Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 07 2013

Consensual review edit

File:Carina_Gödecke_by_Stepro_IMG_0977_LR50.jpg edit

 

  I withdraw my nomination --Stepro (talk) 13:49, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wikimania_2013,_Hong_Kong,_2013-08-12,_DD_04.JPG edit

 

  Oppose Badly chosen focal length for a group picture, 35mm or even 50mm would have been better so the people in the background don't look like dwarfes. Also overexposed in the background, and somewhat too high colour saturation. -- Smial 10:59, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you actually, not the best choice of focal distance, I take it back Poco a poco 21:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall view.JPG edit

 

  • Nomination Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall Guangzhou --Fredlyfish4 00:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Not quite sure about the colours - the trees seem rather brown, maybe throw blue at it? Mattbuck 11:15, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
      Support Not perfect, but can pass as QI IMO. --Cccefalon 06:04, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
      Support --JLPC 08:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Cccefalon 08:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

File:AmirKabir_naghashbashi.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination w:Amir Kabir --مانفی 09:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline   Oppose Not sharp enough, I'm afraid. Sorry.--Jebulon 10:37, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
    I disagree --مانفی 21:46, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
      Oppose Not sharp enough for a full format portrait. It might be ok for the preview resolution in wikipedia, but the assessment criterion is always the full resolution. --Cccefalon 07:36, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Cccefalon 08:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

File:13-08-08-hongkong-sky100-31.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Hong Kong after Sunset --Ralf Roletschek 15:22, 18 November 2013 (UTC)   Comment Tilted --Moroder 21:31, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
    Actually it's tilt and perspective distortion - buildings are vertical on left, but leaning out on right. Mattbuck 11:15, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion   OK corrected. --Ralf Roletschek 19:40, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
    Still tilted. Mattbuck 16:51, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
      Comment New Version --Smial 20:26, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
      Support --JLPC 08:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
      Support --Cccefalon 19:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Rafael_Urdaneta_Bridge_3.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Rafael Urdaneta Bridge --The Photographer 17:21, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --JLPC 17:31, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Oppose sorry, but this picture ist partialy not sharp --Taxiarchos228 21:09, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support i like it --Anna Anichkova 14:15, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
    the criteria here is not like or disslike, but enought quality or not. I like this bridge too, but the image of this bridge doesn't fit the QI-criteria. --Taxiarchos228 07:29, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Comment Very difficult case. I believe the focus was intentionally set to the waves, not to the bridge in the background. So it is really a great picture in matters of composition and art. But as a depiction of the bridge it's not optimal, as the object is not really sharp. -- Smial 11:12, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support Sharp enough for me. f/10 has sufficient DOF for the bridge even if focused on the waves. --King of Hearts 17:50, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Cccefalon 08:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Sankt._Moritz_Kirche_Sauders_Villanders_09.JPG edit

 

  • Nomination Station of the cross (barocque painting on canvas)in the Saint Maurice church in Villanders --Moroder 10:07, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Thirteen nominations the same day is flooding, IMO. And thirteen nominations with the same name is not very respectful for reviewers--Jebulon 15:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
      Done Names and category --Moroder 14:21, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
    You managed to include some background grey. Mattbuck 21:31, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
      Done Fixed, thanks
    fixed --Moroder 14:59, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
      Support QI for me. --Cccefalon 07:41, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
      Support --JLPC 08:03, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Cccefalon 08:07, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Bingyu-Valley_Liaoning_China_Reclining-Buddha-01.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Reclining Buddha in Bingyu Valley, Liaoning, China --Cccefalon 18:24, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline   Support bad crop right side (tight), nonetheless QI for me. --Rjcastillo 21:17, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
      Oppose Sorry, this is not a tight crop : the foot is obviously uncomplete. CR. --JLPC 22:27, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per above--Jebulon 09:40, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Cccefalon 08:05, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Église Saint-Pierre de Montmartre - portail.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Église Saint-Pierre de Montmartre (by BastienM) --Paris 16 21:46, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline   Oppose Badly tilted. This cannot resolved, bc not enough space for perspective correction. No QI therefore. --Cccefalon 10:13, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
      Neutral I disagree. The perspective distortion is part of the composition here. Otherwise, go here and re-assess half of the images already promoted *g* Still this image is a bit noisy. Let’s have some more opinions. --Kreuzschnabel 16:44, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Comment First of all: I do not care, what at any time whatsoever was assessed as QI or not. We are assessing this photo and nothing else. So, if you want to promote the opinion, that perspective distortion for architecture is irrelevant because it is part of a composition - well, we should then extinguish the chapter "Distortions" in COM:IG. I understand, that a photography taken from the foot of a high building cannot be rectilinear. However, this is a remarkable low-rise building with a remarkable bad tilt, disturbed by many branches. I cannot see a purpose or insignificance for the tilt of this photo. --Cccefalon 07:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
    • You’re right about the branches, which, adding to the visible noise, collect a   Oppose "not convinced" from me for this image. Besides, I never said that PD is irrelevant. I am just pointing out that, though it certainly is a flaw in many cases, it may also be used as an issue of composition – and here it does not look like a mistake to me. --Kreuzschnabel 17:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Cccefalon 07:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

File:AGH Berlin 10-2013 img21 Alex Lubawinski.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Alex Lubawinski, deputy of Abgeordnetenhaus Berlin --A.Savin 12:58, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --Cccefalon 13:16, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Comment - In my opinion, you should rotate the picture from left to right, because the composition of the suit is wrong: the pocket anf the button must be on the opposite side.--Jebulon 00:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
    Yes, I've never seen a suit with a pocket on the right. Mattbuck 22:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Comment It's a flopped image, as Wikipedia portraits should look leftwards. I don't see any problem, sorry. --A.Savin 00:22, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Fake image. -- Smial 09:39, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Comment @A.Savin: I found more mirrored/flipped uploads of persons by you. I suggest you replace all of them immediately by unmanipulated versions. This is commons resp. wikipedia, not fakepedia. -- Smial 10:45, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
    • Maybe you do, but I don't upload fake images on Commons. It's just a portrait, flopped =/= faked. A button on the right instead of the left, who cares? In most of my AGH portraits, I removed warts, moles, and similar disturbing things from the face; so, now you will come and claim that all of that pictures are fakes? You're going obviously too far, I will not change anything, you're free to use COM:DR if you really need to play the big detective here. --A.Savin 11:33, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
      • Please stop the personal attack. I do not uploads fakes and I don not claim all of that pictures are fakes and I do not play big detective. But I believe, that a mirrored/flipped/flopped image is a too massive manipulation and can in no case be QI, that's all. -- Smial 13:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
        • "I believe..."? A real knockout argument, lol. --A.Savin 13:11, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
          • This is a very embarrassing thing for the people pictured, for Wikipedia, and not least also for you as a photographer. -- Smial 13:14, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
            •   Support : looks Ok now. --JLPC 17:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
            •   Support : Yes. The man is how I should see him if I were in front of him.--Jebulon 09:52, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Scherbe Kontra Bass at Burg-Herzberg-Festival 2013.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Band: Scherbe Kontra Bass at de:Burg-Herzberg-Festival--Jean11 21:45, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline *  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. The heads in the foreground are disturbing. The crop is unfavorable. The person on the left is unsharp.--XRay 18:39, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The heads in the foreground are not a big problem, this is sometimes inevitable in such shooting situations. But sharpness and crop on the left side is dissatisfying. -- Smial 12:49, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Cccefalon 07:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Espiritu de montjuic-montmelo 2012 (13).JPG edit

 

  • Nomination Lola T70 in the career of classics on the circuit of Catalonia-Spain --Alberto-g-rovi 07:48, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support a bit strong cropped but good quality. Catalunya Lliure ;) --Ralf Roletschek 08:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC) --Ralf Roletschek 08:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Oppose colour noise everywhere, no QI for me --A.Savin 14:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Cayambe, sorry --Moroder 21:58, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Comment denoised. @Alberto-g-rovi: please consider uploading less compressed versions. -- Smial 23:52, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Cccefalon 08:21, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

File:13-07-20_Amphi_Ben_Ivory_08.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Ben Ivory at the Amphi Festival 2013, Cologne, Germany --Achim Raschka 07:00, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Could you brighten it please? Mattbuck 23:15, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
      Support A bit brighten could be good or not. QI to me as it is. --Hockei 22:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
    I think it needs brightening now. Mattbuck 08:09, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support Acceptable. -- Smial 20:06, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Cccefalon 08:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Animales del l'oceanografico-valencia-2009 (10).JPG edit

 

  • Nomination Roseate spoonbill in the area of the wetlands of the Oceanografic in Valencia-Spain--Alberto-g-rovi 13:25, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline   Comment Good shot. But I would decrease the brightness. So that the contours are better visible on the bird. --Hockei 16:30, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
      Comment I see it quite balanced, but you decide --Alberto-g-rovi 06:12, 16 November 2013 (UTC)   Comment It's your decision whether you follow my suggestion or not, Alberto. ;-) --Hockei 17:08, 16 November 2013 (UTC}
      DoneI already tweaked the brightness tell me that you think--Alberto-g-rovi 06:42, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
      Support The bird now looks good to me. The black level needs to be decreased a little again IMO. Nonetheless, I'll support your picture. --Hockei 08:12, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
      Oppose - The bird seems too bright to me. Mattbuck 21:24, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
      Oppose the blurred fence in the background makes for a poor composition - MPF 15:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support --Moroder 13:54, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Most of the bird is overexposed. Makele-90 01:40, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Cccefalon 08:02, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Castillo_de_Malbork,_Polonia,_2013-05-19,_DD_38.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Malbork Castle, Poland --Poco a poco 20:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Too much perspective correction? The right part is leaning. --Selbymay 08:48, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
      New version Poco a poco 21:12, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
    I see no reaction, I hope you don't mind if I move to CR Poco a poco 22:02, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
  • weak   Oppose cw tilt, roof is blurry and has sharpening artifacts, nice sharpness at bottom --Vamps 16:09, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ralf Roletschek 20:01, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support QI for me --Moroder 15:33, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support Deserves a QI batch --High Contrast 16:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Moroder 15:33, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Halberstadt_Dom_Langhaus.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Halberstadt Cathedral, image taken by Hoger. --Atamari 12:59, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
Tilted anticlockwise (  Oppose). Mattbuck 14:59, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Uoaei1 13:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
  Comment The lights are very disturbing. It's a pity! -- Spurzem 21:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
  Comment Needs a slight perspective correction. The columns of the walls should be straight and nearly parallel. The lights may be disturbing, but not avoidable. --Dirtsc 16:59, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Oppose some barrel distortion. --Cccefalon 20:41, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
  • New version with some slight adjustments related to noise, perspective, and distortion. Unfortunately it's not simple barrel distortion but somewhat wavy, so a perfect correction would be only possible with complete lens data. But I believe it's enough for QI. -- Smial 12:59, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
  Question Can votes of people, who are involved in the processing of the photo, be eligible for the total vote? I think no. --Cccefalon 08:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC) Question answered at talk page, thank you! --Cccefalon 11:42, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice!. The lights don't disturb me, they are lights. --Moroder 15:26, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
  •   Support Not pinsharp, but per Moroder.--Jebulon 16:23, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Jebulon 16:23, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Wooden_longboat,_Israel._01.jpg edit