Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

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:Brügge (B), St.-Salvator-Kathedrale -- 2018 -- 8559.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2018 at 15:47:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Boy plowing with a tractor at sunset in Don Det, Laos.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2018 at 02:41:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Grutte Griene, eiland in het natuurreservaat “Sneekermeer”. (d.j.b.) 04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2018 at 17:38:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects Windmill.
  •   Info Maybe this picture is too simple for FP. It is a simple metal mill which dominates the water level of Grutte Griene, island in the nature reserve "Sneekermeer". I personally like this picture because of its simplicity. All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 01:57, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, not enough wow for me.--Peulle (talk) 12:26, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Alligator mississippiensis - Loro Parque 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2018 at 13:04:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 13:04, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 13:04, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I saw this in small size and really liked it, but looking at the full size there are just too many artefacts for me to go along with it as an FP, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 13:35, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
    •   Info I made a completely new version from RAW, I think, it is better now --Llez (talk) 15:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support It is, actually. :) --Peulle (talk) 19:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Siem Reap, Victory Gate.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2018 at 21:50:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:EstatuasIglesiaSanFrancisco-Jujuy.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2018 at 21:40:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Redone Ezarateesteban 22:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I enjoy this composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:24, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Asymmetrical off-center composition with unfortunate lighting conditions (daylight + different lamps). Please try again if you have the opportunity. Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 15:14, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Le Bouddha couché du Temple Baphuon...jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2018 at 08:47:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Oppose the light doesn't work for me.--Peulle (talk) 11:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Besides the lighting, the composition doesn't seem very appealing to me. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:44, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I uploaded a new version of the photo with the corrections needed, thank you for your advice.--Pierre André (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Just looks like a bunch of rocks to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:38, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   I withdraw my nomination thank you for your advice. You're right, the photo of this gigantic reclining Buddha, is not significant enough of this temple.--Pierre André (talk) 20:38, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

File:PIA07763 Rhea full globe5.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2018 at 08:10:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment - The bottom doesn't look fixed to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Done Try to make a little bit darker instead of fixing borders. --The NMI User (talk) 10:11, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Why are you avoiding fixing the borders? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:39, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Kalifornischer Seeloewe Zalophus californianus Tierpark Hellabrunn-4.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2018 at 07:30:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Detail of the Central Branch of Greater Victoria Public Library, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2018 at 04:34:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Canada
  •   Info All by me. I like the play of the sun and shadows here together with the reflection of unusual construction of the glass roof. -- Podzemnik (talk) 04:34, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Excellent. I was making a similar comment before reading the line above -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:58, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support truly excellent --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:50, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice rule of thirds execution. Interesting use of shadows, highlights, reflections and structure in a single shot. Well done. Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 15:54, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Martin -- P999 (talk) 16:40, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Really interesting to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Dirty glasses, muddy reflections. I don't see anything interesting. Not the FP for me. --KSK (talk) 04:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Col dala Pieres Puez Mont de Sëura Cir Sela da Stevia te Gherdëina.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2018 at 03:33:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Granite cliff with feldspar crystals in Loddebo 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2018 at 20:09:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Sweden
  •   Info For some strange reason I think the portrait orientation creates more drama here than landscape. At first I wasn't too happy about the old handrail, but then I realized it provides size reference. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 20:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 20:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:33, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support This one works really well. Patterns, lines, clouds, colours. Very well done! --Code (talk) 21:29, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild   Oppose - Very good subject, but I demur on the composition, as I don't think the sky is helping. Either a purely blue sky or a sky with something going on in the upper left corner would probably help the composition more, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:28, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Crispy. Good light and colors. I also like the composition with the clouds. Positive impression at first sight with the thumbnail, then confirmed at full size -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:50, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:47, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:31, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Code -- P999 (talk) 20:59, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Basile Poco2 19:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A nice juxtaposition of the orange granite and the cool blue sky. Daniel Case (talk) 15:18, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 16:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Ледяные парусники.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2018 at 10:40:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info created and uploaded by Discoverynn - nominated by SKas -- KSK (talk) 10:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- KSK (talk) 10:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Resolution could be better, but very nice composition. --XRay talk 11:41, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Resolution is too low for me; 6 megapixels from a 36MP camera. Images should not be downsized and I can't see a good reason why this one should be. There's also the adage that "all sunsets are beautiful", so while this is a pretty picture in itself, there are so many pretty sunsets on Commons that an FP must give us something extra special. This doesn't, since it's so small.--Peulle (talk) 11:54, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
      Comment @Peulle and others. The full size is uploaded. 34 megapixels are enough? Please, look at the bigger size. --KSK (talk) 10:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Still not quite sure. I'll go with   Neutral.--Peulle (talk) 14:26, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. It's a very nice idea but the execution of it plus processing could be better. --Cart (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per XRay, but mostly per Peulle. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:59, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle --The NMI User (talk) 08:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Regretful oppose per others; it's a great image that unfortunately falls apart technically at the edges. Daniel Case (talk) 04:26, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I love Baikal lake. - Benh (talk) 06:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Good size now but it still doesn't wow me. Btw, it looks tilted to me. Ok, we have no real horizon, but the opposite shoreline is far enough to be used as level gauge. --Cart (talk) 09:33, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
      Done--KSK (talk) 12:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Sindoor.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2018 at 08:45:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Brügge (B), Groenerei -- 2018 -- 8493-7.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2018 at 06:26:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Bergtocht van Gimillan (1805m.) naar Colle Tsa Sètse in Cogne Valley (Italië). Zicht op de omringende alpentoppen van Gran Paradiso 16.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2018 at 05:09:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Jaflong Sylhet.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2018 at 04:51:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  •   Info created by Abdul Momin - uploaded by Abdul Momin - nominated by RockyMasum -- Masum-al-Hasan (talk) 04:51, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Masum-al-Hasan (talk) 04:51, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Amazing landscape -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:12, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I really like the composition, but IMO the focus is in front of the man. The man himself isn't sharp enough. --XRay talk 11:43, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support XRay may be right. Still... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:54, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral per XRay, andi it's just too noisy for me. Lovely scene, though, hence my neutral rather than oppose.--Peulle (talk) 14:47, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good for me...isn't quality images here --Σπάρτακος (talk) 17:28, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Martin -- P999 (talk) 18:10, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 18:23, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support great light and composition Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:26, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Benh (talk) 12:59, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♠ 02:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Ideal moment, nice layering, interesting subject, well composed. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:25, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I understand why everyone likes this picture, but before it's featured, would it be OK to smooth out the color noise a bit? Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Why don't you ask the photographer? This image has been processed from raw using Photoshop, so the result is their artistic creation, and perhaps their compromise between fixing the noise/posterisation issues and losing detail or over-smoothing the result. Also, one of our Photoshop experts could offer to attempt a reprocessing from raw, but it isn't always easy to achieve the same effect on an image like this. I'd really rather we didn't fiddle with the JPG. -- Colin (talk) 07:41, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Has its defects, yes, but they're fixable and it's just so pretty. Daniel Case (talk) 23:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Because of the severe colour noise of the mountains --Llez (talk) 16:04, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Abbotsford House Study Room.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2018 at 17:01:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Rathaus der Stadt Wanfried, Hessen, Deutschland IMG 5932-1 edit.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2018 at 16:36:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alternative image File:Rathaus der Stadt Wanfried, Hessen, Deutschland IMG 5922-1 edit.jpgEdit

 

  •   Info @Basotxerri, Peulle: Here you go.
  •   Support -- Christoph Braun (talk) 20:46, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral OK, the technical quality is better now. --Basotxerri (talk) 08:28, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support very pleasant --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --The NMI User (talk) 09:00, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Not a great composition, IMO, though the motif is nice. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It still doesn't quite give me the wow feeling. Cleanup of the purple CA might also be a suggestion.--Peulle (talk) 20:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral My first thought was, wow, those must be really big rats  . However, I've noticed that in other pictures of these buildings the half-timbering is red, almost scarlet, whereas here they seem more like red velvet cake. Is this something that could be addressed? Daniel Case (talk) 23:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Most of the images you'll find online are dated and the paint is not as saturated as it used to be. Although the lighting might be a more decisive factor. The timberframing will look entirely different on an overcast day. For this particular image, I wouldn't consider nudging the colors though. Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 14:59, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Church of Saint-Mayme 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2018 at 09:23:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Etangs de Bassies.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2018 at 09:13:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Obernberger See -BT- 09.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2018 at 08:39:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • No problem, thank you for your opinion! --Basotxerri (talk) 14:32, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Hmmmm --Podzemnik (talk) 17:54, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. The sharpness could be better. --XRay talk 11:45, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Artistic. This aquatic blue and green vegetation is unusual and behind some trees it makes the composition successful in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:16, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Basile -- P999 (talk) 18:13, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 20:19, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --The NMI User (talk) 09:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Very weak oppose An interesting idea that I don't think quite works. The trees are complex enough to be distracting, and the highlights near the bottom are almost blown. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you Daniel. This might have been a nice application for a polarizer to get rid of the reflections, I think. --Basotxerri (talk) 07:14, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Obernberger See -BT- 03.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2018 at 07:36:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria
  •   Info All by me. -- Basotxerri (talk) 07:36, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 07:36, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - The scene is beautiful, but the composition isn't working that well for me. I'd rather see something in landscape format. This feels to me like a slice of something that might be an FP, but I'd have to see it. Still considering whether to oppose... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:07, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you Ikan. I've just checked it and I've only got one landscape shot of the lake and seven are portraits ;-) --Basotxerri (talk) 08:45, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I have a negative opinion of Ikan. I like this composition but the quality is not FP level to me, then I'm neutral. --Laitche (talk) 01:43, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral per Ikan and the strong horizontals. I wonder, however, if this could be improved by cropping out the hazed mountain and sky ... Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

File:IglesiaConsolación-puertaprincipal-00903.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2018 at 22:45:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  •   Info all by me --Ezarateesteban 22:45, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:45, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Since this hasn't gotten any !votes yet, I will venture to suggest that there's a featurable image still to be found here. First, the slight pincushion distortion needs to be corrected. Second, I think it would do better with the walls, and possibly even the trim above, cropped out, to leave just a square picture of the doors themselves.  Support now. Daniel Case (talk) 02:32, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Look now, Daniel. thanks!!! Ezarateesteban 12:05, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - That did it. Very satisfying picture, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Parque estatal Chugach, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 109-121 PAN.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2018 at 18:04:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Yes, that was a stitching issue, Peulle, the only one I actually saw and fixed, just forgot to upload the corrected version, which just happened, thanks. --Poco2 20:51, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Fix confirmed.   Support now, it's an impressive view.--Peulle (talk) 22:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not particularly beautiful nor interesting in my view. The light is also too hard -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:45, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support That's a no-brainer support. :) ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 12:33, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Blown clouds are distracting, per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 04:04, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
    Daniel, I've reworked the curves and reduced the highlights but in a 360 degrees pano the sun will have to be somewhere. --Poco2 07:36, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Polinices aurantius 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2018 at 15:26:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Bones, shells and fossils
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Right now you're probably thinking: "What? He's voting against one of Llez' shell pics? Is that even possible?" I know, I usually support these too, so let me explain my reasoning. It's simple, really. It's the shells. Their colours are fairly uniform, just a slight variation between light yellow and white, not with some of the exciting stripes or patterns we have become used to seeing in these nominations. As such, they are less exciting. Less impressive, less "wow-y" than the photos I've become accustomed to seeing. That's all.--Peulle (talk) 15:46, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
    •   Comment To make photos of such uniform shells (without overexposing) and showing however all details is much more difficult than a photo of shell with various different colours and "with some of the exciting stripes or patterns". --Llez (talk) 20:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Sure, but there's a problem with inflation; so many great shell pics raises the standard since I get used to seeing better ones.--Peulle (talk) 20:17, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Each shell is a masterpiece of nature. I do not dare to differentiate between better and worse shells. In my opinion they all are aestetic, independent the colour and shape they have. Just such shells as the shell above are a challenge for photographers. --Llez (talk) 20:51, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great job...your shells will never detach me --Σπάρτακος (talk) 23:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportMeiræ 23:59, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 01:59, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:17, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportMartin Falbisoner (talk) 08:37, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:30, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 16:40, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:01, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 17:55, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm sorry but I must agree with Peulle (and I have, I think, !voted against one of these other collections—can't remember which). It is not to say that Llez shouldn't have taken it, or even nominated it; it is certainly an image we should have on Commons, and possibly even a QI. But Peulle is right that the nature of these shells makes it difficult to get out of them much of what has made other shell sets featurable—ironically, to me, that is in part because so much care was taken in photographing them. Daniel Case (talk) 03:59, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Only a   Question: "...shell sets featurable...".Do we feature shells or do we feature pictures? Do we have featured picture candidates or featured shell candidates? --Llez (talk) 05:23, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  • The subject is of course relevant. A photo can be technically excellent, but if the subject doesn't wow people, there's still a chance they won't vote for it in FPC. --Peulle (talk) 12:07, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Esztergom by night 01 - Simor János utca.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2018 at 09:11:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 09:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Pudelek (talk) 09:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The atmosphere is nicely preserved. -- GeXeS (talk) 11:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Per GeXeS. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support hard photo to take for this conditions. Olivier LPB (talk) 13:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 15:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very charming indeed --A.Savin 15:34, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice, but DoF could be (a little bit) better. --XRay talk 17:38, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 18:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Per GeXes Poco2 18:19, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 20:28, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 22:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - per GeXes P999 (talk) 01:18, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The blue hour contributes a lot. I like the reflecting sewer drain in the foreground, but not so much the darkest right part, uninteresting. I think a crop would improve -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I'm not going to buck such a strong consensus to merely delay the coronation of this photo, but my feeling about it is that sure, it's a clear picture of a deserted street on a cloudy dusk after the rain, but the composition isn't great and it's a very good QI to me. You can consider this my symbolic "oppose" vote, unless things unpredictably turn for this nomination (I won't be the lone opposer, though). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:11, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:18, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportMartin Falbisoner (talk) 08:36, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A bit oversaturated IMO but still nice. How'd you make the light flare so beautifully? :) ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 10:44, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
    I had some luck with this flare ;) --Pudelek (talk) 11:48, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:21, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A great noir feel (even though, OK, in this case it's more like bleu profonde). Daniel Case (talk) 18:04, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --The NMI User (talk) 09:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 13:15, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places

File:20171128 Angkor Wat 5671 DxO.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2018 at 07:25:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Cambodia
  •   Info created & uploaded by User:Jakubhal - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I expect this nomination to be controversial, so hear me out. We constantly hear pleas to pretend in photography that we aren't living in the 21st century, requiring photos to have no cars and even no people in them. And the question to me in regard to a tremendous tourist attraction like Angkor Wat isn't whether it's unrealistic to require that all photos of it include no people, either by arriving when it's closed or cloning them all out; it's whether the people actually make the photo less than excellent. And in this case, I submit to you that we have an excellent view of the most famous part of Angkor Wat, with two women in the center adding a splash of color and a welcome structural element (though not an ancient one) and some more people elsewhere being somewhat less obtrusive parts of the scene. Call it a juxtaposition of the digital age and an ancient temple complex if you like, but I think this photo is very good and deserves a feature (though I'd be sympathetic to changing the description to "View of the central structure of Angkor Wat with two women"). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:57, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Pudelek (talk) 09:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 17:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Agree and disagree with Ikan, so here comes the controversy... Agree that the description, and also the 3 categories, are not describing well the content. There are people on the picture, and these people in the center dressed with colorful clothes and mirroring in the water should obviously be mentioned somewhere in the file page. Otherwise, the subject is nearly wrong. Imagine the picture without these two women, it would have been completely different. The picture is only 62% from its original size, either cropped or downsized. Concerning the composition, there is too much sky compared to the bottom crop, and horizontally the main tower could have been positioned in the middle, so that the tourists visible on the left would have disappeared, and the temple would have stand much better within the composition. I agree that Siem Reap is usually crowded, and that such pictures with no tourist might be difficult to make, however, if you really want the buildings only, then you have 2 solutions : 1) patience, waiting until the place gets free 2) technique, taking two photographs with a tripod and clone out the intrusive elements in each after shooting. Then now the picture should be considered as it is : temple with tourists taking photographs of themselves. Is the action great ? Not really. Maybe a Buddhist monk walking, or a local child jumping would have made this image awesome, but here it rather shows the spectacle we have not paid for when purchasing the 37 US$ entrance ticket. I don't agree that the 21st century may justify weak sceneries with distracting elements as a modern way of life. There certainly are impressive architectural constructions with similar water reflection in non-touristic places, just you need to search and find. Here the photographer didn't search, as the attraction was perfectly located on the map, Angkor Wat being the major touristic site in Cambodia. Then, to make an exceptional picture of such classic destinations, you really have to find the special element or the particular situation that will make your shot original -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:05, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I respect you for taking the time to think about all of that and write it down. Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Always a pleasure to converse with you, even if we sometimes disagree -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:15, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • My pleasure, too. I think this is a very good photo, but if it doesn't get the votes for FP, the reasons you mention could be considered the difference between a good and a great picture. I'll see whether more people pass judgment on it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:20, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • It's a good picture, yes, and bad also. I can't imagine this image in a guide book for example, it's too far from the tradition and local culture -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Basile Morin, I have selected that picture among a dozen other, exactly because of the woman in red dress. The photo with that pair just looked more interesting than other more usual shots of Angkor Watt central structure. It is a pity I could not make a photo of rural life with Angkor in background but I think it is no longer possible. At least for an outsider who can enter the area only during a day. The place is overcrowded by tourists. I believe scene as you describe, showing local culture, may be now possible only if someone close the area and intentionally arrange it there. Sorry -- Jakubhal 19:46, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, this place is "overcrowded by tourists", especially between November and February, during the dry season with mild temperatures. But here there are 2 problems with them : 1) they are highly visible in the center, while the description of the image is "View of the central structure of Angkor Wat" only, and no ladies. 2) These women are taking pictures like pure tourists, and this action is particularly incompatible with the magic. Never will you find such pictures in a gallery, otherwise we would ask the photographer "hey, are you doing art or just snapshots in touristic sites with your mobile phone like these ladies ?" The temple is beautiful, the tourists action is not romantic at all -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:26, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Ok, @Basile Morin:, I understand now what you mean, although I do not agree. Anyway, I have uploaded a new version according to your crop suggestion. -- Jakubhal 18:36, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Better, but the description is still missing a major element of this image. Two tourists eye-catching in the center, and a caption like saying "temple only" -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:41, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Changed as Ikan Kekek suggested. -- Jakubhal 05:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose not because of any of the reasons so far given but because of the weird and unrealistic appearance of the clouds, as if someone had sprayed cleanser on the sky and had stepped away momentarily to get a cloth to wipe it with. Daniel Case (talk) 18:00, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
    Sorry Daniel Case, but I don't get it. Are you suggesting that I painted that sky? -- Jakubhal 19:28, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
@Jakubhal: I'm saying that it looks extremely unrealistic, that it was not photographed or processed correctly. Daniel Case (talk) 19:33, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: I have uploaded a new version, the light should be more natural now. Not sure if it solves your problem with sky. -- Jakubhal 20:12, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
I can see what it was supposed to be now ... sort of a thin layer higher up that lightened the sky. But I still don't think the picture works enough for FA. Daniel Case (talk) 04:28, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Wonsgehaig Neubürg P7100062.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2018 at 07:08:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Germany
  •   Info created & uploaded by User:Ermell - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I just love the light and sun rays, and in that context, the central positioning of the cross. I love the symbolism, which I think Christians and non-Christians alike could feel. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportMartin Falbisoner (talk) 08:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support --Laitche (talk) 09:46, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support although a couple of the spots in the sky could be cloned out; they don't really look like birds so it's probably best to just get rid of them.--Peulle (talk) 15:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 17:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great lighting --Poco2 18:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Thanks for the nomination Ikan. Just birds Peulle.--Ermell (talk) 22:10, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportMeiræ 00:00, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- P999 (talk) 01:21, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment The colors are yellowish like in an old postcard -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:05, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Not due to the sunlight, you think? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't know due to what. The sky looks overprocessed at first sight, but maybe the reason is different. One thing is sure, it was shot against the light -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:10, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Yellowish colors and there are also blown highlights in the foreground and in the sky. Sorry, I don't like this picture   -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:10, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 16:28, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Intanon 03.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2018 at 10:00:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  •   Info created & uploaded by Khunkay - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 10:00, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:00, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral - Weak support: Really can't tell whether it's overprocessed or not... Good shot though! ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 12:08, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Karelj (talk) 19:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - The building looks strangely flattened in this picture, whereas other pictures show it as having 360° symmetry, or at least something much closer to that. Please correct me if I'm wrong. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:43, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Nice spot, nice colours, good lighting but I don't like the perspective and the crop especially the cut-off footpath in front. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Looks more like a still from a Pixar production than a photograph. Daniel Case (talk) 21:57, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:48, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Sunny green paddy fields with water reflection.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2018 at 01:06:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

EDIT: Although I must say I'd rather support the second picture that Ikan brought up. By the way - isn't that a lens flare hidden in the round top of the tree to the left? It's a bit disturbing. --GeXeS (talk) 17:37, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Fixed Thanks, GeXeS, for these sharp eyes and for your side note concerning the picture suggested below by Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:19, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:26, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 10:20, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 11:46, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:46, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Nothing special, nothing interesting, just agriculture... --Karelj (talk) 19:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Karelj --Σπάρτακος (talk) 21:12, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Looks very good - nice light and a lovely sky. The shack on the right could have been cropped out, maybe. Or maybe not. But the CA in the trees on the left have to be removed for me to support.--Peulle (talk) 21:13, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Done I've fixed the flare spotted by GeXeS (the CAs were removed in Lightroom). Concerning the right part, I like the blue sky reflecting in the water and prefer to keep this format ratio 2:1, but I appreciate your suggestion -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:19, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • CA still present on the far left. I can mark it for you if you like.--Peulle (talk) 22:27, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Huh, it's gone now. And I was sure I refreshed the cache after last time. Oh well.   Support--Peulle (talk) 00:12, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • You can check in the history, I've not touched the CAs. Thanks for your support -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:24, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like the crisscrossing lines. -- King of ♠ 01:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per my comment in QIC, I really like it. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 03:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Once again I'm on the opposite of Karelj. It's a really beautiful representation of paddy fields in Laos. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 04:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 18:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I really like that pattern Poco2 18:16, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support very beautiful picture, very beautiful place. Nice light and sky. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportMeiræ 00:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:18, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tozina (talk) 00:18, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:45, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 15:53, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Agapanthus cultivar. Zaailing van Agapanthus Lilac Flash. (d.j.b.) 04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2018 at 15:38:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants #Family Agapanthaceae.
  •   Info Agapanthus cultivar. A selected seedling of Agapanthus Lilac Flash. A Close-up of a beautiful flower of a selected Agapanthus in mild evening light.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 04:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 21:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:47, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Very delicate, nice bokeh and lighting but the right crop is improvable --Poco2 18:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportMeiræ 00:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- P999 (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral per Poco -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Feldkirchen Stadtpfarrkirche Mariä Himmelfahrt mit Friedhof 19042018 3015.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2018 at 10:11:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  •   Info created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Johann Jaritz -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 10:11, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 10:11, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 11:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support - Generally and technically good, but the tree at the bottom give my vote the "weak"... Quite unfortunate. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The tree at the bottom does not affect the image of the church for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:43, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 16:18, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, good photo but not that outstanding. There are cars in the picture. --A.Savin 16:33, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Too much sky and not enough space at the bottom, IMO, like here -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:29, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Savin. ~Moheen (keep talking) 06:08, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very well composed. I don't agree that the cars damage the composition at all, nor do I have the slightest problem with any of the trees or the amount of sky into which the steeple rises. My support is strong, not weak. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Just a precision, I wouldn't have the slightest problem with the sky either if the bottom space had been as generous as it is on top. Question of balance in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:32, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
And the two clocks don't even agree! (I know, I know ... why would they want two clocks if they both told exactly the same time? ) Daniel Case (talk) 01:54, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Agree with others, I miss something special here to consider it one of our finest, sorry. --Poco2 18:06, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Líneas de Nazca, Nazca, Perú, 2015-07-29, DD 54.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2018 at 06:18:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Io highest resolution true color.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2018 at 05:47:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:PIA21906-Ceres-DwarfPlanet-HighResolution-Dawn-20170920.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2018 at 05:45:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Striated heron looking for fish (p2, 5s).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2018 at 15:01:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • @Peulle: As I did not turn up any saturation, vibrance, or sharpness, could you elaborate on "overprocessed" so that I know what to fix? ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:56, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle, and the heron is a little too dark to stand out well in a very bright background. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek, Peulle: Thanks for both your effort in contemplating my image in detail and taking your time to comment, however, please don't take offense — IMO this is the best; I have carefully calculated the lighting, exposure, and aesthetics, and I prefer the it the way it is. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:45, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A well-caught moment. Nice and and very impressive image -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:20, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment This bird is special due to the refection in the water. We don't have so many pictures of this kind, from the main page the only one I've found shows Flamingos with a water reflection less intense than here. I like the posture. It's active. However, I find the crop too large on the left and suggest a tighter one with the same ratio (see note). I think it's important here because the composition is very graphic, like modern design. Also I would suggest a little tilt clock-wise (between 0,5 and 1 degree maximum) so that the head is higher and the animal appears more vertical -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Alternative cropEdit

 

  •   Support - Thanks. I like that you got a picture of the bird while it was stepping. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Montreal Botanical Garden April 2017 005.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2018 at 03:50:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support per Basile Morin's comment below, not optimal coloring but still OK. I'm starting to like this image. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 15:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Reminds me of Cart's buoy photo. Daniel Case (talk) 15:51, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Poetic. I find the subject intriguing. The light and the colors in Cart's buoy were better, but here the object is so particular, like surreal. At first sight, I found the image a little bit tilted too, like GerifalteDelSabana, but it's probably an optical effect as I checked at full size and the pillar appears perfectly vertical in reality -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Poetic, it makes me feel calm and that I should slow down and sit by a river for a the rest of the day. But please King of Hearts will you fix the description and the name, too? "Birdhouse" or something like that should appear in both description and the name of the file I think. Thanks heaps, --Podzemnik (talk) 02:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, I agree with Ikan and Podzemnik that the description should be more accurate and may strike my support in the next days otherwise -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 10:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 11:08, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:47, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Peulle, sorry. --A.Savin 16:36, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Peulle. --Karelj (talk) 19:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Peulle.--Ermell (talk) 07:28, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Simple and nice. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:40, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Nice composition for me. Only I find the bird house too small in the overall picture.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose not enough special Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Peulle, sorry. This is just QI without wow and no more -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Marion Maréchal-Le Pen (39775509224).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2018 at 21:55:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment Please keep the tone politically neutral regarding persons here. We need good photos of all kind of politicians regardless of their views. (1, 2) If you think this is hard, try working in a neutral way on the article about Kim Jong-un... --Cart (talk) 13:09, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Political tone aside, Kim typically appears to have much more of a genuine expression whereas this failed attempt at a smile replica looks repulsive.--Trougnouf (talk) 13:56, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  • True enough, a smile or expression can always be discussed. She looks more natural in some of the other photos of her. --Cart (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I've turned witch into "contrived" -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile Morin --Trougnouf (talk) 12:56, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose because of that smile. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 15:03, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment As it is I find the CPAC logo on the lectern and most of the background distracting. However, I think it could work cropped as I have suggested. Daniel Case (talk) 15:49, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support because technical quality of the photo Ezarateesteban 22:01, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - That forced smile is really disturbing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose In general, she looks like a very pretty young woman, and her "normal" smile is not like this. Yes, forced, or taken at the wrong second.--Jebulon (talk) 08:33, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Draft horse pulling logs in Parc naturel Hautes Fagnes, Eupen, Belgium (VeloTour 54 to 55, DSCF3703).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2018 at 17:34:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Equidae_(Equids)
  •   Info I came up to this working draft horse crossing the trail while I bicycled downhill in "Parc Naturel Hautes Fagnes", I had just enough time to get my camera out and grab this shot before my battery died and it disappeared back into the forest. by -- Trougnouf (talk) 17:34, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 17:34, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I don't blame you for taking this picture and seeing what might result—I would have too. However, while the result's a QI I don't feel it's enough for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 02:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support For me a great shot, maybe because I myself have done such work. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:26, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
You've hauled logs from a rope tied around you in deep woods in pouring rain?   Daniel Case (talk) 15:46, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
It hadn't been raining (though the forest is humid), the horse looked like it was steaming probably because it was very hot from doing such work. --Trougnouf (talk) 15:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC) That's why I found it more impressive than any other working horse on the project (ie Category:Working_horses, Category:Quality images of draft horses, Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Equidae_(Equids))--Trougnouf (talk) 16:03, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment When evaluating a picture you should be able to distinguish wooden logs from tree trunks and tension chains from a rope, otherwise it would be advisable to visit an ophthalmologist. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Optometrist, I think you mean. Daniel Case (talk) 21:43, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
In Germany, we tend to see ophtalmologists (and medical practitioners in general) rather often, thanks to universal healthcare. Optometrists just make my glasses but I usually see a doctor first. And now calm down everybody   --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment The image is rather dark, with the animal not too isolated from its background. The outlines are difficult to distinguish without an effort of concentration -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:27, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Done I've increased the brightness and sharpening and improved the denoising. --Trougnouf (talk) 14:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • It's a very nice photo but sorry to say, it looks a bit washed out now, there are other ways of making a subject stand out. You unfortunately had the light from the wrong direction and that was very visible in the first version. This can be corrected though, plus a bit warmer shadows (just the shadows, not the whole pic) and an emphasize on the steaming horse would be better. A 16:9 crop wouldn't hurt either. Any version is yours if you want them. --Cart (talk) 15:12, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you! I'm not using your version because it's based on the jpeg but I tried applying your feedback as much as possible. I restored all the exposure stuff to sane values and I used drawn and parametric masks to make the horse stand out, the image is a little bit warmer and cropped to 16:9-ish. I uploaded the raw file in case you or anyone would like to try any further change. --Trougnouf (talk) 16:10, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral now. A little bit better, but still a dark and not very contrasted composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:03, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support This is perfectly fine for me. You got some depth in the photo now and the cut helps a lot. Of course it's always better to work from raw, I think you did a good job. To borrow an expression from Daniel: "You can almost smell the damp horse now. " :) --Cart (talk) 16:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cart --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:28, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 07:06, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Quality could have been better but the atmosphere is great. --Podzemnik (talk) 04:42, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 09:51, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Fellhorn (Chiemgauer Alpen) von Norden.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2018 at 12:28:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 13:14, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural


Zeitplan (Tag 5 nach der Nominierung)Edit

Fri 10 Aug → Wed 15 Aug
Sat 11 Aug → Thu 16 Aug
Sun 12 Aug → Fri 17 Aug
Mon 13 Aug → Sat 18 Aug
Tue 14 Aug → Sun 19 Aug
Wed 15 Aug → Mon 20 Aug

Zeitplan (Tag 10 nach der Nominierung)Edit

Sun 05 Aug → Wed 15 Aug
Mon 06 Aug → Thu 16 Aug
Tue 07 Aug → Fri 17 Aug
Wed 08 Aug → Sat 18 Aug
Thu 09 Aug → Sun 19 Aug
Fri 10 Aug → Mon 20 Aug
Sat 11 Aug → Tue 21 Aug
Sun 12 Aug → Wed 22 Aug
Mon 13 Aug → Thu 23 Aug
Tue 14 Aug → Fri 24 Aug
Wed 15 Aug → Sat 25 Aug