-KandidatenEdit

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

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Ivanovo Obl Vichuga asv2018-08 img02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2018 at 19:03:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Pyhävaara and Juhannuskallio as seen from Rukatunturi, 2018 September.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2018 at 12:20:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  •   Info I got a friendly suggestion from Ikan Kekek at the QI candidates to nominate this one. So thanks, I appreciate! It was also suggested that I should crop some of the bottom but I'm still concidering it. The view is from Rukatunturi fell in Kuusamo of Lapland, Finland in 2018 September. The hill ahead is Pyhävaara. Created, uploaded and nominated by Ximonic -- Ximonic (talk) 12:20, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ximonic (talk) 12:20, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Yes, I think the light and colors in the background are magical, but I'd like a crop of the front 2/5 or so of the foreground. On balance, though, I think it's worth a supporting vote, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Good quality image, but nothing special. --Karelj (talk) 19:41, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Garzweiler surface mine, October 2018, -01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2018 at 06:32:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Korfu (GR), Korfu, Altstadt -- 2018 -- 1156.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2018 at 04:03:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Germany
  •   Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 04:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 04:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Peaceful, with clear water that's producing somewhat of a prism effect with the sunlight. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For me, just too much going on. I might have been able to forgive that if the sea had been more pleasingly aqua/green. Daniel Case (talk) 15:43, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Korfu (GR), Agii Douli, Olivenhain -- 2018 -- 1284-8.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2018 at 17:00:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Germany
  •   Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 17:00, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 17:00, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry but I'm not really seeing anything here that blows me away.--Peulle (talk) 18:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   strong support Do you don't see the water ground with nets? Habitator terrae 🌍 18:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - I do, and I'm not getting what's amazing about the form of this composition. It's good but IMO not exceptional. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Neptuul (talk) 19:17, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Peulle. --Karelj (talk) 21:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per other supporters --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. I can see why you took this, but the contrast isn't working and the composition doesn't help. Daniel Case (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Зимова фортеця.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2018 at 13:10:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  •   Info created - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too small and too grainy for me.--Peulle (talk) 18:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Talk about the size. I'm inclined to support because the unsharpness is part of a mood that I like, but if you downsized it to make it look better, that's against policy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I don't think it's been downsized, but it's not a great camera so possibly that's why it's very grainy/soft. Also, is F22 right for this sort of shot? I suspect not. Charles (talk) 19:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I like the mood but Charles has a point ... most of the other 30-second exposures we've featured in less-than-dark conditions are not this grainy. Daniel Case (talk) 07:11, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Done I tried to fix this isues. --Moahim (talk) 09:40, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 19:37, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Hollow Horn Bear LCCN 2016858434 (2) (cropped).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2018 at 04:42:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •   Info created by Harris & Ewing / LoC, restored and uploaded by GreenMeansGo, nominated by Yann (talk) 04:42, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A 100 years old portrait. -- Yann (talk) 04:42, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - It's a fine and historically important portrait, and the digital restoration has made a lot of progress, but I think more can still be done, especially to clean dirt and scratches near the left margin. I will not oppose and would respect a consensus to feature if one is forthcoming, but I think that even though the restoration work to date must have been quite time-consuming, other restorations have produced cleaner documents than this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:07, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm by no means an expert on photo restoration. I'll be travelling this weekend to be at WikiCon NA, but when I get back I'll try to make some more time to see if I can't clean it up a bit more. GMGtalk 10:35, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Bulbul naranjero (Pycnonotus barbatus), parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-25, DD 36.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2018 at 21:47:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Barbudo acollarado (Lybius torquatus), parque nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-25, DD 27.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2018 at 18:01:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:The star formation region Messier 17.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2018 at 07:21:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Eagle Nebula from ESO.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2018 at 07:19:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Crocosmia 'Lucifer' (Montbretia) (d.j.b.) 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2018 at 04:50:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants #Crocosmia 'Lucifer' (Montbretia).
  •   Info Beautiful flared flower buds in bright bright colors. A striking flower in the garden. Location, Garden sanctuary JonkerValley (Netherlands). All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:50, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:50, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Another signature image by Dominicus - beautiful! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:35, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- The NMI User (talk) 07:24, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Shame about the blurred bud in the foreground. Charles (talk) 09:05, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose don't think there's anything you can do about the blurred bud. Charles (talk) 19:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I am not really convinced by this picture, what is so special with this picture? Habitator terrae 14px|link=Earth 12:15, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Could that stray stem at lower left be cloned out? Daniel Case (talk) 02:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  Done. Small correction. Thanks for your reviews. --Famberhorst (talk) 04:54, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Schönwald im Schwarzwald Blindensee Windrad 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2018 at 13:28:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Industry#Germany
  •   Info Wind turbine next to lake Blindensee, municipality of Schönwald im Schwarzwald, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:29, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:28, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 17:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Nice idea but not striking enough to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:07, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Minimalist intention maybe but the result is not very exciting. At this time of the day, the mirror effect doesn't work as well as later in the evening. This is a side view, so the turbine is not shown in full. The light is also a bit harsh -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:13, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan Kekek, Basile Morin -- The NMI User (talk) 07:24, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too static, per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 02:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 21:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Fly agaric (Aminita muscaria), New Forest-FocusStacked.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2018 at 11:44:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:2018 - Національний художній музей України.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2018 at 07:47:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  •   Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Moahim -- Moahim (talk) 07:47, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Moahim (talk) 07:47, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I find this an interesting picture to look at. Good quality mostly as well. But I have a concern about some of the colors in there. For example the green on the trees to the left - it seems very strong kind of green. Were the trees illuminated by green lamps? It feels maybe oversaturated. Same concern is about the blueness of the sky on the left as it feels too colorful aswell. Again, I can't tell for sure if it really was like this, or if the picture is slightly oversaturated? All best, --Ximonic (talk) 11:46, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  • The differnce of colors because of the lamps with different color temperature on the street (there are lamps with cold white light near the green trees and others are yellow warm). The right part of the sky is a bit cloudy and has more "parasite light" from the street lamps. Thank You. --Moahim (talk) 13:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Beautiful light play.--Peulle (talk) 12:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Habitator terrae (talk) 14:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 18:53, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, but I don't like this sort of cylindric deformation --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Wolfgang. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:08, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose This image is too busy for me. Sharpness is good but the curves are not natural, and the colorful lights and highlights too explosive -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Moroder, Basile Morin -- The NMI User (talk) 07:30, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I made a color correction, but the geometry will be untouched - it is a wide angle panorama from a close distance, it can not be different. --Moahim (talk) 13:29, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Wolfgang. Daniel Case (talk) 17:07, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Castle of Beynac 27.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2018 at 21:07:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#France
  •   Info All by --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:07, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Abstain as author --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:07, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - I could have sworn you already nominated this, but I guess you nominated another picture of a castle with a dark cloud touching its upper right, and I opposed it for the same reason. I would have liked a cloud in the upper right corner, not touching the building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support While it could be better per Ikan, I think it is good enough as is. -- King of ♠ 06:21, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Same building, same cloud. Charles (talk) 11:34, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Beautiful structure, but in my view the people spoil it and the crop at the bottom is a bit tight -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:59, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Charles and Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 14:58, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2018 at 18:51:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Yes, I put out some bird food (which is why I call it a set-up), which the squirrels steal anyway. I found it was the only way to get a mouth-open shot. If you put a nut out, he/she grabs it and runs away. Charles (talk) 19:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support, because you manipulate it   --Habitator terrae (talk) 20:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Please Habitator terrae, enter the code {{s|weak support}} but not {{weak support}} because the bot doesn't understand this last template here. I've fixed it for you -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- P999 (talk) 01:07, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Blurred foreground but rare enough to see a squirrel smiling like in cartoons -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:32, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support This is a friendly squirrel! --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:05, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry to spoil the party but ... his eye. You don't really see it in thumb but when full screen then the white grid on the eye just keeps grabbing your attention. I guess it is your conservatory forming the catchlight. I keep thinking the poor squirrel has an eye defect. I don't know if you can do any photoshop magic or try again from another angle. It is a shame because otherwise it is good. -- Colin (talk) 07:53, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I thought about changing the catchlight of my conservatory, but it is so clear I decided to keep it as the setting is not pretending to be in the wild (though the squirrel is wild!) Charles (talk) 08:26, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 10:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I love the backlighting ... very difficult to get with an animal, I would think. Daniel Case (talk) 05:17, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great capture. -- The NMI User (talk) 07:31, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 21:18, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Polyporus squamosus, Dryad's Saddle.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2018 at 18:40:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Grand Place Flower Carpet 2018 (30mm).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2018 at 16:03:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Portrait de Jacques-Noël Sané par Boilly ca 1800 4Fi00224.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2018 at 15:31:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Tabby cat with blue eyes-3336579.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2018 at 10:41:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
  •   Info created by Adina Voicu, uploaded and nominated by Yann (talk) 10:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support We don't have that many featured portraits of cats, and I think this one is worth the star. -- Yann (talk) 10:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment The eyes are beautiful, but F1.8 gives no depth of field. The crop trims hairs and whiskers. I think for a pet we could expect more. Charles (talk) 11:13, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support works for me. Very good --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:45, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild   Oppose per Charles. It's a great closeup of part of the face, but I'd like to at least see definition on the chin, not a milky bokeh that makes it indistinguishable from the cat's chest. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:45, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:10, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - per Yann -- P999 (talk) 01:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles.--Ermell (talk) 22:18, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Cute! -- The NMI User (talk) 07:34, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I think it has to be no. Charles (talk) 15:14, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Cute kitten of postal cards, shallow DoF. The eyes are in focus and the large aperture make them very striking, but the nose and the chin are blurred. A little bit more sharpness would have made it great -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:52, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Common seal (Phoca vitulina) 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2018 at 09:06:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • I've uploaded a denoised version - can you have another look please Peulle Charles (talk) 17:00, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Cool shot despite of the technical issues. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:52, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:23, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak   Support - This is a great image, but what gives me a lot of pause is that I've been thinking, if this were someone else's photo, you'd have trouble with the sharpness of the face. Please comment on that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:43, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Your comment is fair. For easy-to-capture images I set my technical standards higher than hard-to-repeat-shots which require different skils. As set out in FP criteria. This one was captured on a pitching boat, demanding 1/1000 sec and ISO 800. It's not a portrait, so the definition of the seal close-up cannot be compared with, say, my squirrel (new FPC nom.) Charles (talk) 18:49, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:45, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:11, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Washed out background and poor light, but also redeeming features. Good pose. Lied on this rock, it looks like a sculpture -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - per Basotxerri -- P999 (talk) 01:20, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♠ 06:23, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:50, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Captivating! --Ximonic (talk) 11:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- The NMI User (talk) 07:34, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Working at the consolidation of a wooden footbridge in Luang Prabang - 1 (Side view).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2018 at 00:38:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Laos
  •   Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I think you're likely to have a certain amount of attrition in voting for this photo because it has similar subject matter to other FPs, but it's so picturesque and has striking light, shadow and composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per my comments on the previous nom. -- King of ♠ 07:30, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 15:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:06, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I wasn't sure I'd support at first, but upon pondering it for a while it works as the sum of its parts, showing us what a challenging landscape this is to live in. I also like the detail at depth ... not something we always get in shots like these. Daniel Case (talk) 17:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:11, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:45, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 10:21, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- The NMI User (talk) 07:36, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Shimano bicycle museum (CYCLE CENTER) in Sakai at dusk, October 2018 - 487.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2018 at 15:57:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Σαγράδα Φαμίλια 3382.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2018 at 11:05:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment POV is not ideal. Charles (talk) 12:31, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
    •   Comment But this POV brings the two spires, which have different heigths, next to each other. --C messier (talk) 13:03, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very good for me. Vignetting is hardly visible. The covering tarp on the left spire is more of an issue, though --A.Savin 12:43, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Unfortunately the left part is wrapped in a fabric, hiding the art work -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:02, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Agree with Basile, nice shot but the timing (renovation works) not the ideal --Poco2 15:46, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment There is a chance the tarp may stay until the completion of the construction of the church (2026?), when behind those two spires will be some taller ones. --C messier (talk) 16:02, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose FP will have to wait till then... Charles (talk) 18:51, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Maybe just crop to the righ one for the time being? Daniel Case (talk) 03:53, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Don’t crop, please! The tarp is part of the composition and consequently it’s characteristic of the Sagrada Família. Educational value. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:10, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support An artwork has always a needing to be restaurated, so why don't documentate this? Habitator terrae 14px|link=Earth 12:21, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Carved tree with reliefs of dinosaur and other animals.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2018 at 02:54:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Oppose I want to see the colors. Yann (talk) 07:09, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support in colors. --Yann (talk) 07:51, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Nicer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:15, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Moahim (talk) 08:44, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very nice to see a sculpture that is not "man on horse cast in bronze". --Cart (talk) 09:27, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tozina (talk) 15:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:18, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:41, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Ya Ly Dam spillway, Vietnam.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2018 at 05:20:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info created by Shansov.net - uploaded by Shansov.net - nominated by Pine -- Pine 05:20, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Pine 05:20, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Really striking, but small and not so sharp. Tycho, if you have a larger version and can apply enough sharpening, give it a try! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Vignetting -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:11, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Technical issues aside, the regular lines of the spillway and the chaotic irregularity of the landscape beyond do not mix well. Daniel Case (talk) 18:38, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support The wow-effect of this picture is so big, that I must support. Habitator terrae 14px|link=Earth 12:23, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 21:22, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Château de Fleckenstein 07.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2018 at 13:26:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thanks, appreciated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Moahim (talk) 08:46, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very good.--Peulle (talk) 10:31, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Quality is great but the motif is not really stricking to me --Poco2 15:47, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♠ 07:28, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:07, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I went through a similar thought process to Poco's, I believe, but ultimately, I think the planes against the background are a sufficiently interesting motif to merit a feature for a photo of this impressive quality. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:46, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 22:00, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Johannes Vermeer (1632-1675) - The Girl With The Pearl Earring (1665).jpg (delist)Edit

Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2018 at 12:35:35
 


File:Global Temperature Anomaly.gifEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2018 at 07:36:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

*  Support Scary... And for those who still wonder about size for gifs, this image consists of 79 frames so the real file size is 79 x 1,280 × 720 pixels = 72.8 Mpx which is very large for a complex gif. It's about as large as the system can take. --Cart (talk) 08:22, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

  • Move to support the video. --Cart (talk) 10:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support, and should also be a VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:30, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support This should run endlessly on the TVs Donald Trump uses to stare at ... --Granada (talk) 09:37, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - That would be Fox "News". Fat chance! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:13, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral The animation runs too fast, making the file less useful.--Peulle (talk) 10:05, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Peulle, just what I thought. This is set to a 0.1 sek change rate. If you look at the file's page (Other versions) you can see that I have made a version that runs at only 0.5 sek speed. If need be I can make other versions that run even slower so that it is possible to examine the map at any speed you like. I think the 'fast' original gives you a good quick idea of what's going on, after that you can get nerdy and examine the map more closely. It's even possible to extract the individual images from this gif and make a still series of it. --Cart (talk) 10:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, the slower one works better. I'm still considering opposing, though, since I also think it should be bigger; the ideal use of this file (IMO) is on a powerpoint presentation on a big screen in front of a crowd, and for big projector screens, the current size is not ideal. Btw.: having the individual images available for separate viewing, as in an album, would be useful, so there could be a link to that in the files.--Peulle (talk) 10:39, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Since it is a gif you always have to factor in the number of images when it comes to size. This consists of 79 images and that is about as big as the system can handle, so a bigger image is not possible. See above for how to calculate the size of a gif. This is the equivalent of a 72.8 Mpx image. Btw, the image reaches a bigger audience via people's phones than powerpoint, so IMO that is the ideal use. --Cart (talk) 10:44, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • At my computer the fast version is not so good, too, because my internet is to slow. But after you wait the gif has run one time, you see the gif with the true speed. You also could see on a smaller version, than the original version (with the descripted problem). In my view. The fast version, because, you see the weather changes (5 years) and see also the climate changes (>30 years), where the focus is on. So it shows very good, that weather isn't climate. The slow version doesn't discribe this so good, I think. Habitator terrae (talk) 11:26, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment too fast for me. Can the speed be changed? Charles (talk) 10:53, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Illustrates well why this 30-year-old image format should not be used in this millennium. We can now stream video, adapt the quality to the bandwidth, speed it up or slow it down in real time, pause it, and whizz forward and backward at will. This is eye-candy, visually intrusive, CPU hogging, bloated and I get the point on the very first pass so why loop? I can't see how anyone would enjoy reading and pay attention to an article on this serious topic with this flickering away in the corner of your screen. Also, what's with the filename? An "anomaly" is a [singular] deviation from standard, not a trend upwards. -- Colin (talk) 11:22, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Even so, the format is not prohibited and sometimes more reliable/easier to play than video files. Why else would there be need for the constant "Problems playing the file?" on video files. Last year a gif ended up on third place in POTY. --Cart (talk) 12:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • The heart isn't quite so distracting with colour flicker as this. But even so, a video format would have been better. If WMF have problems with playing videos then they should invest in making a better player. I don't have any problems playing youtube videos. And with modern video editing suites it would be trivial to produce a 4K, HD, SD, etc version. --Colin (talk) 13:08, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
Cart, thinking about the heart gif, I think the old talking frog joke explains it. -- Colin (talk) 17:49, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The endless loop is horribly distracting when you'r trying to read the page it's embedded in, even in the slower version. GIF is stone age, and so is using Fahrenheit for scientific results (from a global perspective). --El Grafo (talk) 12:10, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
    @El Grafo, Charlesjsharp: Yes, I know Fahrenheit isn't in the SI, but here we see only the anomaly. And there is a°F-b=a°C-b=c°K-b. So this is irrelevant. Habitator terrae (talk) 12:55, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
    I agree it is less problematic than with absolute values. I strongly disagree with the term irrelevant though. --El Grafo (talk) 13:04, 12 October 2018 (UTC) and BTW: there is no "°K"
    It isn't just about SI but the fact the majority of the world won't have a feel for what +/- 4°F means, and knowing what this temperature change means is kind of the point. -- Colin (talk) 13:08, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
    I'm so stupid (I didn't know so much about Fahrenheit, I thinked, that there are the same rules than Celcius): It's more relevant then I thinked: 0,56a°F-b=a°C-b=c°K-b  . I work on a K version. Habitator terrae (talk) 14:21, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I agree. Fahrenheit? 12:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talk • contribs) 12:31, 12 October 201 (UTC)
    See above. Habitator terrae (talk) 12:55, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Info At least a converter is added to the decription: "The scale shows a temperature change of ±4 F° or ±2.2 C°." --Cart (talk) 13:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Colin, who has made this point before but never as forcefully as he does here. .GIFs were always just a stopgap, a format that was developed so people on CompuServe (remember that?) could share images (".GIF! .GIF! .GIF!" ... ah, those were the days). IMO .PNG has superseded .GIF as a better lossless image format for stills, and as noted now that we have better video capabilities here we can leave the animated ones to memes. Daniel Case (talk) 16:47, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The video is much better. --Yann (talk) 16:40, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

AlternativeEdit

 

*  Support Works too. --Cart (talk) 15:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

  • Move to support the video. --Cart (talk) 10:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Habitator terrae (talk) 15:36, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - K is for Kelvin, but 0°K is absolute zero, so I have to oppose until it's edited to C for Celsius. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:58, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Ikan Kekek, this is only how many degrees up or down the temperature has fluctuated, not the actual temperature. K and C have the same steps unlike F. So whether it is written as 1K up or 1C, doesn't matter, it's the same. --Cart (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
and K is in the SI. Habitator terrae (talk) 16:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
I know that degrees Kelvin and Celsius are the same size, but in the English description of the Fahrenheit version, it states: "The scale shows a temperature change of ±4 F° or ±2.2 C°." This makes things clear, should be in German, too, and should be included in the description for this version, too (though it can be restricted to mentioning variation of degrees Kelvin). I'll provisionally   Support, but I think everyone can see how I was confused. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:10, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I've added the temp clarification to this Alt's description. For clarity and correct language, someone who speaks German should add the translation to the files. --Cart (talk) 19:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

  Comment @Charlesjsharp: What do you say to this animation? Habitator terrae (talk) 08:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

  •   Comment It's still too fast and you cannot easily see the temperature scale (should be Celsius) Charles (talk) 12:28, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The video is much better. --Yann (talk) 16:40, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Slow video alternativeEdit

  Info @W.carter, Ikan Kekek, Granada, Peulle, Charlesjsharp: Here a compromise version, that I found on another page of the NASA. All critical things are solved: It is slow, it is a video, it is in °C and the title is Global temperature changes  . What do you thing of this? Habitator terrae (talk) 10:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

  •   Support --Habitator terrae (talk) 10:40, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice, you have taken to heart all the comments here. Also 'pinging' Colin, Daniel Case, El Grafo, Granada. --Cart (talk) 10:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Better, but why not just have one year increasing top right? And make the temperature scale legible. Charles (talk) 12:30, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • The original was made by NASA and they made the individual frames in four-years-segments. The uploader can't add information that NASA didn't provide. --Cart (talk) 12:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I surf on the NASA-Website, and I think I will find something. Please wait a bit. Habitator terrae (talk) 12:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I found a high resolution scale. But I didn't found an one year Video, and I think, this video is better.   Info Now the video has a 3.840 × 2.160 px per frame (that are 8.3 mp). Habitator terrae (talk) 13:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Ok, while your enthusiasm for your image is commendable, please know that with each change and alternative, voter's interest in the nomination will fade. Most voters don't revisit a nom once they have cast their vote. You are new on this forum and on a bit of a learning curve, but ideally, this should not be a media lab and nominations should be as ready as they can be when posted here. Think about that in the future. --Cart (talk) 13:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't think, that they would be so critical with my nomination. Habitator terrae (talk) 14:17, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
And didn't know about the other animations. After it seems to be, that the file has non chance, I reasearch on the Website for better images. Habitator terrae (talk) 14:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Don't worry, you will learn how to do this.   It is a very demanding and tough forum and voters here will complain about the smallest thing to select "the best of the best" images on Commons. I think you have done well for a first-timer, you survived and delivered. --Cart (talk) 14:29, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Maybe there is a little confusion with Charles taking your "you have taken to heart all the comments here" literally as though Habitator terrae was the author and could therefore tweak it. Obviously, with third-party sources, there is much less we can or should do. -- Colin (talk) 16:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Wonderful. I can look at this in 4K and it is smooth like a lava lamp and inevitably moves towards hot. This is something that could easily be incorporated into a TV documentary or current affairs programme, and the individual frames are good enough to be used in a magazine. Exactly what FP should aim for. -- Colin (talk) 16:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Habitator terrae, I still think (after the nomination closes) the filename(s) should be changed. NASA's title is "Global Temperature Anomalies from 1880 to 2017" which would be a much better title, though their claim that the baseline of "1951 to 1980" is "normal" and so the red, yellow and blue represent "anomalies" is strange language -- they are deviations from an arbitrary baseline but hardly unexpected or irregular. Still, picking NASA's title is better than this one. -- Colin (talk) 12:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
@Colin, Habitator terrae: "temperature anomaly relative to $reference_period" is exactly how climatologists call this kind of thing. So yes, that's how the file should be named, imho. The reference period doesn't really matter, as temperature during the reference period just serves as a baseline; this is never meant to imply that the average temperature from 1951 to 1980 would be somehow normal or natural, it's just one way of looking at things. --El Grafo (talk) 07:47, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
El Grafo, the thing is it isn't an "anomaly" but "Global Temperature Anomalies from 1880 to 2017", which should be the filename. It is quite misleading to use the singular (and echo's Trump's recent claim that "it'll change back" as though this is all just a blip). As for "normal", see the NASA article, which repeatedly (and IMO incorrectly) keeps referring to "Higher than normal" and "Lower than normal", rather than the correct neutral term "baseline". At least the Commons file description doesn't make that mistake. -- Colin (talk) 10:46, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good. --Yann (talk) 16:40, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I liked the other versions, too, but this is a big improvement. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:17, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 15:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support There are still some things I dislike about the cartography, but let'S not get lost in details … --El Grafo (talk) 07:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support High educative value -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:42, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --GeXeS (talk) 11:31, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Fishmonger in ICA Fish stall holding a salmon.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2018 at 12:19:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
  •   Info I was about to nominate this when the hammerhead appeared... Well, at least I'll give it a try. This photo was not my idea. I was out to shoot his fish stall, and like I always do when there are people involved, I introduced myself and the WikiProject. While I was clicking, he said: "Hey, how about a photo of me holding a big salmon?" Of course I was game for that. :) All by me, -- Cart (talk) 12:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 12:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice! --Yann (talk) 12:40, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition, background (left), irrelevant papers (front right). Charles (talk) 17:45, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Info Just a small note: This is in a fish stall and the two pieces of paper on the counter are price tags for some of the products in the stall. He was doing some tagging when I interrupted him, so not irrelevant. The are in Swedish and says (translated): "Smoked mackerel 15.90:-/hg" and "Herring pickled with crayfish 25:-/hg". The are very much part of the environment in a Swedish fish stall, as are the tools of his trade in the background: cart with crushed ice, shovel for said ice, etc. --Cart (talk) 17:56, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  • But it's posed photo, so composition can be carefully chosen. The fishmonger was not be presenting such a large fish for sale, so the tage for other fishes are not relevant. His expression is not natural. Charles (talk) 07:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes it is a posed photo, staged in a perfect way. There is a long tradition in imagery to depict people with their tools and associated things around them (1, 2, 3) Without the items, the image would be sterile and have no context. His head is centered on that shiny steel thing, giving the illusion of a 'halo' and the fish has plenty free headroom to 'swim out' into. --Cart (talk) 09:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support. Thanks for the note, Cart. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support; but I think you could do with cropping some of the right out so the cross the man and the fish make is a bit more centered and striking. Daniel Case (talk) 05:56, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose That dark background on the left cluttered with objects really is a bit distracting ... How 'bout taking like one step to the right?--Peulle (talk) 06:40, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support; The picture shows an authentic Swedish fishmonger with an impressive catch.--Christof46 (talk) 18:19, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry per Peulle --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:09, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support the dark portion on the left doesn't bother me, and the human and fish subjects are shown well. --Pine 00:54, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Neptuul (talk) 10:15, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, but that's a rather clear example of "QI (and maybe VI) but not FP". Neither light nor composition are FP-worthy. --Code (talk) 11:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Code I'm afraid --Poco2 15:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Code as well.--Ermell (talk) 09:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

File:G. Dury - Portrait of Dom Augusto, Duke of Leuchtenberg - Google Art Project.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2018 at 22:16:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Salle couverte de grandes dalles situées au Sud u monastère.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2018 at 08:22:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Hi there - the darkness may be possible to fix with simple brightening. By "downsized" I mean that this image is only 3,872 × 2,581 pixels, and the camera used has the potential to shoot 6016 × 4000 pixels. Please see the Guidelines: "Images should not be downsampled (sized down) in order to appear of better quality." Certainly, for FPs, we require as high a resolution as possible, unless the image has many redeeming features (big wow factor).--Peulle (talk) 19:15, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  • dear Peulle (talk) thank you for the piece of advice: in deed I did not know about that and I always export file after editing with a file sized at 10 Mpix I chnged the setting so tha I can have a better file ... I improved the lightening too --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 21:10, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The rules state a minimum size and the image is within the criteria, regarless of downsizing. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  • @Tomascastelazo: You have misunderstood. The guideline is that images should not be downsized. The 2MP limit is an absolute minimum, but you still can't downsize images to just above that limit and expect them to be promoted.--Peulle (talk) 08:55, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Still dark in my view and like this one the colors are veiled -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:29, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Again, a very good composition, but I feel like there's no way it was that dark at 10:55, even on a mostly cloudy day in February, and the sharpness could be better. You have some great ideas, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Light OK for me. --Yann (talk) 14:40, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others; it looks like it was shot through an ND filter. Also, it's still not completely sharp anywhere, which I can't fathom given the aperture. Daniel Case (talk) 16:16, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
      • Hello everybody and thank you for your Humble Opinions : I did not use any filter and the sun was covered by clouds and even I like it that way but I added more Sharpness and more light ... have a look please --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 18:17, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Color is better but sharpness is not. Daniel Case (talk) 17:43, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - If the light really was like that, I simply don't love the photo for having dull light, and as I said, it's not sharp enough for FP, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:39, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Thank you everybody ... but I like it :) --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 15:22, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • That's ok if you like it that way. Just to see how it would look, I did some basic corrections of the light and added a bit of sharpness. You can see the edited version here: File:Salle couverte de grandes dalles situées au Sud u monastère - 2.jpg. I think that would have a bigger chance of making FP if you added it as an "Alt", but that is up to you. :) --Cart (talk) 15:27, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
    • dear Cart (talk) thank you for the hints I reverted it twice and compared it twice tour file to rech the same result : I hope that you enjoy the result and that I improved my edting skills --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 18:39, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • You must 'ping' all the voters now that you have changed the photo. All the best, --Cart (talk) 18:44, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Still a bit soft in places but solid, overall, and as I said, I like the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:13, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Now it's far too clear, like washed out 3 times in the washing machine :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:56, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Perhaps the best you could get now with the light, but still not natural enough in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:46, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Stone wheel engraved in the 13th century built Konark Sun Temple in Orissa, India.jpgEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2018 at 13:50:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info A stone wheel engraved in the walls of the temple. The temple is designed as a chariot consisting of 24 such wheels. Each wheel has a diameter of 9 feet, 9 inches, with 8 spokes. created by Subhrajyoti07 - uploaded by Subhrajyoti07 - nominated by Subhrajyoti07 -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 13:50, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 13:50, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose IMO the quality (especially in terms of sharpness) is not high enough for FP. The light is also so-so.--Peulle (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Gorgeous motif, but I have to agree with Peulle on the sharpness (the light isn't as much of an issue for me). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:33, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I don't see any issue with the sharpness. Post-processing may eventually be better handled, but still OK. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:11, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle and Ikan. I might forgive this in a background to an image of something else, but this is the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 15:34, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

File:68-104-9007 Kamianets-Podilskyi Fortress RB 18.jpgEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2018 at 13:19:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hm-m... This is sunrise time, castle in first sun rays. --Rbrechko (talk) 14:43, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Takes in too much ... that building at the bottom is a bit distracting, and being in shade doesn't help that. Also, the castle itself is a bit unsharp (look at the trees around it). Daniel Case (talk) 13:42, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I would support a version with a tighter bottom crop. --C messier (talk) 14:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I still probably wouldn't, because the sharpness is questionable for FP, but I support the idea. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:43, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very nice light for an old castel. Habitator terrae (talk) 18:54, 14 October 2018 (UTC)


Zeitplan (Tag 5 nach der Nominierung)Edit

Sat 13 Oct → Thu 18 Oct
Sun 14 Oct → Fri 19 Oct
Mon 15 Oct → Sat 20 Oct
Tue 16 Oct → Sun 21 Oct
Wed 17 Oct → Mon 22 Oct
Thu 18 Oct → Tue 23 Oct

Zeitplan (Tag 10 nach der Nominierung)Edit

Mon 08 Oct → Thu 18 Oct
Tue 09 Oct → Fri 19 Oct
Wed 10 Oct → Sat 20 Oct
Thu 11 Oct → Sun 21 Oct
Fri 12 Oct → Mon 22 Oct
Sat 13 Oct → Tue 23 Oct
Sun 14 Oct → Wed 24 Oct
Mon 15 Oct → Thu 25 Oct
Tue 16 Oct → Fri 26 Oct
Wed 17 Oct → Sat 27 Oct
Thu 18 Oct → Sun 28 Oct