Commons:Propositions d'images remarquables

Les règles des Propositions d'images remarquables ont changé.
Conformément aux règles générales, une image est promue avec 7 (sept) votes "support" ou plus (et un ratio de 2/1 de # supports/opposes) et le nombre de nominations actives par utilisateur est limité à 2 (deux)
Désormais, seuls peuvent voter les membres inscrits depuis plus de 10 jours ayant procédé à au moins 50 interventions dans "Commons"


Skip to current candidates Aller directement aux propositions en cours

Cette page recense les images qui sont proposées pour être affichées dans les Images remarquables. Notez qu'il ne s'agit pas de la même chose que l'image du jour ou que les images de qualité.

Les archives des votes précédents se trouvent sur cette page.

Il existe également une liste chronologique des images remarquables.

Voir aussi les Images de qualité, les propositions d'images de qualité et les critiques photographiques.

ProcédureEdit

Conseils avant de proposer une imageEdit

partie en cours de traduction depuis la version anglaise, votre avis est le bienvenu.
Lisez entièrement le guide avant de commencer
Quelques règles informelles à retenir avant de proposer une image (les termes en italiques sont la traduction anglaise des termes).

  • Définition (display resolution) : les images de Commons peuvent être utilisées sur d'autres supports qu'un écran d'ordinateur, par exemple pour être imprimées ou vues à très haute résolution. Il est important que les images proposées aient la plus haute résolution possible. Au moins 2 millions de pixels (par ex. 2000 x 1000) semble raisonnable à présent. Les images de résolution inférieure sont systématiquement rejetées sauf s'il y a une bonne raison.
  • Mise au point (focus) : tous les objets importants de l'image devraient être nets.
  • Avant-plan et arrière-plan (background and foreground): ils peuvent être dérangeants. Le sujet principal ne devrait pas être caché par le premier plan, ni se confondre avec l'arrière-plan.
  • Qualité générale (general quality) : Les images proposées devraient avoir une très haute qualité technique.
  • Une retouche (digital manipulations) ne doit pas tromper l'observateur. La correction de quelques défauts dans l'image est acceptée pour autant que ce soit limité, bien fait, et non pour tromper. Les retouches courantes sont le recadrage, la correction de la perspective, de netteté, des couleurs ou de l'exposition. Des manipulations plus importantes, tels quel l'élimination d'éléments dans l'arrière plan, doivent être décrites dans la description de l'image, par le biais du modèle {{RetouchedPicture}}. Les retouches non décrites ou mal décrites qui transformeraient le sujet sont inacceptables.
  • Utilité (value) : notre but principal est de présenter des images utiles et précieuses. Les images devraient ainsi être spéciales d'une façon ou d'une autre, donc, entre autres :
    • La plupart des coucher de soleil sont beaux, et la plupart ne sont pas différents des autres existant déjà.
    • Les photos de nuit sont souvent belles mais davantage de détails sont visibles de jour.
    • "Beau" ne veut pas dire "utile".

Au niveau technique, nous avons l'exposition, la composition, le mouvement et la profondeur du champ.

  • L'exposition (exposure) est l'obturation du diaphragme qui modifie la luminosité (brightness) pour rendre avec qualité les ombres et les lumières au sein de l'image. Le manque d'ombres dans le détail n'est pas nécessairement négatif, cela peut être un effet désiré.
  • La composition (composition) est l'arrangement des éléments dans l'image. La "Règle de trois" est un bon guide pour la composition, c'est un héritage des écoles de peintures. L'idée est de diviser l'image par deux lignes horizontales et deux lignes verticales, nous avons donc trois parties dans chaque sens. L'objet ne doit pas forcément être centré. Les sujets intéressants doivent êtres placés aux 4 croisements des lignes. L'horizon ne doit jamais être mis au milieu, car il couperait l'image en deux. L'idée principale ici est de rendre l'image dynamique.
  • Netteté (sharpness) renvoie à la manière dont les mouvements sont représentés dans l'image. Ils peuvent être nets ou flous. Ils ne sont pas mieux l'un que l'autre, cela dépend de l'intention du photographe. L'impression de mouvement dépend des différents objets de l'image. Par exemple, photographier une voiture de course qui apparaît nette par rapport à l'arrière plan ne donne pas une idée de la vitesse. Il faudrait en fait que la voiture soit représentée nette, mais avec un arrière plan flou, créant ainsi le mouvement. D'un autre coté, représenter le saut d'un joueur de basket net avec le reste de l'image flou, en raison de la nature peu habituelle de la photo, lui conférerait de l'intérêt.
  • La profondeur de champ (depth of field or DOF) renvoie à la zone de mise au point devant et au delà du sujet principal. La profondeur de champ est choisie en fonction des besoins spécifiques à chaque image. Une profondeur grande ou petite peu améliorer ou dégrader la qualité de l'image. Une faible profondeur de champ peu attirer l'attention sur le sujet principal, en le séparant de son environnement. Le lentilles à petite distance focale (grand angle) ont une grande profondeur de champ, et vice versa, les lentilles à grande distance focale (petite ouverture) ont une petite profondeur de champ.

PropositionEdit

Si vous pensez avoir trouvé ou créé une image qui puisse être considérée comme parmi les meilleures de Commons, avec une description et une licence appropriée, copiez le nom de l'image dans la boîte ci-dessous (en incluant le préfixe File:), après le texte déjà présent :


Après cela, vous devrez insérer un lien vers la page que vous venez de créer en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

VoteEdit

A l'exclusion de tous autres, vous pouvez utiliser les modèles suivants:

  • {{Pour}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Contre}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),

Ainsi que :

  • {{Neutre}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment ),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram voting question.svg Question).


IMPORTANT: veuillez notamment NE PAS UTILISER les modèles {{weak support}} (GA candidate.svg Weak support) ni {{weak oppose}} (BA candidate.svg Weak oppose), ils ne sont pas reconnus par le robot, et votre vote serait considéré comme non valide.

Merci d'inclure quelques mots expliquant pourquoi vous soutenez ou non la promotion de l'image, surtout si vous votez contre. N'oubliez pas de signer avec ~~~~.

RèglesEdit

Règles généralesEdit

  1. Le résultat est donné 9 jours après la proposition (voir le planning en bas de page). Les votes ajoutés le 10e jour ou après ne sont pas décomptés.
  2. Les utilisateurs non-enregistrés peuvent proposer des images, faire des commentaires, mais pas voter.
  3. La proposition elle-même ne compte pas comme un vote : il faut l'ajouter explicitement.
  4. Le proposant peut retirer une image à tout moment, en écrivant I withdraw my nomination.
  5. Souvenez-vous que le but de Wikimedia Commons est une bibliothèque pour tous les projets Wikimedia, y compris des projets futurs ; les images n'ont pas à être utiles uniquement pour Wikipédia.
  6. Les images peuvent être retirées de la liste dès le 5e jour si elles n'ont reçu aucun vote "pour".
  7. Soyez attentifs et très sélectifs dans les choix que vous faites, car il ne peut y avoir que deux propositions actives par proposant. Toute proposition supplémentaire sera rejetée sans examen.
  8. Seulement 2 nominations actives par même utilisateur (qui est, en nomination sous "review" et non encore close) sont autorisées. Le principal but de cette mesure est de contribuer à une meilleure qualité moyenne des nominations, par un choix plus judicieux des photos présentes en nominations.

Règles de promotionEdit

L'image candidate devient une image remarquable si elle remplit les conditions suivantes :

  1. Une licence appropriée (bien sûr !)
  2. Au moins sept votes "pour".
  3. un ratio de 2/1 de votes "pour"/"contre".
  4. Deux versions différentes de la même image ne peuvent pas être promues en même temps, mais seulement celle avec le plus grand score.

ContestationsEdit

Avec le temps, les critères d'évaluation évoluent, et il peut être décidé qu'une image qui était auparavant assez bonne pour être dans la liste ne peut plus l'être.

Pour qu'une image soit déchue, il faut qu'une majorité de 2/3 avec au moins 5 votes accepte de retirer l'image, autrement elle reste "remarquable". Pour voter, utiliser les modèles {{Keep}} (Symbol keep vote.svg Keep : mérite de rester "remarquable") ou {{Delist}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist  : ne mérite plus le label).

Pour contester une image, copiez son nom avec le préfixe dans la boîte ci-dessous à la suite du texte déjà présent :


Vous devriez inclure les informations suivantes :

  • Informations sur l'origine de l'image (créateur, importateur).
  • Un lien vers le vote d'origine.
  • La raison pour laquelle vous contestez le label, avec votre signature.

Insérez ensuite un lien en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal.

SommaireEdit

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la listeEdit

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste, cliquez ici et ajoutez votre proposition en haut de la liste : {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:FILENAME}}

Propositions en coursEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Drikke fontaine i Aarhus Rådhus.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2014 at 14:08:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Drinking fountain between the benches in Aarhus City Hall

File:Elfbergen Gaasterland Oorlogsmonument 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 17:39:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Elfbergen Gaasterland Oorlogsmonument
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Elfbergen Gaasterland War Memorial. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Don't see anything extraordinary about this image. (The long exposure and focal length choice is odd) -- Colin (talk) 11:55, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The marker does not stand out in any featurable way. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Ta Phrom, Angkor, Camboya, 2013-08-16, DD 39.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 15:48:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the Ta Phrom temple in Angkor, Cambodia.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Interior of the Ta Phrom temple in Angkor, Cambodia. All by me, Poco2 15:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 15:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment percpectives (left and right are leaning out) -- Christian Ferrer 18:11, 23 april 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Corrected, which does not mean that everything is vertical now (right side), because it isn't vertical in reality Poco2 21:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharpness id not the best on the edges, however I like it very much. -- Christian Ferrer 04:49, 24 april 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition, lighting and sharpness not really saying "wow" to me. Location is very wow. -- Colin (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Colin. I don't understand the composition.--Jebulon (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice chaos! --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Facade på Aarhus Rådhus.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 11:35:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Facade of the City Hall in Aarhus on Park Alle

File:Berlin - Schloss Bellevue2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2014 at 19:53:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Berlin: Bellevue Palace
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info High resolution image (about 30 MP) of Bellevue Palace, official residence of the President of Germany, all by Taxiarchos228 -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes, this is OK! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Happy to support as well, but please fix the dust spots in the sky and perhaps lighten the shadows on the left. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I´ll do this soon. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Saffron Blaze: sky should be cleared completely now. The shadows are IMO not disturbing for the impression itself and everything within the shadows is visible clearly. So it would be too much brightening I think. The curves are already adjusted and well-balanced. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:15, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At the first glance I thought to have found a stitching error at the right part of the building - but that's no error, the building looks a bit strange there also on other photos . Nice panoramic view at good light. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you please correct the tilt or the distorsion (please see note) ? Thanks in advance.--Jebulon (talk) 09:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
If you look at the 100%-view you'll see that the image is horizontal straightened. Nevertheless the builings is located at a small slope so it might seem a bit angular. But this is reallity. The Bellevue Palace isn't even Versailles ;-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for answer, but even at 100%, the roofs looks tilted... Anyway, you know the place better than me so I have no reason to doubt. Do you want a cliché ? This leaning roof does not look very "preussisch" ! Seriously, I'm not bothered with the shadow, and it is a very good picture, now in use as QI, VI and future FP in the relevant article of the french WP (french caption added, BtW).--Jebulon
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 16:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:34, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very detailed. However, the light is harsh compared to File:Bellevue Palace Berlin 02-14.jpg -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:La Grace (ship, 2010), Sète, Hérault 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2014 at 10:30:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

La Grace in Sète.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Christian Ferrer
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 10:29, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Subject not isolated from very busy background and in least dramatic form (at port, sails furled). See Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles#Water for examples of featured ships. See File:La Grace-At Sea1-full.jpg for more impressive capture of this replica ship. And Google Images too. -- Colin (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the title/name of the image is just wrong, but the picture itself is very good to me, with a lot of things to be seen, like in real in a port. The light is excellent and I'm satisfied with the composition. Maybe the inflatable boat is not the best, but it was here.--Jebulon (talk) 15:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Jebulon, I choose this name because it's the yellow boat that we see in first, but you're right, there is a lot of things in this image and others titles are possible. --Christian Ferrer 05:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:01, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 19:28, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:USO-Sale Sharks - 20131205 - Ballon flottant.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 21:14:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by, nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This picture was taken during the match opposing the USO to the Sale Sharks, competing in the European Challenge Cup, which was attended by two accredited photographers, thanks to Wikimedia CH. one of the player as let the ball loose, creating this "floating ball" moment, with all the eyes converging to the ball. -- Pleclown (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 06:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a Flemish painting. Great sports shot. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:27, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really good --Baresi F (talk) 21:11, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hieronymus Bosch for the faces, maybe... But as it is the focal point of the image, I'd wish a ball without chromatic aberration (purple fringe). Thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
    New version. Pleclown (talk) 17:13, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Memorial J Kubitschek Brasilia statue.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 20:01:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Statue of Juscelino Kubitschek, the founder of Brasilia, in front of the JK Memorial in Brasilia.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 20:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 20:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:17, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I like Cayambes pictures very much, especially those one of Brasilia. This is a very good detail shot of this Kubitschek memorial. But the main object is sadly not right sharp. Because this is a very simple subject I have to be strictly than e.g. with aerial views. Please reprocess this image and I'll gladly support it. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New version uploaded, noise and CA reduction and a bit of sharpening. --Cayambe (talk) 21:25, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Cydalima perspectalis carterpillar.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 19:28:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Archaeodontosaurus - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jebulon (talk) 20:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you to TOMER. This animal is very affectionate, if some want to adopt, I can send you. I have thousands in my garden. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Barcex (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Ossuary in Sedlec.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 19:23:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Jan Kameníček - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At least something different !--Jebulon (talk) 20:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Always useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:17, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain or Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good idea and well composed. I'd support if general sharpness were (much) better. But I guess I'm asking too much of a small point and shoot camera... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:59, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 05:29, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. Would be a little nicer without the noise in the dark areas. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 18:57, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ossuary certainly makes for an arresting image but I don't think this one rises above a well taken tourist photo. The technical quality and lighting is satisfactory rather than outstanding, and Sedlec Ossuary has lots of potential (see Google Images). -- Colin (talk) 21:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportClockery Fairfeld who, me? 11:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Colin. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Endangered species Iguana Iguana from Margarita Island.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 18:32:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Endangered species Iguana Iguana from Margarita Island
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Can it be specified whether this is a male or a female individuum? --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:07, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done In description female. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Zinnia_flower_in_jaffna.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 14:27:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

a zinnia elegans flower in nallur, jaffna, sri lanka
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by aathavan jaffna - uploaded by aathavan jaffna - nominated by Aathavan jaffna -- Aathavan jaffna (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nom -- Aathavan jaffna (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is just my opinion, but an FP macro (or near macro) should use a near perfect specimen and either focus stack or find a compelling way to use the limited depth of field. This image is just an ordinary photo of a flower. It is not one of our finest works. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Did you ever bother to compare the number of plant FP we have against the number of arthropod ones, for instance? It makes no sense. Something in the evaluation process is very biased against plant photographs. Your reasoning highlights this. There is no reason to expect plant FPs to be focus-stacked. We don't have so many plant FPs. And I am not supportive of this specific candidate either. Gidip (talk) 18:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I agree with Gidip.--Jebulon (talk) 21:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • We have many arthropod ones because of one or two dedicated individuals. If your concern is systemic bias I will inform you I couldn't care less. BTW, focus stack was just one option. It is not my job to teach people how to photograph flowers in a compelling way. My job is state I don't think this is one of them. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I mostly agree with Saffron on this. I suspect mentioning focus stack may have touched a nerve -- something that isn't really feasible except for cut flowers in the home. But that is merely one technique that one could be used. As an example, there's a rather nice Bing desktop photo of a zinnia you can Google for. There's also an existing File:Zinnia elegans with Bombus 01.JPG featured picture. Unlike animals that fly about, flowers are rather easier to take a frame-filling shot. And there are a huge multitude to choose. So making someone go wow requires something a bit special. Like with sunsets, you might think that having a beautiful subject would make the task easy, but perhaps not. -- Colin (talk) 20:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--maathavan (talk) 13:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Invalid vote. User has less than 50 edits --DXR (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Bondinho chegando ao Pão de Açúcar.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 14:15:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Halley Pacheco de Oliveira - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 14:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 14:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 1) Picture is blur. 2) No wow. Weird objective, shooting from the top downwards, with a disruptive cable car??? What is the photographer trying to achieve???? --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • The title is "Cable car arriving at the Pão de Açúcar*" [translator note: Sugar Loaf hill, in Rio de Janeiro]. So he was probably trying to photograph the cable car arriving at the Sugar Loaf station. --G Furtado (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per AK. The motif is not compelling. The cable car visually sits on the canopy of trees. Lots of other minor issues that ensure this is not one of our finest works. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination. Per users. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 19:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Lagarto (Sceloporus mucronatus), Zona arqueológica de Cantona, Puebla, México, 2013-10-11, DD 03.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 12:31:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lizzard (Sceloporus mucronatus), archeological area of Cantona, Puebla, Mexico.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Lizzard (Sceloporus mucronatus), archeological area of Cantona, Puebla, Mexico. Poco2 12:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 12:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Don't think the composition is exceptional. The very bright rock/lichen is distracting. -- Colin (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:14 P416 6136.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 12:09:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

English: Roe deer - malePolski: Sarna - kozioł
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because Too many technical issues. Blurness, noise, background problems etc. I would be very, very surprised if this nomination is successful, as the photo clearly does not meet the FP criteria at one glance. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Velika noč - jedila hren šunka pirhi potica.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 20:40:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Traditionaln easter breakfast with eggs, ham, and [en:nut roll
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Klemen Brumec - uploaded by ModriDirkac - nominated by ModriDirkac -- ModriDirkac (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ModriDirkac (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Now I am hungry. That aside, there is a very unfortunate loss of sharpness towards the bottom of the image. It is bad enough that it is distracting. The image also seems to be a bit dull as if it could use a bit of brightening. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Suffering from insufficient DOF (and focus not on the plate) and very high ISO. The edit that reduced noise also seems to have reduced contrast and actually applied negative Clarity according to the EXIF (which I can understand being done selectively on a female portrait or dreamy scene, but not food). I'd love to know what the different objects/foods are in the picture. I suspect the lack of a tripod limited what could be achieved here and we've only got a 50%-sized image from a potentially great camera. -- Colin (talk) 17:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Saffron Blaze and Colin, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 10:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Whistlejacket by George Stubbs edit.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 09:15:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Whistlejacket is an oil-on-canvas painting from about 1762 showing the Marquess of Rockingham's racehorse, rearing up against a blank background. Edited by uploader from National Gallery scan to add lost "brownspace" to the left and right of the painting.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by George Stubbs - uploaded by Crisco 1492 - nominated by Nikhil -- Nikhil (talk) 09:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 09:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Its status on the wikipedias is supported by the strong EV. I don't think that should have the same impact here on Commons. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the late reply. However, I disagree with your opinion. We have many paintings, which have been given FP status on various wikipedias, elevated to FP status in commons. For example this pic got FP staus, this one and many more are there. IMHO, EV is an advantage for a pic in commons, besides technical quality. Nikhil (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I am not suggesting EV isn't a consideration on Commons. I am saying a good scan of a high EV paiting should not be the threshold for FP status on Commons. Commons is about the image... and without the written backstory in the WP article as to why this is such an important painting it becomes are rather unremarkable image to me. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:41, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa Torrox Costa 2014.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 08:58:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hotel Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa in Torrox-Costa (62 Mpx high res panorama)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No historic building or church :) High resolution panorama (62 Mpx) of Hotel Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa in Torrox-Costa
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support makes me want to go on vacation. Now! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail, subject, composition and lighting, good job! Poco2 09:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Btw, could you improve the symmetry (the right side is closer to the camera than the left side)? Poco2 11:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    (sorry, forgotten your comment): Yesterday I spent several hours on the improvement of the photo in order to check a suggesion by Colin regarding another projection (Panini General), see my discussion page for details. During the work I also tried to improve the symmetry but finally my disappointing insight, probabaly you can give a comment on it on my talk page, was that I still prefer the version I have nominated here. It simply looks better if I use the trees at the left and right as framing than strictly align the center to the lines on the floor. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:11, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Did you do a version without the trees on the left and right... i.e a few steps closer perhaps? Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Unfortunately not. I really like the trees here. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    They work as a framing device but the one of the left is a bit distracting given it is the one large dark element in the image. Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    I though you mean the palm trees but you mean the smaller ones at the very left and right. Nonetheless is does not change the situation that I only have image material from the given positon. Indeed, my idea was to use them as framing. Cropping is no option because the pool building at the left would be cropped. I could try to brighten the left tree, what do you think? --Tuxyso (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Probably ✓ Done: I've brightened the tree at the very left. Do you think it is better now? --Tuxyso (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Tuxyso, can you spend a comment to my question above about the lack of symmetry? Poco2 20:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Poco -- Colin (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent sharpening --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid the panorama distorsion does not work for me, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 13:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • What exactly does not work for you? What had you done better? Where do you see problems with distortion? In the foreground or at the building? --Tuxyso (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Shortly: I should not see this if I where at the place of the camera.--Jebulon (talk) 14:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I'm willing to adjudicate if someone will pay me to take the place of the camera. My verification of the perspective and field of view should take around two weeks. Thanks in advance. -- Colin (talk) 21:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Thank you, but no need. If some can wait a few months, I'll be there (or close too) in next july.--Jebulon (talk) 11:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
        • But don't forget to take new motives besides all the motives I have taken bad photos of (you made a similiar comment on my Alhambra photos) during my visit in Andalusia. Should I add a category Photos of Andalusia by Tuxyso to simplify your work? --Tuxyso (talk) 11:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
          • Oh sorry dear Tuxyso, I don't want to hurt you, and your pictures are very good ! I have a mental problem with panorama pictures and subsequent deformations/distorsions, that's all. And the rest of your productions is always very interesting, I don't think I can do better ! That was just a joke, answering to Colin's joke. Sorry again, no offense, really.--Jebulon (talk) 17:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
            • This time I have indeed understood the joke from Colin (which is not a natural consequences in a foreign language). But I have clearly understood your statement the way that you will make a better photo when you are in the region. BTW: I have a non-panoramic wide-angle version of the motive but imho the high resolution makes the difference here due to the plenty of details, take e.g. a look on the magazine the girl at the very left is reading :) --Tuxyso (talk) 19:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 19:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 06:09, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. --DXR (talk) 16:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:25, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Scallop Neurological Diagram.svgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 07:46:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Scallop neurological diagram
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by KDS444 - uploaded by KDS444 - nominated by KDS444 -- KDS444 (talk) 07:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A little context: this image is a full false color rendition of a similar diagram from a monograph on giant scallops. I realize it looks a little like something out of The Matrix, but this is in fact the actual arrangement of the neural system of a scallop. I have produced it here with lighter color shades representing those parts closer to the viewer, and darker shades as those further away: in this way, one can see that the system is arranged in a single "folded" circle/ loop connected to the various ganglia via nerves, with the animal's "left" half on one side and "right" half on the other (the scallop is, in this sense, "facing" the viewer... Though scallops, of course, don't have faces!). I have also attempted to show all nerves as having 3-dimensional round (cylindrical) shapes (i.e., their actual shapes) and have shown every nerve in its actual position and locus of connection. In the end, the image is highly accurate. And it wasn't easy! Also note that the image has been purged of all raster components. What is left is strictly vector-based. KDS444 (talk) 07:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent Svg work, easy to underestand and hight EV. We need support it. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Is the original monograph online? And if so, could you give us a link to it? This diagram is very beautiful indeed, but I would just like to check it against the original. Also, do we know for sure that this arrangement is the same in all scallops? Or is the diagram really just for one species of giant scallop? Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 13:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
    • The original image file has the information to the source, but let me give it again here: Drew, Gilman Arthur. 1906. The habitats, anatomy, and embryology of the giant scallop (Pecten tenuicostatus, Mighels). Figure 23/ Plate 12. The diagram is specifically of a giant scallop-- more than that, of course, it is a diagram of one particular giant scallop, the one that Drew used for his own illustration! I know of no reason to expect other scallops to have a very different neurology, though I would be glad to narrow the claim of this image to being that of a giant scallop only. KDS4444 (talk) 00:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • So the book dates from 1907. It is online here: [1] By the way, this is usually called "the nervous system" rather than the "neurology". I am studying the images on his plates now. Invertzoo (talk) 01:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comparing this diagram with the original, I have found one nerve (on each side) that has been accidentally omitted, an unbranched one at the front of the diagram, one that runs out almost level with the visceral ganglia. It also it seems to me that the cerebral ganglia need to be far more swollen and rounded-looking, as they are in the original, otherwise they don't even really look like ganglia. And in the original, the anterior pallial nerve comes to more of a point at the top. I am tired tonight but I will look again in the morning and see if I can spot anything else. I must say however in KDS444's favor that the 3-D rendering makes the diagram very much easier to understand than the original. Invertzoo (talk) 01:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Let me re-examine my diagram in light of these comments and revise as necessary. It is a quarter past 5:00 in the morning here in L.A., and I am very tired-- later today I will consider a reconstruction along these suggested (and no doubt accurate) lines. Aside: it was the utter confusion I experienced while looking at Drew's original strange image that inspired me to create my own based on his work, a version that wouldn't invoke such cerebral cacophony and confusion. Hopefully this will bear out in the end! KDS4444 (talk) 12:22, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Paris Palais du Luxembourg façade s printemps 2014.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 20:34:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JLPC - uploaded by JLPC - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There are two FPs of the Palais du Luxembourg, but this one is very beautiful too. The sky, the fontaine, the people, the trees gives a nice atmosphere.-- Paris 16 (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 08:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice mood and light. --Jebulon (talk) 14:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wanted to do a pano one day, but I see that it has already been done very well! --DXR (talk) 14:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 23:08, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and thanks to Paris 16 for this nomination and his help on other files. --JLPC (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Norbert Kiss - GP Camión de España 2013 - 08.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 19:11:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Truck pilot Norbert Kiss at the Spain Truck GP 2013.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Truck pilot Norbert Kiss at the Spain Truck GP 2013 (panning shot). Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nikhil (talk) 01:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Nice panning, sharpness is ok but lighting not the best, overall FP to me Poco2 08:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pleclown (talk) 11:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really something special here, more than "technical quality" ! That is why FPC exists, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 17:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Einstein2 (talk) 17:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Munich subway station Westfriedhof.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 16:50:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Munich subway station Westfriedhof
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Munich subway station Westfriedhof- all by --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and a suggestion. What if you crop the lower part until you get 1:2 ratio? I feel that if the black line on the floor ends closer to the corner of the image it will look nicer. --Kadellar (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I made the same suggestion (perhaps 16:9) earlier today (see note). Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 20:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Paris 16 (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow ! And per Kadellar.--Jebulon (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive --Jamez42 (talk) 00:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice work. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:04, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 08:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info and ✓ Done Thanks for your friendly reviews. As suggested I cropped the image a bit - you were right, the result is more convincing. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry, I can't support twice !!!--Jebulon (talk) 13:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I knew it would look better with the crop but this far exceeded my expectations. Very strong visual impact now. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 11:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, obviously. Train at right is a nice touch. --DXR (talk) 14:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Visually striking. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 18:41, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 19:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding shot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:51, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:21, 42 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Rumex pictus 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 14:54:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rumex pictus
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 14:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gidip (talk) 14:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JLPC (talk) 11:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Nice picture, but why did you cut off the other flowers along this stalk?? I would have supported if not for that. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per AK. The bottom crop creates an unnecessary and unwelcome tension in the image. The overall composition is not convincing either. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Just for general knowledge, these are fruits. Cheers, Gidip (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch für das Deutsche Reich.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 12:42:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cover of old book

File:Shepherds Bow - Google Art Project.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 22:36:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Ukrainian religious painting, from an iconostasis, showing the Adoration of the Shepherds. Tempera on wood, between 1650 and 1700.

File:2014.03.29.-08-Mannheim Neckarau Waldpark-Wiesen-Schaumkraut.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 20:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hockei (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Photo is oversaturated imo. It looks very unnatural, especially the grasses behind. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I disagree with AK here. I find the light/colours/bokeh are fine. However, it is the tight crop on the bottom that is off-putting. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I suggest a less square crop. Gidip (talk) 18:42, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 22:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Jasná Ski Resort - gondola lift Kosodrevina - Chopok (1).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 09:29:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jasná Ski Resort - gondola lift Kosodrevina - Chopok

File:St Stephen Walbrook Church Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 22:29:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:St Stephen Walbrook Church Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Diliff - uploaded by User:Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 22:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 22:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition is cut down --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • What does 'cut down' mean? If you mean cropped, then yes, I carefully cropped the image to get the framing I wanted. But what specifically about the composition makes you oppose? Diliff (talk) 10:05, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, the seats are cut, that's what I mean --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
I would have preferred more of the seats in the foreground too, but it was not physically possible. My tripod was pushed up against a pillar directly behind the camera, so I could not go back any further. And to tilt the camera down further would result in a lot of distortion. Already, the viewpoint is looking down at perhaps a 60 degree angle at the bottom of the frame. The field of view is extremely large. Diliff (talk) 10:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
I underestand the situation. You could merge severals pictures in the future? --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Capturing the whole of an interior like this is not easy. The wide angle-of-view can lead to all sorts of stretched and distorted forms, and features such as columns and chandeliers can look awful. This image shows a good control of these problems and has a strong three-dimensional feel. The level of detail is great, as one would expect from Diliff, and the bright natural lighting is handled well. -- Colin (talk) 10:36, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question We have one round oculus (close right to the pulpit) , and several oval oculi. Is it normal, or is it a perspective deformation ?--Jebulon (talk) 14:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • It is normal. Only the 'central' oculus is round, the rest are genuinely oval-shaped. I think they are progressively more oval shaped, but I'm not sure and did not pay enough attention at the time. There may be some perspective distortions at the periphery but nothing that would make a circle look so oval-shaped. 14:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • OK, convinced. Thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and following Wilfredo's complaints, I feel that if we could see a bit more of the bench, it would be better, but it's FP for me anyway. --Kadellar (talk) 19:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 09:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:TF Wildpark Johannismuehle 03-14 img11.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:45:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Harris Hawk (Parabuteo unicinctus) in Wildpark Johannismühle, Brandenburg, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by A.Savin
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 07:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, but maybe a portrait crop would be even better. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much in shadow and want a more detailed image from a captive bird at FP. -- Colin (talk) 13:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Notable chromatic noise under the wings and on the breast. Not sharp enough, sorry. No offense Colin, but I don't see why it should be more detailed because captive: anyway, the bird is as mobile as in the nature, no ? It is not a stuffed specimen...--Jebulon (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Not less sharp than some of building photographs getting promoted here (and also supported by you sometimes); yes, quite mobile birdy which does not stand still for more than some seconds; and - yes, some noise but certainly not chromatic (=colour) one. --A.Savin 19:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Don't be angry ! I know what "chromatic" means, I learnt ancient greek when I was young, and the word is the same in French. So, there is chromatic noise, as I said. And I find the bird, especialy the face, not sharp enough, sorry. And yes, I've probably made mistakes in my votes. Didn't you ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Actually, I think A.Savin is right, there is noise but it's not chromatic. Chromatic noise would be a mixture of red, blue and green blotches. There's very little of that in the image. It's just luminance noise. Diliff (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    I don't buy the "we have promoted images that are worse than this" argument you've raised here and in another photo. That some weak images get through isn't an reason to promote another weak image. If that argument held, we'd be on a downward spiral towards mediocrity. Perhaps we are :-(. I'd be very surprised if any 10MP unsharp building image got promoted these days. Comparing building and animal photography is pretty silly anyway. Jebulon, a captive bird can be trained to land and stay quite close to people. So it it would be possible to get as close as one desired and the keeper/circumstances allow. With a wild bird, one would be happy to even get the bird to fill the frame of a huge zoom lens. We have lots of highly-detailed head-portraits of captive birds of prey, for example. -- Colin (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition, nice moment, nice pose. Well done --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMHO not sharp enough for a bird FP. The level of detail is relatively poor - even at the sharper areas. Also f/5 at 130mm could be a problem - the claws a very unsharp. Light is not really good, the background is bumpy. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 08:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I just don't see this as one of our finest works, particularly in the bird category. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, sorry. --Kadellar (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Trompe l oeil Emperor's Courtyard Residenz Munich.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 15:59:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trompe l'Oeil in Residenz, Munich.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This facade is flat, round windows are fakes, it is just a trompe l'oeil painting, as a restoration work. Emperor's Courtyard of the Residenz, Munich, Bavaria, Germany.-- Jebulon (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. And the man in the archway is perfectly posed. Or is he fake too? :-) -- Colin (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Oh, what a good idea ! I'll think of it next time ! --Jebulon (talk) 18:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition with harmony feels :) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 07:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 07:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking shot. --Baresi F (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great! I should have had this idea myself and already a long time ago. Yet I didn't. Good work, Jebulon! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks Martin Falbisoner. That's because I was a tourist, with a "new eye". I'm fan of pictures of Paris by non Parisians: they see some things I've never seen before ! Anyway: Es lebe München !--Jebulon (talk) 15:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not the quality I'd wish for a building photo. Missing sharpness; artefacts. Not very much wow for me, so I'd have abstained if it at least was a real QI. --A.Savin 21:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I agree the image isn't as sharp as we might want and we have lots of megapixel stitched architecture images that show greater detail than this. But unlike QI, FP is judged for wow and artistic qualities which can mitigate against technical issues. When I saw this picture I went wow, both for the effect of the subject itself and also the pose of the man in the archway. It makes a great picture overall. This is the heart of FP, not pixel peeping. But everyone sets their thresholds and balances at different levels so I can accept some think the technical deficiencies (whether sharpness or noise) are too much. -- Colin (talk) 10:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
        • About sharpness: please remember this is not "architecture", but "painting". What you see is a flat wall, one cannot compare with any other facade. The painted lines are not as "pin" if it was a real relief (on purpose IMO).--Jebulon (talk) 14:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
          • I appreciate that, and studied the real bits too. There is some grain/noise that removes sharpness -- not sure if due to processing like Tuxyo suggests. But ultimately I guess we are looking a raw captured pixels rather than a downsized image, and it is rarely perfect at that level. Maybe you should try your hand at stitched panorama! -- Colin (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
          • I don't think I'm able ! Actually I don't know how to do. But since a few day, I work with some collaborators who know how to do, and I'll ask them (they make professional interactive panorama pictures ! You point at a spot, and you have a close-up !). I'll see what kind of softwares they use.--Jebulon (talk) 17:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak) I also like the innovative composition as said by other reviews. But imho the problem of the photo is the bad light. It looks for me as if you extremely pushed the shadow parts of the building which lead to some unfavorable noise at the facade. Probably you just excluded the sky because it had been burnt out due to back light. For a photo with a strong accentuation on the structure of the facade it is not crisp enough. --Tuxyso (talk) 04:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • "excluded the sky because it had been burnt out due to back light": well possible; see this small burnt area behind the arch. --A.Savin 05:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Nothing is burnt, see histogram.--Jebulon (talk) 09:45, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  ■ MMXX talk 21:32, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow imo. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Not sure some people actually know what Trompe-l'œil means Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:39, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 18:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The man is a plus and makes it different. --Kadellar (talk) 21:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose interesting picture, but strong and visible artefacts and noise --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Blassenstein Erlauftal mit Nebel 02 Panorama.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:19:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fog over Erlauf river, seen from Blassenstein mountain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Also see the original nomination. Created by User:Uoaei1 - uploaded by User:Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 08:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better. Yann (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Caecilius Mauß (talk) 09:55, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 11:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I still think cropping along the top of the dark clouds makes a much more dramatic picture -- the shaft of light from the left then forces the eye into the clouds in the middle of the picture and the dark clouds then frame the picture rather than having a distracting bright part in the top left or blue part in the top right. If you don't want as extreme as 3:1 then keeping the bottom but cropping the top is still better imo. -- Colin (talk) 13:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --King of ♠ 18:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 04:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 08:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  ■ MMXX talk 21:33, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Am I the only one who feels it is slightly tilted? I added a note. --Kadellar (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Dear Kadellar, thanks for the hint, you are absolutely right! I have uploaded a new version to correct the tilt. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportClockery Fairfeld who, me? 11:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Original CropEdit

Fog over Erlauf river, seen from Blassenstein mountain

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uoaei1 - uploaded by Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is a very nice scene but the crop isn't good. Too much sky (and vapour trail) and the nearby rocks are distracting. A 6000x2000 crop as indicated would imo make a great panorama. So I suggest that as an alternative. -- Colin (talk) 18:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for your valuable proposal! I'd rather take a 2:1 crop instead of 3:1, which well-preserves the rule of thirds and some of the details in the foreground (trees disappearing in the fog). What is your opinion about this? --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral While I do love the one area of the trees, I am having a hard time understanding the level of support for this scene (see above). An oppose at this point would be rather arrogant if not petulant. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't understand the logic of this new suggestion. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps because it is the original nomination not a new one. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Summer fields near Rosehearty, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - pomprint.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 06:25:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Summer fields near Rosehearty, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - pomprint.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Steve Allen - uploaded by TeleComNasSprVen - nominated by TeleComNasSprVen -- TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In thumbnail view, oversatured, white balance... --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:32, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree the green is a bit vivid but don't see any white balance issue. I've suggested a 2.4:1 crop that I think is much stronger. -- Colin (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Sure, but would it be more appropriate to upload a crop as a separate file derivative work? I wouldn't want to touch the original, to keep the loss minimal and other concerns, but if you decide to make a cropped version we can link it here and vote on that. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Of course yes, you could upload in another version in this nomination --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Because strong oppose doesn't get more weight. This looks like a cartoon due to colours. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I'm new to the FP process, but why is looking like a "cartoon" a problem for an image? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
The colours are oversaturated. While I am here... not fond of the crop/composition either... image is split in half. Saffron Blaze (talk) 06:31, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Dean Franklin - 06.04.03 Mount Rushmore Monument (by-sa)-3 new.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 00:47:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Rushmore Monument

AlternativeEdit

Mount Rushmore Monument

@Saffron Blaze: ✓ Done. Also wanted to know. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 13:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support better! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Compares well with some of the finer takes on this scene I could find on the internet. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:54, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 21:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's better. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:16 wood samples.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 20:23:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

16 types of wood
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Anonimski - uploaded by Anonimski - nominated by Anonimski
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator. - Anonimski (talk) 20:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting idea. --King of ♠ 06:59, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don' t know why I support so tardily...--Jebulon (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm not really wow-ed by the visual impact - which is imo impossible to achieve given the subject. But the interesting idea, the convincing conceptualization, high quality execution, and impressive documentation make me give my support. Very high EV, too! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as per Martin F. Yann (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 19:39:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle") of Mülheim an der Ruhr at blue hour
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, too dark. Yann (talk) 07:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    • IMHO it is not that bad, even dark structures are still visible. Yann, have you looked on the correct version? Yesterday I've uploaded a brighter version, probably you've seen an old version in the cache. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's too dark. Trust us on this one. Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Daniel it is not the question if I trust you and Yann or not. If it is the perception of you then I take it seriously. Nonetheless a few questions: What is the best brightness for such a shot? As you can see it is not a classical cityscape - you have only lights which brighten the main building and few lights at the left part of the bridge - the dark parts are trees. In short: Longer exposure with HDR or earlier shot? I've exposed in a way that the bright parts of the building are barely not burnt. Additionaly the sun sets behind the right part of the building thus you have at the beginning of the blue hour a strong brightness gradient on the sky. Another possibility had been to take the shot early in the morning before sunrise (sun behind me), but I do not know if the nice lighting of the building is there at that time. What would you suggest? --Tuxyso (talk) 07:41, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • In my opinion, the darkness is correct. It is night, and this emphasizes the situation. A night shot, in which can be seen more than is lit, I think is unrealistic. This composition with the lights reflected in the water and the rest of the twilight hour I find a good balance.--XRay talk 08:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
There's no EV in this one because we can't really see the shape of the building behind the lights. Therefore the darkness is not correct. Daniel Case (talk) 03:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Yann, Daniel, XRay and others: I am always surprised about the dynamic range of my D7000. I've created an alternative version with shadow and brightness correction. IMHO noise stays at an acceptable level:
    Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014 Alternative.jpg. Do you think that version is better and could have a chance here? --Tuxyso (talk) 08:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

AlternativeEdit

Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle") of Mülheim an der Ruhr at blue hour

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Alternative nomination, with improved shadow details. After certain consideration I also think that this one is better than the previous nom. I look forward to your comments. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 18:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So ... much ... better! I love the eight-point flares around the street lamps and the reflections in the river! Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically sound but monotonous due to the one colour of light. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:47, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Monotonous for you, for me a very nice color contrast between orange and blue which well brings out the building. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose This version is by far better, but still I cannot see anything here that blows me away, it is a good quality night shot Poco2 09:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:16, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dark, mono and boring. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 13:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Better than the other, but still a bit dark. The composition is not special either. Yann (talk) 19:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ukas (talk) 04:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:An ocean of motion about Spanish commotions or the windy explosion of pot-hous oration LCCN2003681692.tiffEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 15:51:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cartoon of British views on the war against Spain, Pyne 1790-1810.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William Pyne, scanned by the Library of Congress - uploaded by
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator; see this jpeg version if you prefer to use the Commons ZoomViewer. This is a difficult document to digitize due to size (45 inches or 1.14 metres wide) and this is part of the reason for nominating it as an exemplar of the excellent work of the archivists at the Library of Congress in releasing the British Cartoon Prints Collection. Pyne was notable for establishing the Royal Watercolour Society. This cartoon is historically significant as it was made at the time of the Anglo-Spanish War (1796–1808) showing stereotypes of the Spanish as expressed by different classes of the British population. It is a rare example of William Pyne's humorous cartoons (the only political cartoon of his that I can find on Commons), the majority of his published work being palace illustrations and British costumes. The digitization shows detail of costumes and characters, sufficient for each to be taken as a separate detailed illustration. The full size image shows natural foxing due to age, and creases from being folded up, which it was designed to do, but these do not detract from the impact or quality of the etchings. The main humour of the text is to poke fun at the Spanish, with the cobbler calling them "fish-eating rascals" and the journalists for the Spanish Gazette having nothing to report (on the left) while the British cryers (on the right) are exhausted from having ten years worth of incidents to report in one day. I would hope that a consequence of bringing attention to this cartoon would be to help improve Wikipedia articles about Pyne, at the moment the article about his life exists only in English and is a stub. -- (talk) 15:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Remember add a short description in image hint look up .tiff|600x300px|SHORT DESCRIPTION]] --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Missed that, added one now. -- (talk) 16:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Capilla de Lourdes.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 15:01:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Capilla de Lourdes
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice scene but overprocessed and soft at 6MP. Why are the colours so different in File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg which appears to be the same photo but without the bird removed. The trees in the nomination photo have a white outline against the sky, compared to the other photo. The sloping white faces of the church are near white in the second photo but considerably darker in this nomination, suggesting the highlights are lowered too much -- a white surface facing the sun would be expected to be white. This makes the tonal range compressed. The scene could be fantastic at a slightly better time of year when the trees are less bare. -- Colin (talk) 12:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The other version is a pratice test with CaptureNX2 without real colors and with a fake bird. You can download the NEF file and try by yourself develope the jpg, if you want (you can find the link in file description) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm not particularly impressed that this is the second fake you've uploaded to Commons. At least File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg now admits this, but wouldn't it be better to request its deletion. -- Colin (talk) 20:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
This nomination is not a fake. Why delete File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg? If you consider that in commons should not be altered images, please also nominates all pictures in Photomontages of animals and Photomontages, You are free to nominate it to deletion. ;). By the way, it's a good idea to focus on this nomination. A hug --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Crown Queens Bavaria Schatzkammer Residenz Munich.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 14:33:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crown of the Queens of Bavaria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Biennais, Nitot and Leblond - Photographied, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support New in "Commons", a masterpiece of the french 19th-century jewelry, made in Paris for Queens of Bavaria in 1806-1807 (altered in 1867), when the bavarian electorate was erected as a kingdom, allied of Napoleon. In use until 1918. Gold, silver, pearls, diamonds and other gems. On display (behind a glass...) at the "Schatzkammer", in the Residenz of Munich, Bavaria, Germany.-- Jebulon (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 16:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. IMO it would better with the full base (at the bottom).--XRay talk 16:40, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Frankly, such a reason for oppose to this kind of image leaves me speechless...--Jebulon (talk) 19:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Ups. Sorry. It's a good picture, but IMO it looks incomplete with a significant part of the base.--XRay talk 17:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you elaborate a bit on the shooting conditions? I obviously have no business with this sort of photography and will therefore not make a vote, but the exif leaves me a bit wondering. Did you hand-hold it for 0.2s or could you push it against something stable? It looks a bit soft (in the sense of denoised) to me for a ISO 400 image. --DXR (talk) 20:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Speechless again... Lack of base of the cushion, and questions about Exif Data, that's only what suggests this picture ? I took this image hand hold (or maybe I used the glass as stable surface, I don't remember). I post processed with Lightroom5, and after that with GIMP. I used luminance and color denoising with Lightroom5, adjusted sharpness a very little, and the white balance too. After that, with GIMP, I used the selective blur tool in order to correct the noise of some pearls, one after the other. I removed some disturbing elements in background by cloning out, and corrected the perspective a very little bit. This image was taken without tripod nor flash in a museum full of tourists, behind a glass, it is as difficult as it is interesting, a real challenge.--Jebulon (talk) 21:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I'm not looking to get into an argument here, but I'm not sure you should be "speechless" that an image of a crown, even if it's admittedly a beautiful one, will not blow everyone of his feet if nominated as a commons FP. As I said, I will refrain from voting, but I think my question regarding the quality was legitimate and your comments help assess the quality of your work here in a postive way. --DXR (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The fact that it was challenging to capture this picture does not add any value to the photo. Photographers often mistakenly think it does but I'm afraid it doesn't. Some get rewarded because they were lucky, some work hard and and the outcome is slightly above the average. That's life.. --85.253.101.104 21:24, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    Nonsense imo. Of course it makes a difference, but IP commenters have usually presented themselves to be fairly stubborn in their opinions, so what's the point of debating here... --DXR (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • As for me, I just asked for assessments, nothing else. I gave explanations because I was asked for. I don't think long discussions make a photo better (I tend to think the contrary). Shall I suppress Exif Data next time ? That's the question... Something like "Love it, or leave it"--Jebulon (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For once I'm not bothered by the bottom crop ... because the base blends so well into the background that you might not notice unless it's pointed out. And, really, the crown captures so much attention you won't mind. Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:57, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support given the circumstances quality is very decent. High EV! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The cropped base allows the attention to concentrate on the crown. Enough of the base is there to let the imagination (our brain) 'see' the missing part. Very good technical quality and high EV. --Cayambe (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I understand the challenging conditions (I've been there) and I appreciate the editing work of Jebulon done here but the quality is still not at QI level to me (yes, I doubt it can get better, but that's a different topic): not enough DoF, dark halos around the pearls in the background, some of the reflections don't look natural to me, it is ccw (taking the cross in the top as reference) and overall lack of sharpness. I wouldn't manage it better, but I just judge the result. Poco2 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As one can see here, the so-called tilt is in real. I think there are also positive things to say "in pro" for this picture, but even negative, I thank you for your detailed and useful review, apart of the tilt, nothing of what you say is really wrong... BtW, it is already a QI...--Jebulon (talk) 13:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Sorry, I meant FP level instead of QI level, I guess I spend too much time at QI... And, of course there are positive things to say about it, and as said, I will not even try to get this shot. Poco2 22:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Animales-aiguamolls l'emporda-2013 (8).JPG, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 08:38:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 12:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Mammals


Contestations en coursEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Drikke fontaine i Aarhus Rådhus.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2014 at 14:08:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Drinking fountain between the benches in Aarhus City Hall

File:Elfbergen Gaasterland Oorlogsmonument 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 17:39:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Elfbergen Gaasterland Oorlogsmonument
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Elfbergen Gaasterland War Memorial. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Don't see anything extraordinary about this image. (The long exposure and focal length choice is odd) -- Colin (talk) 11:55, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The marker does not stand out in any featurable way. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Ta Phrom, Angkor, Camboya, 2013-08-16, DD 39.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 15:48:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the Ta Phrom temple in Angkor, Cambodia.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Interior of the Ta Phrom temple in Angkor, Cambodia. All by me, Poco2 15:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 15:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment percpectives (left and right are leaning out) -- Christian Ferrer 18:11, 23 april 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Corrected, which does not mean that everything is vertical now (right side), because it isn't vertical in reality Poco2 21:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharpness id not the best on the edges, however I like it very much. -- Christian Ferrer 04:49, 24 april 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition, lighting and sharpness not really saying "wow" to me. Location is very wow. -- Colin (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Colin. I don't understand the composition.--Jebulon (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice chaos! --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Facade på Aarhus Rådhus.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 11:35:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Facade of the City Hall in Aarhus on Park Alle

File:Berlin - Schloss Bellevue2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2014 at 19:53:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Berlin: Bellevue Palace
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info High resolution image (about 30 MP) of Bellevue Palace, official residence of the President of Germany, all by Taxiarchos228 -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes, this is OK! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Happy to support as well, but please fix the dust spots in the sky and perhaps lighten the shadows on the left. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I´ll do this soon. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Saffron Blaze: sky should be cleared completely now. The shadows are IMO not disturbing for the impression itself and everything within the shadows is visible clearly. So it would be too much brightening I think. The curves are already adjusted and well-balanced. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:15, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At the first glance I thought to have found a stitching error at the right part of the building - but that's no error, the building looks a bit strange there also on other photos . Nice panoramic view at good light. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you please correct the tilt or the distorsion (please see note) ? Thanks in advance.--Jebulon (talk) 09:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
If you look at the 100%-view you'll see that the image is horizontal straightened. Nevertheless the builings is located at a small slope so it might seem a bit angular. But this is reallity. The Bellevue Palace isn't even Versailles ;-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for answer, but even at 100%, the roofs looks tilted... Anyway, you know the place better than me so I have no reason to doubt. Do you want a cliché ? This leaning roof does not look very "preussisch" ! Seriously, I'm not bothered with the shadow, and it is a very good picture, now in use as QI, VI and future FP in the relevant article of the french WP (french caption added, BtW).--Jebulon
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 16:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:34, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very detailed. However, the light is harsh compared to File:Bellevue Palace Berlin 02-14.jpg -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:La Grace (ship, 2010), Sète, Hérault 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2014 at 10:30:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

La Grace in Sète.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Christian Ferrer
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 10:29, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Subject not isolated from very busy background and in least dramatic form (at port, sails furled). See Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles#Water for examples of featured ships. See File:La Grace-At Sea1-full.jpg for more impressive capture of this replica ship. And Google Images too. -- Colin (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the title/name of the image is just wrong, but the picture itself is very good to me, with a lot of things to be seen, like in real in a port. The light is excellent and I'm satisfied with the composition. Maybe the inflatable boat is not the best, but it was here.--Jebulon (talk) 15:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Jebulon, I choose this name because it's the yellow boat that we see in first, but you're right, there is a lot of things in this image and others titles are possible. --Christian Ferrer 05:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:01, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 19:28, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:USO-Sale Sharks - 20131205 - Ballon flottant.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 21:14:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by, nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This picture was taken during the match opposing the USO to the Sale Sharks, competing in the European Challenge Cup, which was attended by two accredited photographers, thanks to Wikimedia CH. one of the player as let the ball loose, creating this "floating ball" moment, with all the eyes converging to the ball. -- Pleclown (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 06:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a Flemish painting. Great sports shot. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:27, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really good --Baresi F (talk) 21:11, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hieronymus Bosch for the faces, maybe... But as it is the focal point of the image, I'd wish a ball without chromatic aberration (purple fringe). Thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
    New version. Pleclown (talk) 17:13, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Memorial J Kubitschek Brasilia statue.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 20:01:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Statue of Juscelino Kubitschek, the founder of Brasilia, in front of the JK Memorial in Brasilia.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 20:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 20:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:17, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I like Cayambes pictures very much, especially those one of Brasilia. This is a very good detail shot of this Kubitschek memorial. But the main object is sadly not right sharp. Because this is a very simple subject I have to be strictly than e.g. with aerial views. Please reprocess this image and I'll gladly support it. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New version uploaded, noise and CA reduction and a bit of sharpening. --Cayambe (talk) 21:25, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Cydalima perspectalis carterpillar.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 19:28:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Archaeodontosaurus - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jebulon (talk) 20:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you to TOMER. This animal is very affectionate, if some want to adopt, I can send you. I have thousands in my garden. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Barcex (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Ossuary in Sedlec.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 19:23:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Jan Kameníček - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At least something different !--Jebulon (talk) 20:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Always useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:17, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain or Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good idea and well composed. I'd support if general sharpness were (much) better. But I guess I'm asking too much of a small point and shoot camera... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:59, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 05:29, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. Would be a little nicer without the noise in the dark areas. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 18:57, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ossuary certainly makes for an arresting image but I don't think this one rises above a well taken tourist photo. The technical quality and lighting is satisfactory rather than outstanding, and Sedlec Ossuary has lots of potential (see Google Images). -- Colin (talk) 21:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportClockery Fairfeld who, me? 11:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Colin. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Endangered species Iguana Iguana from Margarita Island.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 18:32:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Endangered species Iguana Iguana from Margarita Island
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Can it be specified whether this is a male or a female individuum? --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:07, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done In description female. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Zinnia_flower_in_jaffna.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 14:27:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

a zinnia elegans flower in nallur, jaffna, sri lanka
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by aathavan jaffna - uploaded by aathavan jaffna - nominated by Aathavan jaffna -- Aathavan jaffna (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nom -- Aathavan jaffna (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is just my opinion, but an FP macro (or near macro) should use a near perfect specimen and either focus stack or find a compelling way to use the limited depth of field. This image is just an ordinary photo of a flower. It is not one of our finest works. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Did you ever bother to compare the number of plant FP we have against the number of arthropod ones, for instance? It makes no sense. Something in the evaluation process is very biased against plant photographs. Your reasoning highlights this. There is no reason to expect plant FPs to be focus-stacked. We don't have so many plant FPs. And I am not supportive of this specific candidate either. Gidip (talk) 18:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I agree with Gidip.--Jebulon (talk) 21:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • We have many arthropod ones because of one or two dedicated individuals. If your concern is systemic bias I will inform you I couldn't care less. BTW, focus stack was just one option. It is not my job to teach people how to photograph flowers in a compelling way. My job is state I don't think this is one of them. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I mostly agree with Saffron on this. I suspect mentioning focus stack may have touched a nerve -- something that isn't really feasible except for cut flowers in the home. But that is merely one technique that one could be used. As an example, there's a rather nice Bing desktop photo of a zinnia you can Google for. There's also an existing File:Zinnia elegans with Bombus 01.JPG featured picture. Unlike animals that fly about, flowers are rather easier to take a frame-filling shot. And there are a huge multitude to choose. So making someone go wow requires something a bit special. Like with sunsets, you might think that having a beautiful subject would make the task easy, but perhaps not. -- Colin (talk) 20:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--maathavan (talk) 13:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Invalid vote. User has less than 50 edits --DXR (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Bondinho chegando ao Pão de Açúcar.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 14:15:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Halley Pacheco de Oliveira - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 14:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 14:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 1) Picture is blur. 2) No wow. Weird objective, shooting from the top downwards, with a disruptive cable car??? What is the photographer trying to achieve???? --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • The title is "Cable car arriving at the Pão de Açúcar*" [translator note: Sugar Loaf hill, in Rio de Janeiro]. So he was probably trying to photograph the cable car arriving at the Sugar Loaf station. --G Furtado (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per AK. The motif is not compelling. The cable car visually sits on the canopy of trees. Lots of other minor issues that ensure this is not one of our finest works. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination. Per users. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 19:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Lagarto (Sceloporus mucronatus), Zona arqueológica de Cantona, Puebla, México, 2013-10-11, DD 03.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 12:31:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lizzard (Sceloporus mucronatus), archeological area of Cantona, Puebla, Mexico.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Lizzard (Sceloporus mucronatus), archeological area of Cantona, Puebla, Mexico. Poco2 12:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 12:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Don't think the composition is exceptional. The very bright rock/lichen is distracting. -- Colin (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:14 P416 6136.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 12:09:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

English: Roe deer - malePolski: Sarna - kozioł
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because Too many technical issues. Blurness, noise, background problems etc. I would be very, very surprised if this nomination is successful, as the photo clearly does not meet the FP criteria at one glance. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Velika noč - jedila hren šunka pirhi potica.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 20:40:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Traditionaln easter breakfast with eggs, ham, and [en:nut roll
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Klemen Brumec - uploaded by ModriDirkac - nominated by ModriDirkac -- ModriDirkac (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ModriDirkac (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Now I am hungry. That aside, there is a very unfortunate loss of sharpness towards the bottom of the image. It is bad enough that it is distracting. The image also seems to be a bit dull as if it could use a bit of brightening. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Suffering from insufficient DOF (and focus not on the plate) and very high ISO. The edit that reduced noise also seems to have reduced contrast and actually applied negative Clarity according to the EXIF (which I can understand being done selectively on a female portrait or dreamy scene, but not food). I'd love to know what the different objects/foods are in the picture. I suspect the lack of a tripod limited what could be achieved here and we've only got a 50%-sized image from a potentially great camera. -- Colin (talk) 17:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Saffron Blaze and Colin, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 10:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Whistlejacket by George Stubbs edit.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 09:15:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Whistlejacket is an oil-on-canvas painting from about 1762 showing the Marquess of Rockingham's racehorse, rearing up against a blank background. Edited by uploader from National Gallery scan to add lost "brownspace" to the left and right of the painting.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by George Stubbs - uploaded by Crisco 1492 - nominated by Nikhil -- Nikhil (talk) 09:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 09:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Its status on the wikipedias is supported by the strong EV. I don't think that should have the same impact here on Commons. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the late reply. However, I disagree with your opinion. We have many paintings, which have been given FP status on various wikipedias, elevated to FP status in commons. For example this pic got FP staus, this one and many more are there. IMHO, EV is an advantage for a pic in commons, besides technical quality. Nikhil (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I am not suggesting EV isn't a consideration on Commons. I am saying a good scan of a high EV paiting should not be the threshold for FP status on Commons. Commons is about the image... and without the written backstory in the WP article as to why this is such an important painting it becomes are rather unremarkable image to me. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:41, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa Torrox Costa 2014.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 08:58:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hotel Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa in Torrox-Costa (62 Mpx high res panorama)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No historic building or church :) High resolution panorama (62 Mpx) of Hotel Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa in Torrox-Costa
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support makes me want to go on vacation. Now! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail, subject, composition and lighting, good job! Poco2 09:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Btw, could you improve the symmetry (the right side is closer to the camera than the left side)? Poco2 11:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    (sorry, forgotten your comment): Yesterday I spent several hours on the improvement of the photo in order to check a suggesion by Colin regarding another projection (Panini General), see my discussion page for details. During the work I also tried to improve the symmetry but finally my disappointing insight, probabaly you can give a comment on it on my talk page, was that I still prefer the version I have nominated here. It simply looks better if I use the trees at the left and right as framing than strictly align the center to the lines on the floor. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:11, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Did you do a version without the trees on the left and right... i.e a few steps closer perhaps? Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Unfortunately not. I really like the trees here. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    They work as a framing device but the one of the left is a bit distracting given it is the one large dark element in the image. Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    I though you mean the palm trees but you mean the smaller ones at the very left and right. Nonetheless is does not change the situation that I only have image material from the given positon. Indeed, my idea was to use them as framing. Cropping is no option because the pool building at the left would be cropped. I could try to brighten the left tree, what do you think? --Tuxyso (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Probably ✓ Done: I've brightened the tree at the very left. Do you think it is better now? --Tuxyso (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Tuxyso, can you spend a comment to my question above about the lack of symmetry? Poco2 20:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Poco -- Colin (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent sharpening --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid the panorama distorsion does not work for me, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 13:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • What exactly does not work for you? What had you done better? Where do you see problems with distortion? In the foreground or at the building? --Tuxyso (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Shortly: I should not see this if I where at the place of the camera.--Jebulon (talk) 14:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I'm willing to adjudicate if someone will pay me to take the place of the camera. My verification of the perspective and field of view should take around two weeks. Thanks in advance. -- Colin (talk) 21:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Thank you, but no need. If some can wait a few months, I'll be there (or close too) in next july.--Jebulon (talk) 11:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
        • But don't forget to take new motives besides all the motives I have taken bad photos of (you made a similiar comment on my Alhambra photos) during my visit in Andalusia. Should I add a category Photos of Andalusia by Tuxyso to simplify your work? --Tuxyso (talk) 11:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
          • Oh sorry dear Tuxyso, I don't want to hurt you, and your pictures are very good ! I have a mental problem with panorama pictures and subsequent deformations/distorsions, that's all. And the rest of your productions is always very interesting, I don't think I can do better ! That was just a joke, answering to Colin's joke. Sorry again, no offense, really.--Jebulon (talk) 17:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
            • This time I have indeed understood the joke from Colin (which is not a natural consequences in a foreign language). But I have clearly understood your statement the way that you will make a better photo when you are in the region. BTW: I have a non-panoramic wide-angle version of the motive but imho the high resolution makes the difference here due to the plenty of details, take e.g. a look on the magazine the girl at the very left is reading :) --Tuxyso (talk) 19:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 19:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 06:09, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. --DXR (talk) 16:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:25, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Scallop Neurological Diagram.svgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 07:46:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Scallop neurological diagram
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by KDS444 - uploaded by KDS444 - nominated by KDS444 -- KDS444 (talk) 07:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A little context: this image is a full false color rendition of a similar diagram from a monograph on giant scallops. I realize it looks a little like something out of The Matrix, but this is in fact the actual arrangement of the neural system of a scallop. I have produced it here with lighter color shades representing those parts closer to the viewer, and darker shades as those further away: in this way, one can see that the system is arranged in a single "folded" circle/ loop connected to the various ganglia via nerves, with the animal's "left" half on one side and "right" half on the other (the scallop is, in this sense, "facing" the viewer... Though scallops, of course, don't have faces!). I have also attempted to show all nerves as having 3-dimensional round (cylindrical) shapes (i.e., their actual shapes) and have shown every nerve in its actual position and locus of connection. In the end, the image is highly accurate. And it wasn't easy! Also note that the image has been purged of all raster components. What is left is strictly vector-based. KDS444 (talk) 07:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent Svg work, easy to underestand and hight EV. We need support it. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Is the original monograph online? And if so, could you give us a link to it? This diagram is very beautiful indeed, but I would just like to check it against the original. Also, do we know for sure that this arrangement is the same in all scallops? Or is the diagram really just for one species of giant scallop? Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 13:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
    • The original image file has the information to the source, but let me give it again here: Drew, Gilman Arthur. 1906. The habitats, anatomy, and embryology of the giant scallop (Pecten tenuicostatus, Mighels). Figure 23/ Plate 12. The diagram is specifically of a giant scallop-- more than that, of course, it is a diagram of one particular giant scallop, the one that Drew used for his own illustration! I know of no reason to expect other scallops to have a very different neurology, though I would be glad to narrow the claim of this image to being that of a giant scallop only. KDS4444 (talk) 00:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • So the book dates from 1907. It is online here: [2] By the way, this is usually called "the nervous system" rather than the "neurology". I am studying the images on his plates now. Invertzoo (talk) 01:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comparing this diagram with the original, I have found one nerve (on each side) that has been accidentally omitted, an unbranched one at the front of the diagram, one that runs out almost level with the visceral ganglia. It also it seems to me that the cerebral ganglia need to be far more swollen and rounded-looking, as they are in the original, otherwise they don't even really look like ganglia. And in the original, the anterior pallial nerve comes to more of a point at the top. I am tired tonight but I will look again in the morning and see if I can spot anything else. I must say however in KDS444's favor that the 3-D rendering makes the diagram very much easier to understand than the original. Invertzoo (talk) 01:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Let me re-examine my diagram in light of these comments and revise as necessary. It is a quarter past 5:00 in the morning here in L.A., and I am very tired-- later today I will consider a reconstruction along these suggested (and no doubt accurate) lines. Aside: it was the utter confusion I experienced while looking at Drew's original strange image that inspired me to create my own based on his work, a version that wouldn't invoke such cerebral cacophony and confusion. Hopefully this will bear out in the end! KDS4444 (talk) 12:22, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Paris Palais du Luxembourg façade s printemps 2014.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 20:34:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JLPC - uploaded by JLPC - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There are two FPs of the Palais du Luxembourg, but this one is very beautiful too. The sky, the fontaine, the people, the trees gives a nice atmosphere.-- Paris 16 (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 08:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice mood and light. --Jebulon (talk) 14:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wanted to do a pano one day, but I see that it has already been done very well! --DXR (talk) 14:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 23:08, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and thanks to Paris 16 for this nomination and his help on other files. --JLPC (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Norbert Kiss - GP Camión de España 2013 - 08.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 19:11:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Truck pilot Norbert Kiss at the Spain Truck GP 2013.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Truck pilot Norbert Kiss at the Spain Truck GP 2013 (panning shot). Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nikhil (talk) 01:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Nice panning, sharpness is ok but lighting not the best, overall FP to me Poco2 08:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pleclown (talk) 11:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really something special here, more than "technical quality" ! That is why FPC exists, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 17:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Einstein2 (talk) 17:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Munich subway station Westfriedhof.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 16:50:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Munich subway station Westfriedhof
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Munich subway station Westfriedhof- all by --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and a suggestion. What if you crop the lower part until you get 1:2 ratio? I feel that if the black line on the floor ends closer to the corner of the image it will look nicer. --Kadellar (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I made the same suggestion (perhaps 16:9) earlier today (see note). Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 20:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Paris 16 (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow ! And per Kadellar.--Jebulon (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive --Jamez42 (talk) 00:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice work. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:04, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 08:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info and ✓ Done Thanks for your friendly reviews. As suggested I cropped the image a bit - you were right, the result is more convincing. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry, I can't support twice !!!--Jebulon (talk) 13:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I knew it would look better with the crop but this far exceeded my expectations. Very strong visual impact now. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 11:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, obviously. Train at right is a nice touch. --DXR (talk) 14:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Visually striking. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 18:41, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 19:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding shot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:51, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:21, 42 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Rumex pictus 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 14:54:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rumex pictus
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 14:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gidip (talk) 14:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JLPC (talk) 11:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Nice picture, but why did you cut off the other flowers along this stalk?? I would have supported if not for that. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per AK. The bottom crop creates an unnecessary and unwelcome tension in the image. The overall composition is not convincing either. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Just for general knowledge, these are fruits. Cheers, Gidip (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch für das Deutsche Reich.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 12:42:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cover of old book

File:Shepherds Bow - Google Art Project.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 22:36:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Ukrainian religious painting, from an iconostasis, showing the Adoration of the Shepherds. Tempera on wood, between 1650 and 1700.

File:2014.03.29.-08-Mannheim Neckarau Waldpark-Wiesen-Schaumkraut.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 20:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hockei (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Photo is oversaturated imo. It looks very unnatural, especially the grasses behind. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I disagree with AK here. I find the light/colours/bokeh are fine. However, it is the tight crop on the bottom that is off-putting. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I suggest a less square crop. Gidip (talk) 18:42, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 22:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Jasná Ski Resort - gondola lift Kosodrevina - Chopok (1).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 09:29:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jasná Ski Resort - gondola lift Kosodrevina - Chopok

File:St Stephen Walbrook Church Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 22:29:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:St Stephen Walbrook Church Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Diliff - uploaded by User:Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 22:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 22:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition is cut down --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • What does 'cut down' mean? If you mean cropped, then yes, I carefully cropped the image to get the framing I wanted. But what specifically about the composition makes you oppose? Diliff (talk) 10:05, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, the seats are cut, that's what I mean --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
I would have preferred more of the seats in the foreground too, but it was not physically possible. My tripod was pushed up against a pillar directly behind the camera, so I could not go back any further. And to tilt the camera down further would result in a lot of distortion. Already, the viewpoint is looking down at perhaps a 60 degree angle at the bottom of the frame. The field of view is extremely large. Diliff (talk) 10:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
I underestand the situation. You could merge severals pictures in the future? --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Capturing the whole of an interior like this is not easy. The wide angle-of-view can lead to all sorts of stretched and distorted forms, and features such as columns and chandeliers can look awful. This image shows a good control of these problems and has a strong three-dimensional feel. The level of detail is great, as one would expect from Diliff, and the bright natural lighting is handled well. -- Colin (talk) 10:36, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question We have one round oculus (close right to the pulpit) , and several oval oculi. Is it normal, or is it a perspective deformation ?--Jebulon (talk) 14:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • It is normal. Only the 'central' oculus is round, the rest are genuinely oval-shaped. I think they are progressively more oval shaped, but I'm not sure and did not pay enough attention at the time. There may be some perspective distortions at the periphery but nothing that would make a circle look so oval-shaped. 14:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • OK, convinced. Thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and following Wilfredo's complaints, I feel that if we could see a bit more of the bench, it would be better, but it's FP for me anyway. --Kadellar (talk) 19:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 09:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:TF Wildpark Johannismuehle 03-14 img11.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:45:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Harris Hawk (Parabuteo unicinctus) in Wildpark Johannismühle, Brandenburg, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by A.Savin
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 07:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, but maybe a portrait crop would be even better. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much in shadow and want a more detailed image from a captive bird at FP. -- Colin (talk) 13:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Notable chromatic noise under the wings and on the breast. Not sharp enough, sorry. No offense Colin, but I don't see why it should be more detailed because captive: anyway, the bird is as mobile as in the nature, no ? It is not a stuffed specimen...--Jebulon (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Not less sharp than some of building photographs getting promoted here (and also supported by you sometimes); yes, quite mobile birdy which does not stand still for more than some seconds; and - yes, some noise but certainly not chromatic (=colour) one. --A.Savin 19:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Don't be angry ! I know what "chromatic" means, I learnt ancient greek when I was young, and the word is the same in French. So, there is chromatic noise, as I said. And I find the bird, especialy the face, not sharp enough, sorry. And yes, I've probably made mistakes in my votes. Didn't you ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Actually, I think A.Savin is right, there is noise but it's not chromatic. Chromatic noise would be a mixture of red, blue and green blotches. There's very little of that in the image. It's just luminance noise. Diliff (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    I don't buy the "we have promoted images that are worse than this" argument you've raised here and in another photo. That some weak images get through isn't an reason to promote another weak image. If that argument held, we'd be on a downward spiral towards mediocrity. Perhaps we are :-(. I'd be very surprised if any 10MP unsharp building image got promoted these days. Comparing building and animal photography is pretty silly anyway. Jebulon, a captive bird can be trained to land and stay quite close to people. So it it would be possible to get as close as one desired and the keeper/circumstances allow. With a wild bird, one would be happy to even get the bird to fill the frame of a huge zoom lens. We have lots of highly-detailed head-portraits of captive birds of prey, for example. -- Colin (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition, nice moment, nice pose. Well done --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMHO not sharp enough for a bird FP. The level of detail is relatively poor - even at the sharper areas. Also f/5 at 130mm could be a problem - the claws a very unsharp. Light is not really good, the background is bumpy. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 08:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I just don't see this as one of our finest works, particularly in the bird category. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, sorry. --Kadellar (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Trompe l oeil Emperor's Courtyard Residenz Munich.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 15:59:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trompe l'Oeil in Residenz, Munich.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This facade is flat, round windows are fakes, it is just a trompe l'oeil painting, as a restoration work. Emperor's Courtyard of the Residenz, Munich, Bavaria, Germany.-- Jebulon (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. And the man in the archway is perfectly posed. Or is he fake too? :-) -- Colin (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Oh, what a good idea ! I'll think of it next time ! --Jebulon (talk) 18:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition with harmony feels :) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 07:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 07:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking shot. --Baresi F (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great! I should have had this idea myself and already a long time ago. Yet I didn't. Good work, Jebulon! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks Martin Falbisoner. That's because I was a tourist, with a "new eye". I'm fan of pictures of Paris by non Parisians: they see some things I've never seen before ! Anyway: Es lebe München !--Jebulon (talk) 15:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not the quality I'd wish for a building photo. Missing sharpness; artefacts. Not very much wow for me, so I'd have abstained if it at least was a real QI. --A.Savin 21:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I agree the image isn't as sharp as we might want and we have lots of megapixel stitched architecture images that show greater detail than this. But unlike QI, FP is judged for wow and artistic qualities which can mitigate against technical issues. When I saw this picture I went wow, both for the effect of the subject itself and also the pose of the man in the archway. It makes a great picture overall. This is the heart of FP, not pixel peeping. But everyone sets their thresholds and balances at different levels so I can accept some think the technical deficiencies (whether sharpness or noise) are too much. -- Colin (talk) 10:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
        • About sharpness: please remember this is not "architecture", but "painting". What you see is a flat wall, one cannot compare with any other facade. The painted lines are not as "pin" if it was a real relief (on purpose IMO).--Jebulon (talk) 14:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
          • I appreciate that, and studied the real bits too. There is some grain/noise that removes sharpness -- not sure if due to processing like Tuxyo suggests. But ultimately I guess we are looking a raw captured pixels rather than a downsized image, and it is rarely perfect at that level. Maybe you should try your hand at stitched panorama! -- Colin (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
          • I don't think I'm able ! Actually I don't know how to do. But since a few day, I work with some collaborators who know how to do, and I'll ask them (they make professional interactive panorama pictures ! You point at a spot, and you have a close-up !). I'll see what kind of softwares they use.--Jebulon (talk) 17:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak) I also like the innovative composition as said by other reviews. But imho the problem of the photo is the bad light. It looks for me as if you extremely pushed the shadow parts of the building which lead to some unfavorable noise at the facade. Probably you just excluded the sky because it had been burnt out due to back light. For a photo with a strong accentuation on the structure of the facade it is not crisp enough. --Tuxyso (talk) 04:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • "excluded the sky because it had been burnt out due to back light": well possible; see this small burnt area behind the arch. --A.Savin 05:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Nothing is burnt, see histogram.--Jebulon (talk) 09:45, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  ■ MMXX talk 21:32, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow imo. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Not sure some people actually know what Trompe-l'œil means Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:39, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 18:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The man is a plus and makes it different. --Kadellar (talk) 21:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose interesting picture, but strong and visible artefacts and noise --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Blassenstein Erlauftal mit Nebel 02 Panorama.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:19:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fog over Erlauf river, seen from Blassenstein mountain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Also see the original nomination. Created by User:Uoaei1 - uploaded by User:Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 08:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better. Yann (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Caecilius Mauß (talk) 09:55, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 11:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I still think cropping along the top of the dark clouds makes a much more dramatic picture -- the shaft of light from the left then forces the eye into the clouds in the middle of the picture and the dark clouds then frame the picture rather than having a distracting bright part in the top left or blue part in the top right. If you don't want as extreme as 3:1 then keeping the bottom but cropping the top is still better imo. -- Colin (talk) 13:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --King of ♠ 18:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 04:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 08:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  ■ MMXX talk 21:33, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Am I the only one who feels it is slightly tilted? I added a note. --Kadellar (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Dear Kadellar, thanks for the hint, you are absolutely right! I have uploaded a new version to correct the tilt. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportClockery Fairfeld who, me? 11:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Original CropEdit

Fog over Erlauf river, seen from Blassenstein mountain

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uoaei1 - uploaded by Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is a very nice scene but the crop isn't good. Too much sky (and vapour trail) and the nearby rocks are distracting. A 6000x2000 crop as indicated would imo make a great panorama. So I suggest that as an alternative. -- Colin (talk) 18:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for your valuable proposal! I'd rather take a 2:1 crop instead of 3:1, which well-preserves the rule of thirds and some of the details in the foreground (trees disappearing in the fog). What is your opinion about this? --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral While I do love the one area of the trees, I am having a hard time understanding the level of support for this scene (see above). An oppose at this point would be rather arrogant if not petulant. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't understand the logic of this new suggestion. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps because it is the original nomination not a new one. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Summer fields near Rosehearty, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - pomprint.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 06:25:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Summer fields near Rosehearty, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - pomprint.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Steve Allen - uploaded by TeleComNasSprVen - nominated by TeleComNasSprVen -- TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In thumbnail view, oversatured, white balance... --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:32, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree the green is a bit vivid but don't see any white balance issue. I've suggested a 2.4:1 crop that I think is much stronger. -- Colin (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Sure, but would it be more appropriate to upload a crop as a separate file derivative work? I wouldn't want to touch the original, to keep the loss minimal and other concerns, but if you decide to make a cropped version we can link it here and vote on that. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Of course yes, you could upload in another version in this nomination --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Because strong oppose doesn't get more weight. This looks like a cartoon due to colours. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I'm new to the FP process, but why is looking like a "cartoon" a problem for an image? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
The colours are oversaturated. While I am here... not fond of the crop/composition either... image is split in half. Saffron Blaze (talk) 06:31, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Dean Franklin - 06.04.03 Mount Rushmore Monument (by-sa)-3 new.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 00:47:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Rushmore Monument

AlternativeEdit

Mount Rushmore Monument

@Saffron Blaze: ✓ Done. Also wanted to know. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 13:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support better! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Compares well with some of the finer takes on this scene I could find on the internet. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:54, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 21:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's better. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:16 wood samples.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 20:23:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

16 types of wood
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Anonimski - uploaded by Anonimski - nominated by Anonimski
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator. - Anonimski (talk) 20:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting idea. --King of ♠ 06:59, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don' t know why I support so tardily...--Jebulon (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm not really wow-ed by the visual impact - which is imo impossible to achieve given the subject. But the interesting idea, the convincing conceptualization, high quality execution, and impressive documentation make me give my support. Very high EV, too! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as per Martin F. Yann (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 19:39:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle") of Mülheim an der Ruhr at blue hour
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, too dark. Yann (talk) 07:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    • IMHO it is not that bad, even dark structures are still visible. Yann, have you looked on the correct version? Yesterday I've uploaded a brighter version, probably you've seen an old version in the cache. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's too dark. Trust us on this one. Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Daniel it is not the question if I trust you and Yann or not. If it is the perception of you then I take it seriously. Nonetheless a few questions: What is the best brightness for such a shot? As you can see it is not a classical cityscape - you have only lights which brighten the main building and few lights at the left part of the bridge - the dark parts are trees. In short: Longer exposure with HDR or earlier shot? I've exposed in a way that the bright parts of the building are barely not burnt. Additionaly the sun sets behind the right part of the building thus you have at the beginning of the blue hour a strong brightness gradient on the sky. Another possibility had been to take the shot early in the morning before sunrise (sun behind me), but I do not know if the nice lighting of the building is there at that time. What would you suggest? --Tuxyso (talk) 07:41, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • In my opinion, the darkness is correct. It is night, and this emphasizes the situation. A night shot, in which can be seen more than is lit, I think is unrealistic. This composition with the lights reflected in the water and the rest of the twilight hour I find a good balance.--XRay talk 08:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
There's no EV in this one because we can't really see the shape of the building behind the lights. Therefore the darkness is not correct. Daniel Case (talk) 03:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Yann, Daniel, XRay and others: I am always surprised about the dynamic range of my D7000. I've created an alternative version with shadow and brightness correction. IMHO noise stays at an acceptable level:
    Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014 Alternative.jpg. Do you think that version is better and could have a chance here? --Tuxyso (talk) 08:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

AlternativeEdit

Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle") of Mülheim an der Ruhr at blue hour

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Alternative nomination, with improved shadow details. After certain consideration I also think that this one is better than the previous nom. I look forward to your comments. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 18:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So ... much ... better! I love the eight-point flares around the street lamps and the reflections in the river! Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically sound but monotonous due to the one colour of light. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:47, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Monotonous for you, for me a very nice color contrast between orange and blue which well brings out the building. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose This version is by far better, but still I cannot see anything here that blows me away, it is a good quality night shot Poco2 09:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:16, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dark, mono and boring. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 13:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Better than the other, but still a bit dark. The composition is not special either. Yann (talk) 19:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ukas (talk) 04:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:An ocean of motion about Spanish commotions or the windy explosion of pot-hous oration LCCN2003681692.tiffEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 15:51:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cartoon of British views on the war against Spain, Pyne 1790-1810.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William Pyne, scanned by the Library of Congress - uploaded by
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator; see this jpeg version if you prefer to use the Commons ZoomViewer. This is a difficult document to digitize due to size (45 inches or 1.14 metres wide) and this is part of the reason for nominating it as an exemplar of the excellent work of the archivists at the Library of Congress in releasing the British Cartoon Prints Collection. Pyne was notable for establishing the Royal Watercolour Society. This cartoon is historically significant as it was made at the time of the Anglo-Spanish War (1796–1808) showing stereotypes of the Spanish as expressed by different classes of the British population. It is a rare example of William Pyne's humorous cartoons (the only political cartoon of his that I can find on Commons), the majority of his published work being palace illustrations and British costumes. The digitization shows detail of costumes and characters, sufficient for each to be taken as a separate detailed illustration. The full size image shows natural foxing due to age, and creases from being folded up, which it was designed to do, but these do not detract from the impact or quality of the etchings. The main humour of the text is to poke fun at the Spanish, with the cobbler calling them "fish-eating rascals" and the journalists for the Spanish Gazette having nothing to report (on the left) while the British cryers (on the right) are exhausted from having ten years worth of incidents to report in one day. I would hope that a consequence of bringing attention to this cartoon would be to help improve Wikipedia articles about Pyne, at the moment the article about his life exists only in English and is a stub. -- (talk) 15:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Remember add a short description in image hint look up .tiff|600x300px|SHORT DESCRIPTION]] --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Missed that, added one now. -- (talk) 16:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Capilla de Lourdes.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 15:01:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Capilla de Lourdes
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice scene but overprocessed and soft at 6MP. Why are the colours so different in File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg which appears to be the same photo but without the bird removed. The trees in the nomination photo have a white outline against the sky, compared to the other photo. The sloping white faces of the church are near white in the second photo but considerably darker in this nomination, suggesting the highlights are lowered too much -- a white surface facing the sun would be expected to be white. This makes the tonal range compressed. The scene could be fantastic at a slightly better time of year when the trees are less bare. -- Colin (talk) 12:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The other version is a pratice test with CaptureNX2 without real colors and with a fake bird. You can download the NEF file and try by yourself develope the jpg, if you want (you can find the link in file description) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm not particularly impressed that this is the second fake you've uploaded to Commons. At least File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg now admits this, but wouldn't it be better to request its deletion. -- Colin (talk) 20:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
This nomination is not a fake. Why delete File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg? If you consider that in commons should not be altered images, please also nominates all pictures in Photomontages of animals and Photomontages, You are free to nominate it to deletion. ;). By the way, it's a good idea to focus on this nomination. A hug --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Crown Queens Bavaria Schatzkammer Residenz Munich.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 14:33:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crown of the Queens of Bavaria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Biennais, Nitot and Leblond - Photographied, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support New in "Commons", a masterpiece of the french 19th-century jewelry, made in Paris for Queens of Bavaria in 1806-1807 (altered in 1867), when the bavarian electorate was erected as a kingdom, allied of Napoleon. In use until 1918. Gold, silver, pearls, diamonds and other gems. On display (behind a glass...) at the "Schatzkammer", in the Residenz of Munich, Bavaria, Germany.-- Jebulon (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 16:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. IMO it would better with the full base (at the bottom).--XRay talk 16:40, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Frankly, such a reason for oppose to this kind of image leaves me speechless...--Jebulon (talk) 19:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Ups. Sorry. It's a good picture, but IMO it looks incomplete with a significant part of the base.--XRay talk 17:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you elaborate a bit on the shooting conditions? I obviously have no business with this sort of photography and will therefore not make a vote, but the exif leaves me a bit wondering. Did you hand-hold it for 0.2s or could you push it against something stable? It looks a bit soft (in the sense of denoised) to me for a ISO 400 image. --DXR (talk) 20:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Speechless again... Lack of base of the cushion, and questions about Exif Data, that's only what suggests this picture ? I took this image hand hold (or maybe I used the glass as stable surface, I don't remember). I post processed with Lightroom5, and after that with GIMP. I used luminance and color denoising with Lightroom5, adjusted sharpness a very little, and the white balance too. After that, with GIMP, I used the selective blur tool in order to correct the noise of some pearls, one after the other. I removed some disturbing elements in background by cloning out, and corrected the perspective a very little bit. This image was taken without tripod nor flash in a museum full of tourists, behind a glass, it is as difficult as it is interesting, a real challenge.--Jebulon (talk) 21:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I'm not looking to get into an argument here, but I'm not sure you should be "speechless" that an image of a crown, even if it's admittedly a beautiful one, will not blow everyone of his feet if nominated as a commons FP. As I said, I will refrain from voting, but I think my question regarding the quality was legitimate and your comments help assess the quality of your work here in a postive way. --DXR (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The fact that it was challenging to capture this picture does not add any value to the photo. Photographers often mistakenly think it does but I'm afraid it doesn't. Some get rewarded because they were lucky, some work hard and and the outcome is slightly above the average. That's life.. --85.253.101.104 21:24, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    Nonsense imo. Of course it makes a difference, but IP commenters have usually presented themselves to be fairly stubborn in their opinions, so what's the point of debating here... --DXR (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • As for me, I just asked for assessments, nothing else. I gave explanations because I was asked for. I don't think long discussions make a photo better (I tend to think the contrary). Shall I suppress Exif Data next time ? That's the question... Something like "Love it, or leave it"--Jebulon (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For once I'm not bothered by the bottom crop ... because the base blends so well into the background that you might not notice unless it's pointed out. And, really, the crown captures so much attention you won't mind. Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:57, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support given the circumstances quality is very decent. High EV! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The cropped base allows the attention to concentrate on the crown. Enough of the base is there to let the imagination (our brain) 'see' the missing part. Very good technical quality and high EV. --Cayambe (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I understand the challenging conditions (I've been there) and I appreciate the editing work of Jebulon done here but the quality is still not at QI level to me (yes, I doubt it can get better, but that's a different topic): not enough DoF, dark halos around the pearls in the background, some of the reflections don't look natural to me, it is ccw (taking the cross in the top as reference) and overall lack of sharpness. I wouldn't manage it better, but I just judge the result. Poco2 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As one can see here, the so-called tilt is in real. I think there are also positive things to say "in pro" for this picture, but even negative, I thank you for your detailed and useful review, apart of the tilt, nothing of what you say is really wrong... BtW, it is already a QI...--Jebulon (talk) 13:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Sorry, I meant FP level instead of QI level, I guess I spend too much time at QI... And, of course there are positive things to say about it, and as said, I will not even try to get this shot. Poco2 22:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Animales-aiguamolls l'emporda-2013 (8).JPG, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 08:38:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 12:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Mammals


Planning (9e jour après proposition)Edit

Tue 15 Apr → Thu 24 Apr
Wed 16 Apr → Fri 25 Apr
Thu 17 Apr → Sat 26 Apr
Fri 18 Apr → Sun 27 Apr
Sat 19 Apr → Mon 28 Apr
Sun 20 Apr → Tue 29 Apr
Mon 21 Apr → Wed 30 Apr
Tue 22 Apr → Thu 1 May
Wed 23 Apr → Fri 2 May
Thu 24 Apr → Sat 3 May
Last modified on 29 December 2012, at 22:06