Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 22 2022

Consensual review edit

File:001_2012_02_25_Kabel_und_Draehte.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Telecommunication cable with 4 pairs
    --F. Riedelio 11:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Oppose The background is not QI to me for an easy shot like this --Poco a poco 17:33, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   New version Thanks for the review. --F. Riedelio 11:52, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Much better --Poco a poco 20:03, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry I think it lacks details from large aperture (no tripod) and the background is not uniform (nor textured); it has random light patches, a (croppable) shadow margin, and slight noise. --Trougnouf 20:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   New version Thanks for the review. --F. Riedelio 17:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Much better now. --Trougnouf 10:46, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ikan Kekek 19:52, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose →   Promoted   --Peulle 08:58, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

File:Neumühlen,_Tugboat,_WPAhoi,_Hamburg_(P1080448).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Tugboat SD Rover at Neumühlen pier in Hamburg --MB-one 15:49, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --Virtual-Pano 16:11, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment Suggest cropping tighter, cutting out the distraction on the left and bringing a tighter focus on the boat. --GRDN711 05:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for now as there are two issues that I hope MB-one will fix. Crop tighter to remove the distraction on the left edge and boost the shadow detail a little. --GRDN711 16:56, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality and composition is OK to me. -- Ikan Kekek 19:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Ikan. The very high subject contrast is well managed, there are still details visible in the dark areas. --Smial 22:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Peulle 08:57, 21 April 2022 (UTC)